The Liberal SuperMajority

[TGO David]

VERY good article and VERY chilling to think about.

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB122420205889842989.html?mod=rss_opinion_main

A Liberal Supermajority

Get ready for 'change' we haven't seen since 1965, or 1933.

If the current polls hold, Barack Obama will win the White House on November 4 and Democrats will consolidate their Congressional majorities, probably with a filibuster-proof Senate or very close to it. Without the ability to filibuster, the Senate would become like the House, able to pass whatever the majority wants.

Though we doubt most Americans realize it, this would be one of the most profound political and ideological shifts in U.S. history. Liberals would dominate the entire government in a way they haven't since 1965, or 1933. In other words, the election would mark the restoration of the activist government that fell out of public favor in the 1970s. If the U.S. really is entering a period of unchecked left-wing ascendancy, Americans at least ought to understand what they will be getting, especially with the media cheering it all on.

The nearby table shows the major bills that passed the House this year or last before being stopped by the Senate minority. Keep in mind that the most important power of the filibuster is to shape legislation, not merely to block it. The threat of 41 committed Senators can cause the House to modify its desires even before legislation comes to a vote. Without that restraining power, all of the following have very good chances of becoming law in 2009 or 2010.

- Medicare for all. When HillaryCare cratered in 1994, the Democrats concluded they had overreached, so they carved up the old agenda into smaller incremental steps, such as Schip for children. A strongly Democratic Congress is now likely to lay the final flagstones on the path to government-run health insurance from cradle to grave.

Mr. Obama wants to build a public insurance program, modeled after Medicare and open to everyone of any income. According to the Lewin Group, the gold standard of health policy analysis, the Obama plan would shift between 32 million and 52 million from private coverage to the huge new entitlement. Like Medicare or the Canadian system, this would never be repealed.

The commitments would start slow, so as not to cause immediate alarm. But as U.S. health-care spending flowed into the default government options, taxes would have to rise or services would be rationed, or both. Single payer is the inevitable next step, as Mr. Obama has already said is his ultimate ideal.

- The business climate. "We have some harsh decisions to make," Speaker Nancy Pelosi warned recently, speaking about retribution for the financial panic. Look for a replay of the Pecora hearings of the 1930s, with Henry Waxman, John Conyers and Ed Markey sponsoring ritual hangings to further their agenda to control more of the private economy. The financial industry will get an overhaul in any case, but telecom, biotech and drug makers, among many others, can expect to be investigated and face new, more onerous rules. See the "Issues and Legislation" tab on Mr. Waxman's Web site for a not-so-brief target list.

The danger is that Democrats could cause the economic downturn to last longer than it otherwise will by enacting regulatory overkill like Sarbanes-Oxley. Something more punitive is likely as well, for instance a windfall profits tax on oil, and maybe other industries.

- Union supremacy. One program certain to be given right of way is "card check." Unions have been in decline for decades, now claiming only 7.4% of the private-sector work force, so Big Labor wants to trash the secret-ballot elections that have been in place since the 1930s. The "Employee Free Choice Act" would convert workplaces into union shops merely by gathering signatures from a majority of employees, which means organizers could strongarm those who opposed such a petition.

The bill also imposes a compulsory arbitration regime that results in an automatic two-year union "contract" after 130 days of failed negotiation. The point is to force businesses to recognize a union whether the workers support it or not. This would be the biggest pro-union shift in the balance of labor-management power since the Wagner Act of 1935.

- Taxes. Taxes will rise substantially, the only question being how high. Mr. Obama would raise the top income, dividend and capital-gains rates for "the rich," substantially increasing the cost of new investment in the U.S. More radically, he wants to lift or eliminate the cap on income subject to payroll taxes that fund Medicare and Social Security. This would convert what was meant to be a pension insurance program into an overt income redistribution program. It would also impose a probably unrepealable increase in marginal tax rates, and a permanent shift upward in the federal tax share of GDP.

- The green revolution. A tax-and-regulation scheme in the name of climate change is a top left-wing priority. Cap and trade would hand Congress trillions of dollars in new spending from the auction of carbon credits, which it would use to pick winners and losers in the energy business and across the economy. Huge chunks of GDP and millions of jobs would be at the mercy of Congress and a vast new global-warming bureaucracy. Without the GOP votes to help stage a filibuster, Senators from carbon-intensive states would have less ability to temper coastal liberals who answer to the green elites.

