More thoughts on the Nation

And thank you to the many "sheeples" that voted based on color, lies/promises...not record (what he did for the people of IL)...you have been a part of history! You can buy the coins and plates---and pay MORE taxes as the middle class than under any other US President. 32 days in office. When will the spending stop? Welfare gets better. Why not reward the many that have NEVER worked a day in their lives for generation after generation. Why not "reward" the art of living on your back and having more and more kids when you cannot afford to feed yourself. Keep allowing the "illegals" more money---OUR money.

"Medical program." If it does not work for Canada and England why would we even want it here? Oh, more spending---there is a pattern here. We have a friend who brought her 80 year old mother back to the US from England because of the medical system in England and who is treated, who is not and when. If I had breast cancer in England I would not want someone to tell me IF/WHEN I could be treated. Further, how about depending a little less on the same government that continues to screw all of us over and over and over again! Really. It is like sleeping with a rattlesnake or cobra. You would think after being bit we would get out of bed with it---one would think anyway. At some point, we will need to take a stand against these yahoos in DC. They really and truly are out of touch with the people.

Schools (college level is what I will talk about) have had to cut classes/programs due to less people in school and less funding. Student loans? Very hard to come by. Grants for college? Funny...few and far between. If we cannot educate ourselves, what happens? If we cannot go back to school to better/update our skills, what happens? We are a nation in trouble---big trouble. Our government has us right where they want us...poor, depending on them to "fix" things, unemployed and on our knees. Wake up already. How is any of this "good" for us?

Nice post Kim and nice post Mike. Change we can all believe in IF we are all complete and total morons with our heads in the sand. Let us HOPE it only lasts 4 years and there is anything left at the end of Obamanation.

This is good:

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20090303/ap_on_go_co/congress_spending

And then there is this:

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20090303/ap_on_bi_ge/fed_consumer_credit

I have to laugh regarding the "new" money for the "people." The banks are raising credit card interest rates---not lowering them. If you have good credit why would you want to pay 29% interest for purchases? So, how is this going to help?

I still check back in a few times a week to get a chuckle out of the distortions, lies and selective admission of what few genuine facts facts are present.

And since I bet "do you ever wonder what happened to our blog professors from the 'college of knowledge?'Where are all of these diehard Obama worshippers NOW? I think somewhere in the next few months, it's going to be hard to find anyone out there who will admit to have voted for him" is a crack at me, I figure I'll weigh in, just to clarify that, no, I don't regret voting for Obama in the slightest.

The U.S. is leaving Iraq. It will take time - apparently three years, down to 50,000 in 2010 and out in 2011. And while John McCain can now, after General Odierno and General Petraeus have endorsed President Obama's plan, back it as well, as a candidate he nonchalantly speculated about staying in Iraq for decades. And that alone was a risk that wasn't worth it.

There's a lot of good stuff in the stimulus plan, and the deficit-spending is no more a crisis now than when Bush and Reagan did it - the major difference being they threw the money away on foreign nations and the idle rich. Reagan went as far as to aid both Saddam Hussein and the terrorists who would become Al-Qaeda. And yet here he gets lionized as some kind of hero while Obama is labelled a failure after six weeks and THIS deficit spending, which goes to hiring more public-sector employees here in America and to funding federal contracts which private enterprises will bid on, is somehow a looming distaster.

The stimulus includes more money for Pell grants - good for college students and anyone in line for a loan behind them at the bank. It includes money for projects the ground for which will not be broken for another year or two - but that's a good thing. Municipal projects two, three years in advance are usually at the stage where the officials are looking to line up the money, and they often borrow it, including from banks - funding them now reduces demand for private credit. And I don't know this just from "college," just from reading it in "liberal newspapers," I know it from talking to municipal authority members, city council members, engineers and technicians, from attending the public meetings for years and from paying attention.

It includes money for hiring police officers. Building roads. Is there ANY wasteful spending in it? Probably, and when conservatives get done lying about money spent on a California marsh mouse and a Los Angeles-to-Las Vegas train - both lies which distort good programs - maybe we'll hear about it.

In the meantime, the Republicans are slandering $30 million for wetlands restoration that could be spent anywhere and that San Fran isn't even asking for a portion of, $30 million my part of the country could use part of to pay people to dredge polluted stream soil, since past periods of lax regulation left Pa. legally incapable of holding the mining companies liable for what they dumped into our watersheds, and $8 billion for maglev rail lines that A) can also be spent in any part of the country, B) where it would create jobs laying track and C) provides a more fuel-efficient means of transporting either passengers or freight - we just spent this past summer learning the consequences our energy dependence has for the working middle-class.

So, yeah, I'll stick with Obama.

Reading back over that, I realize that as long as it is, it barely scratches the surface.

Everyone's bent out of shape at the lavish salaries and bonuses the executives of the bailed-out financial institutions now. Well, who do you think was paying those salaries and bonuses before the bailouts? The consumers, in price-gouging fees and charges. A large part of the economic problem is foreclosures on mortgages homeowners couldn't afford.

Now, should we staff our government with people who think government intervention in the markets is always intrisically evil? Only if you hate the American consumer and want to set them up for more pillaging by banks in the future. Only if you want wage laws chipped away so companies can suppress wages even more recklessly and members of the American middle-class can have an even harder time owning their own homes.

Look at what the conservatives and Republicans have been up to in the last six months. Almost all of them voted against holding employers accountable for gender discrimination in pay. Senator Bob Corker of Tennessee tried to use the auto industry bailout to force working Americans who make less than he does to take a pay cut.