- Free speech and voting rights. A liberal supermajority would move quickly to impose procedural advantages that could cement Democratic rule for years to come. One early effort would be national, election-day voter registration. This is a long-time goal of Acorn and others on the "community organizer" left and would make it far easier to stack the voter rolls. The District of Columbia would also get votes in Congress -- Democratic, naturally.

Felons may also get the right to vote nationwide, while the Fairness Doctrine is likely to be reimposed either by Congress or the Obama FCC. A major goal of the supermajority left would be to shut down talk radio and other voices of political opposition.

- Special-interest potpourri. Look for the watering down of No Child Left Behind testing standards, as a favor to the National Education Association. The tort bar's ship would also come in, including limits on arbitration to settle disputes and watering down the 1995 law limiting strike suits. New causes of legal action would be sprinkled throughout most legislation. The anti-antiterror lobby would be rewarded with the end of Guantanamo and military commissions, which probably means trying terrorists in civilian courts. Google and MoveOn.org would get "net neutrality" rules, subjecting the Internet to intrusive regulation for the first time.

It's always possible that events -- such as a recession -- would temper some of these ambitions. Republicans also feared the worst in 1993 when Democrats ran the entire government, but it didn't turn out that way. On the other hand, Bob Dole then had 43 GOP Senators to support a filibuster, and the entire Democratic Party has since moved sharply to the left. Mr. Obama's agenda is far more liberal than Bill Clinton's was in 1992, and the Southern Democrats who killed Al Gore's BTU tax and modified liberal ambitions are long gone.

In both 1933 and 1965, liberal majorities imposed vast expansions of government that have never been repealed, and the current financial panic may give today's left another pretext to return to those heydays of welfare-state liberalism. Americans voting for "change" should know they may get far more than they ever imagined.

[Guest Honest AK]

Scare tactics from the same people who just stole 700 billion from us.

[Guest Dragonman]

With the most inept congress in history doubt they'll get far enough for any of the bills to pass. And except Truman and Klinton, Democratic presidents since FDR usually don't get relected.

[Guest Honest AK]

What surprises me is they've actually got people that make $40,000 convinced the world will come to an end if those that make a quarter million or more have their taxes raised.

[fury2neon]

A Note from History: No Democrat since JFK has lowered federal income taxes and they have raised taxes on the middle class every time they promised not to.

[NuTcAsE]

Scare tactics from the same people who just stole 700 billion from us.

That ain't scare tactics. This is fact, there are enough seats up that the dems would be able to do anything their little black hearts desire, and there won't be much anybody can do about it. It won't matter what it is obammy would be more than happy to sign it.

What surprises me is they've actually got people that make $40,000 convinced the world will come to an end if those that make a quarter million or more have their taxes raised.

No, it won't come to an end, but those small businesses making .25mil will have to raise the prices of their products so the people making 40k will pay for it anyway. I'd be willing to bet that the people just under .25mil are probably in a higher tax bracket than Mr. obama. I can't understand why people why people think it's o.k. to raise taxes disproportionally on people who earn more.

[Guest Honest AK]

That ain't scare tactics. This is fact, there are enough seats up that the dems would be able to do anything their little black hearts desire, and there won't be much anybody can do about it. It won't matter what it is obammy would be more than happy to sign it.

The Republicans ran the government for six years straight and look where we are. When anyone asks them to accept their share of the blame, all they do is blame Democrats that were in office decades ago and poor people, especially poor blacks.

I don't expect a bunch of Democrats to do any better but they'd be hard pressed to do worse.

No, it won't come to an end, but those small businesses making .25mil will have to raise the prices of their products so the people making 40k will pay for it anyway. I'd be willing to bet that the people just under .25mil are probably in a higher tax bracket than Mr. obama. I can't understand why people why people think it's o.k. to raise taxes disproportionally on people who earn more.

They got their tax cuts under Bush and prices went up anyway.

I can't understand why people are fine with the idea of bailing out Wall Street and then rewarding them with another tax cut while people living paycheck to paycheck are getting evicted. There are no golden parachutes for these people. All they get is every bit of the blame from Republicans when it's really people from all economic classes that made bad decisions with their money.

If I had it my way, none of us would have their taxes raised but the elite can go cry poor mouth to someone else. I'm tired of hearing it.

Is it class warfare? It sure as hell is and it's the middle and lower classes that have been losing every battle.

[fury2neon]

Is it class warfare? It sure as hell is and it's the middle and lower classes that have been losing every battle.

Read the IRS data, throughout peoples lives in the US we move from one class to the next. Younger people make less than older people because experience is worth something. People in the upper classes fall to the bottom, people on the bottom rise to the top. That is the beauty of this country, everyone has a shot at the craps table. Sometimes you roll a seven and sometimes you roll craps but we all get a shot at the table and each day is a new craps game.

Unlike Cuba, Russia, even Western Europe where you have to be born into money to be accepted as a higher class.

Here you can earn your own money and take care of it or waste it. Its up to you. (Or at least it used to be, you class warfare people hate it when the little guy makes it big blowing your theories.)

[fury2neon]

Oh, by the way read Atlas Shrugged. That is what is going to happen if this class warfare socialist crap is not stopped. And then where will all the socialist moochers get their handouts.

Robin Hood did not steal from the rich and give to the poor, he stole from the GOVERNMENT (Prince John) and gave to the producers who were kept poor by an oppressive government.

[Smith]

The Republicans ran the government for six years straight and look where we are. When anyone asks them to accept their share of the blame, all they do is blame Democrats that were in office decades ago and poor people, especially poor blacks.

I don't expect a bunch of Democrats to do any better but they'd be hard pressed to do worse.

Carter did it in less than 4 years. Also, it was the Republicans who got those "poor blacks" (which is racist and condescending BTW) civil rights in the first place. It was your beloved Democrats who fought it tooth and nail.

[DWARREN123]

What I do not unnderstand is if I make $1,000,000.00 a year why should I have to pay a bigger percentage in taxes. Is it because I am smarter and can afford to or just because I manage my money better?

You should not penalize a person just because they do better.

Just so everyone knows I do not make anywhere near a million a year or even in 15 or 20 years. I just do not like the burden put on others because they do better than I do. If I or anyone wants to make more money then they (or I) can get off their butts and work for it.

[TripleDigitRide]

What I do not unnderstand is if I make $1,000,000.00 a year why should I have to pay a bigger percentage in taxes. Is it because I am smarter and can afford to or just because I manage my money better?

You should not penalize a person just because they do better.

Just so everyone knows I do not make anywhere near a million a year or even in 15 or 20 years. I just do not like the burden put on others because they do better than I do. If I or anyone wants to make more money then they (or I) can get off their butts and work for it.

I just wish one of these politicians would actually go head-on with the real causes of our tax burdens. But that's too much like "work".

Since we're on the subject of "working", how about the working class quit supporting the scumbags in the welfare system. Let them live under a bridge for a while, and maybe then they'll at least consider getting a damn job. Not likely, though. The government isn't interested in helping the working class. It's all about the super broke, or the super rich.

[Guest Honest AK]

Read the IRS data, throughout peoples lives in the US we move from one class to the next. Younger people make less than older people because experience is worth something. People in the upper classes fall to the bottom, people on the bottom rise to the top. That is the beauty of this country, everyone has a shot at the craps table. Sometimes you roll a seven and sometimes you roll craps but we all get a shot at the table and each day is a new craps game.

Unlike Cuba, Russia, even Western Europe where you have to be born into money to be accepted as a higher class.

Here you can earn your own money and take care of it or waste it. Its up to you. (Or at least it used to be, you class warfare people hate it when the little guy makes it big blowing your theories.)

Not everybody had a place at the table playing for 700 billion taxpayer dollars. Those spots were reserved for a chosen few. Your heroes, evidently. Now they get to decide amongst themselves how they're going to divvy it up and pay themselves to do it.

[fury2neon]

Not everybody had a place at the table playing for 700 billion taxpayer dollars. Those spots were reserved for a chosen few. Your heroes, evidently. Now they get to decide amongst themselves how they're going to divvy it up and pay themselves to do it.

Sorry dude, none of my heroes would have accepted any of that 700 Billion.

That's your socialist heroes lining their own pockets and claiming it's bail out and socking it to the people who produced that money in the first place.

Working people when faced with having to work to pay for everyone else's handouts eventual just stop working so everyone is getting nothing. And that is the socialist goal make everyone poor and miserable equally.

[Guest Dean_JC78]

We have not had a Conservative in the White House in 20 years. Bush is NOT a conservative nor is McCain. Both believe they can play to the center to be loved but partisan hacks will hate them just the same because they still have that "R" by their name.

The failure of the last 8 years is that when the GOP finally had their majority, they started to act like democrats... and some went way to far to the other side to put a stop to meaningfull conservative reform and that guy was McCain.

I respect McCains service to our Republic as a war hero. But I always keep in mind that Benedict Arnold was a war hero as well. While McCain did not sell out his country in the jungles of Asia, in my personal opinion he has in the halls of Congress.

Other than Palin, I am sad to say I have no dog in this fight for 2008. No matter who wins we all lose big time.

[fury2neon]

We have not had a Conservative in the White House in 20 years. Bush is NOT a conservative nor is McCain. Both believe they can play to the center to be loved but partisan hacks will hate them just the same because they still have that "R" by their name.

The failure of the last 8 years is that when the GOP finally had their majority, they started to act like democrats... and some went way to far to the other side to put a stop to meaningfull conservative reform and that guy was McCain.

I respect McCains service to our Republic as a war hero. But I always keep in mind that Benedict Arnold was a war hero as well. While McCain did not sell out his country in the jungles of Asia, in my personal opinion he has in the halls of Congress.

Other than Palin, I am sad to say I have no dog in this fight for 2008. No matter who wins we all lose big time.

+1!

[NuTcAsE]

The Republicans ran the government for six years straight and look where we are. When anyone asks them to accept their share of the blame, all they do is blame Democrats that were in office decades ago and poor people, especially poor blacks.

Right, but the Republicans didn't hold a super majority, and the dems got in the way alot! And if you'll recall the dems have been in control the past two worst years. "Poor people, poor blacks", poor whatever need to get off their a** and stop being poor.

I don't expect a bunch of Democrats to do any better but they'd be hard pressed to do worse.

Hold on, I'm afraid we're gonna find out.

They got their tax cuts under Bush and prices went up anyway.

They who? I got a tax cut, my company got a tax cut, and I got a 5$ an hour raise which was probably a direct result of tax cuts. Just a few months ago everybody but the rich just got an "economic stimulus payment." Stuff really started going up when the min. wage went up and it's gonna go up again, and everything else will too, Thank You democrats.

I can't understand why people are fine with the idea of bailing out Wall Street and then rewarding them with another tax cut while people living paycheck to paycheck are getting evicted. There are no golden parachutes for these people. All they get is every bit of the blame from Republicans when it's really people from all economic classes that made bad decisions with their money.

Don't live paycheck to paycheck. Don't buy a house you can afford and you won't get evicted. If you're living paycheck to paycheck, you either 1) have no idea how to spend money, or 2) need a better job.

If I had it my way, none of us would have their taxes raised but the elite can go cry poor mouth to someone else. I'm tired of hearing it.

I'm tired of hearing the "poor" crying and not doing anything about it. If anybody should be crying, it should be the upper 5% who are paying most of the taxes.

Is it class warfare? It sure as hell is and it's the middle and lower classes that have been losing every battle.

Propagated by democrats....You tell me how a dem. can stand up and say they're for the working class? How can the "haves" talk about the "have nots". The fact is it's the dems. that want America sucking on the gov. tit. I'm not saying the Republicans are perfect by no means, but alot of this mess we're in lies squarely at the feet of the democrats.

[towerclimber37]

The Republicans ran the government for six years straight and look where we are. When anyone asks them to accept their share of the blame, all they do is blame Democrats that were in office decades ago and poor people, especially poor blacks.

I don't expect a bunch of Democrats to do any better but they'd be hard pressed to do worse.

They got their tax cuts under Bush and prices went up anyway.

I can't understand why people are fine with the idea of bailing out Wall Street and then rewarding them with another tax cut while people living paycheck to paycheck are getting evicted. There are no golden parachutes for these people. All they get is every bit of the blame from Republicans when it's really people from all economic classes that made bad decisions with their money.

If I had it my way, none of us would have their taxes raised but the elite can go cry poor mouth to someone else. I'm tired of hearing it.

Is it class warfare? It sure as hell is and it's the middle and lower classes that have been losing every battle.

Lets see here..Pres. Bush called for an investigation and regulation of Fannie Mae and Freddy Mac foundations as early as 2006. Dems blocked any legislation that would have regulated it.

[ame]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_MGT_cSi7Rs[/ame]

OBAMA, your lord and savior..(yep..Louis Farrakan called him the messiah) was a lawyer that actually helped give people loans that they could or would not pay back by suing financial institutions.

as for the ineffectiveness of the congress...it IS controlled by Democraps.

and now, a McCain/Palin supporter in New York was assaulted by an Obama thug.

http://pajamasmedia.com/files/2008/10/dacomplaint.jpg

I don't mind what you screw-loose socialists do to yourselves. but stay outta my wallet and out of my life. I have no wish to pay for someone's food when they don't want to work for it. I won't pay for someone's healthcare when they decide that doing drugs is more fun than living up to their responsibilities.

and if someone decides to assault me because I support a particular candidate, or don't..the only thing that will beat them to the hospital is the lights of the ambulance that they're on.

Honest AK, yes we have problems with our country. most of them can be attributed to politicians giving lazy people things they didn't work for under the guise of "helping" them.

the only thing it's done is weaken us as a nation.

if YOU want to point fingers..get it right. quit lying to yourself so much that you believe it.

oh..and here ya go smartypants

http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=newsarchive&sid=aSKSoiNbnQY0

that link explains HOW we got into this situation.

but of course, this is all "propaganda" ...right?

Edited October 18, 2008 by towerclimber37

[NuTcAsE]

Lets see here..Pres. Bush called for an investigation and regulation of Fannie Mae and Freddy Mac foundations as early as 2006. Dems blocked any legislation that would have regulated it.

OBAMA, your lord and savior..(yep..Louis Farrakan called him the messiah) was a lawyer that actually helped give people loans that they could or would not pay back by suing financial institutions.

as for the ineffectiveness of the congress...it IS controlled by Democraps.

and now, a McCain/Palin supporter in New York was assaulted by an Obama thug.

http://pajamasmedia.com/files/2008/10/dacomplaint.jpg

I don't mind what you screw-loose socialists do to yourselves. but stay outta my wallet and out of my life. I have no wish to pay for someone's food when they don't want to work for it. I won't pay for someone's healthcare when they decide that doing drugs is more fun than living up to their responsibilities.

and if someone decides to assault me because I support a particular candidate, or don't..the only thing that will beat them to the hospital is the lights of the ambulance that they're on.

Honest AK, yes we have problems with our country. most of them can be attributed to politicians giving lazy people things they didn't work for under the guise of "helping" them.

the only thing it's done is weaken us as a nation.

if YOU want to point fingers..get it right. quit lying to yourself so much that you believe it.

oh..and here ya go smartypants

http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=newsarchive&sid=aSKSoiNbnQY0

that link explains HOW we got into this situation.

but of course, this is all "propaganda" ...right?

[Guest Dean_JC78]

What I do not unnderstand is if I make $1,000,000.00 a year why should I have to pay a bigger percentage in taxes. Is it because I am smarter and can afford to or just because I manage my money better?

You should not penalize a person just because they do better.

Just so everyone knows I do not make anywhere near a million a year or even in 15 or 20 years. I just do not like the burden put on others because they do better than I do. If I or anyone wants to make more money then they (or I) can get off their butts and work for it.

They naturally have a higher burden. If we all paid 10% in taxes then 10% on somebody making $30,000 a year would be a lot less than somebody making $300,000 a year. Both pay a fair amount but the person that makes more pays more.

What the liberals have done (Part of Marx's plan) is make the lower income people pay nothing in taxes (Only 45% of our population pays any federal income tax). Then the more you make, the higher the % you pay goes up.So not only are you paying more because you make more, but you are also paying a higher %!!!

In my personal opinion, we should only allow people to vote that actually pay taxes (meaning only those 45% mentioned above). When you allow for these schemes to re-distribute money then you get 2 wolves and a sheep voting on what is for dinner.

[Guest Honest AK]

Right, but the Republicans didn't hold a super majority, and the dems got in the way alot! And if you'll recall the dems have been in control the past two worst years. "Poor people, poor blacks", poor whatever need to get off their a** and stop being poor.

Hold on, I'm afraid we're gonna find out.

Let me tell you something. Not everybody that is poor is that way because they don't work. If it was that easy, many of them would have stopped being poor a long time ago.

They who? I got a tax cut, my company got a tax cut, and I got a 5$ an hour raise which was probably a direct result of tax cuts. Just a few months ago everybody but the rich just got an "economic stimulus payment." Stuff really started going up when the min. wage went up and it's gonna go up again, and everything else will too, Thank You democrats.

Prices went up when the cost of fuel went up. Nobody where I work gets a raise based on the minimum wage going up.

Don't live paycheck to paycheck. Don't buy a house you can afford and you won't get evicted. If you're living paycheck to paycheck, you either 1) have no idea how to spend money, or 2) need a better job.

I'm tired of hearing the "poor" crying and not doing anything about it. If anybody should be crying, it should be the upper 5% who are paying most of the taxes.

It's not that simple and you know it. Not everybody that lives paycheck to paycheck does it because they don't manage their money.

There are people that were paying their rent on time and are getting evicted anyway because the owner defaulted.

I'll gladly swap paychecks with the upper 5% and pay their taxes so they won't have to bear such a terrible burden.

Propagated by democrats....You tell me how a dem. can stand up and say they're for the working class? How can the "haves" talk about the "have nots". The fact is it's the dems. that want America sucking on the gov. tit. I'm not saying the Republicans are perfect by no means, but alot of this mess we're in lies squarely at the feet of the democrats.

I never said they were for the working class. In fact, I've stated numerous times that both parties have turned their backs on us in favor of their cronies.

Neither party is interested in cutting wasteful spending by the government.

[towerclimber37]

Let me tell you something. Not everybody that is poor is that way because they don't work. If it was that easy, many of them would have stopped being poor a long time ago.

Prices went up when the cost of fuel went up. Nobody where I work gets a raise based on the minimum wage going up.

It's not that simple and you know it. Not everybody that lives paycheck to paycheck does it because they don't manage their money.

There are people that were paying their rent on time and are getting evicted anyway because the owner defaulted.

I'll gladly swap paychecks with the upper 5% and pay their taxes so they won't have to bear such a terrible burden.

I never said they were for the working class. In fact, I've stated numerous times that both parties have turned their backs on us in favor of their cronies.

Neither party is interested in cutting wasteful spending by the government.

that is the ONE thing we can agree on.

and the Republicans have been the only ones that have wanted to cut taxes so that we get more money. I've NEVER seen a democrat do that. ever.

also, the Democrats are the ones that are asking to not only raise our taxes but they also want to enlarge the federal government.

they want more bodies for the machine in order to make it harder to kill it.

I don't know about you but I can do better on my own, without the help of the federal government.

as for getting a better paying job? I know JUST what it takes to get a better job. the poor don't care to do it.

I grew up with a sink inside and a 2 hole outhouse 50 meters from the back door. I know all about being poor. I just didn't wallow in it and I dang sure ain't goin back to it.

I'm not rich either. but I believe that you should keep what you make and that won't happen with a democrat in office.

[bubbiesdad]

Scare tactics from the same people who just stole 700 billion from us.

The Democratic controlled congress approved it. So they must all be theives.

[Guest Honest AK]

I don't mind what you screw-loose socialists do to yourselves. but stay outta my wallet and out of my life. I have no wish to pay for someone's food when they don't want to work for it. I won't pay for someone's healthcare when they decide that doing drugs is more fun than living up to their responsibilities.

Let's get something straight. You don't pay for a ******* thing for me. I cost you nothing. I've never accepted any government assistance for anything. Also, I'm neither a Democrat or a socialist.

and if someone decides to assault me because I support a particular candidate, or don't..the only thing that will beat them to the hospital is the lights of the ambulance that they're on.

Why are you talking to me about assault? Have I condoned that kind of behavior and I just don't remember it?

Honest AK, yes we have problems with our country. most of them can be attributed to politicians giving lazy people things they didn't work for under the guise of "helping" them.

the only thing it's done is weaken us as a nation.

The big problem we're experiencing right now was caused by folks from all walks of life making bad financial decisions. Not just the evil poor people. Also, stop equating the word poor with being lazy. Everybody I work with is what most would call poor. None of us are lazy.

if YOU want to point fingers..get it right. quit lying to yourself so much that you believe it.

oh..and here ya go smartypants

http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=newsarchive&sid=aSKSoiNbnQY0

that link explains HOW we got into this situation.

The most interesting piece of info in that article is at the very bottom:

Kevin Hassett, director of economic-policy studies at the American Enterprise Institute, is a Bloomberg News columnist. He is an adviser to Republican Senator John McCain of Arizona in the 2008 presidential election. The opinions expressed are his own.

I never said Democrats didn't deserve their fair share of the blame yet you still fly off the handle like I'm a partisan Democrat when in fact, I dislike both parties equally.

[Guest Honest AK]

The Democratic controlled congress approved it. So they must all be theives.

I believe you are right.