Conservatives don't want to help the American middle-class; they'd rather lecture them about how they should feel grateful the sainted rich bless them with jobs. But at the end of the day, its consumer demand for goods and services that creates jobs and the rich are little more than the middle-men best skilled at scamming themselves bigger and bigger chunks of cash, usually by either overcharging consumers or underpaying workers.

We should at the VERY least staff our government with people who pay their taxes---not dodge them. We should staff our government with people who look out for America---not China or Mexico FIRST! Obama is what he surrounds himself with and does not even try to deal with honest people. So, a guy does not pay taxes. Sure put him in charge of the nation's money! Only in America. Change you can believe in. So, you admit you voted for him but under the cover of a screen name. Priceless. There should be a test before you can vote! Once again we can only hope this lasts 4 years. We can only hope.

Opinionmissy:

The medical programs work great in Canada and England. Heck they even treat tourist for free if they get sick or hurt while vacationing in those countries. And I'd be willing to bet, that the reason your friends brought their 80year old mother to America, was not because of the medical system, but rather that they didn't want her to live alone at such an old age.

Besides all that, it's too much fun reading your comments that are "created" by the (racist, lying and overly rich) conservative talk show hosts, in an effort to make Obama or anyone that doesn't agree with them, look bad.

If anyone is "sheeples?" it is you, ignorant conservatives, that worship talk show hosts that resort to yelling, when they're proven wrong about their rants.

Yep, me "juss" an uneducated Bubba, welfare hound who has never been outside of Idaho. I have family in Canada...the medical system sucks there just like in England. Nothing like waiting to find out if someone behind a computer will find that today your "deserve" to have your breasts removed due to cancer and be lucky enough to get to follow that up with chemo. No, wait...you are 69 years old and will not live much longer anyway so you get to appeal and wait.

As far as Obama goes, I do not need the media to explain that guy to me. I lived in Illinois (born and raised there) and have family still there...I know first hand how "great" he is and with all of his spending he has proved it millions and millions of times over to me that he is no better than the rest of them in DC. Chuh-ching. Flush! Now that is "change" that I can believe in.

Obama may be the most visible person to criticize but he is one of only many who factor into this economic crisis. One forgets that he is only man amongst many other strong-willed POLITICIANS! We need a cultural shift away from cheap credit and living above our means. The SEC and Federal Reserve affect the economy more than any politician could ever hope to. So with that being said, Maybe americans should look at their decisions and write about them.

Bazookaman

You do realize that without the stimulus, we could end up in a depression. That is no guarantee of course but not spending leads to skyhigh interest rates and investment drying up. Something needs to be done to help Americans to not store their money in jars under the bed. A decrease in Gross Domestic Product due to lack of spending will not be solved by simply sitting on our hands.

I am speaking in pure economic terms. this knows no partisan blabbering. Its not about Obama or whoever would have been elected. If McCain would have been elected, he would have the same issue and would have consulted similar individuals. Being that the money supply was expanded in the past with no regard to the bubble bursting eventually, this contraction is neither Obama's fault nor can he completely solve the problem. I tire of everybody acting like politicans really are that powerful. If we stop spending, the banks will not have money to lend and therefore investment by business dries up and so starts unemployment and deflation. Deflation would devalue what everybody has.

I dont blame Bush nor will I give him credit. He is only man of many. Politicians again do not make the big decisions. Those are made by the SEC and Federal Reserve. Again, Obama is only one man of many. McCain would have had to take similar action and we would be having the same discussion. The hole was dug prior to the election.

I realize that Washington is wasteful. My overall point is that Obama should not be the scapegoat. This current fiscal crisis was caused by Americans being greedy. Because of that greed and desire to have lavish lifestyles, they took it upon themself to go after cheap credit no matter the cost. Banks and other financial service providers undertook risky measures and those failed. Now people are crying about unemployment when if they had been more frugal over the past ten years, this would not be occurring. We all know someone who maxed out their cards and refinanced their home. Those decisions were not made by POLITICIANS. When you accumulate those decisions over the population of the US it means that we do not have the equity to support the debts. Now, what happens when one cant pay debts? one goes bankrupt, increases revenue, or decreases expense. Cant increase revenue due to cutbacks so what does one do? Decrease spending.

Companies, big and small (especially small) rely on low interest rates to purchase equipment that could not be purchased with cash. If interest rates are high, then that means less investment and less jobs. Slower velocity of money due to lack of spending equals deflation. Deflation means that the number of transactions decreases and so starts the cycle until demand can be hoisted back up. Politicians are bound to try to solve problems like this. Having a huge government debt is not desireable but it may be necessary. You forget how greedy and self-absorbed most Americans are. Having to sacrifice one of their vehicles would be beyond them

Again, I realize that Politicians are wasteful. We are not there so please stop pretending to know all that there is to know. We are all dependent on media and its bias for this info. The whole earmark thing is undesirable but complaining is not going to change it. It is done and lets not pretend that McCain would have been a patron saint.

I am an economist so pardon the fact that I dont play the he said/she said game. The facts are that Americans and their lack of restraint caused the economic crisis. About Bush, I did not like him but he is not the responsible party for this economic meltdown. He is only one man. Loose monetary policy, cheap credit, greedy citizens, and lack of foresight by all contributed to it.

As for the sentiment that less government is better. I somewhat agree but i find that people reap the benefits of this and then criticize it. The interstate highways and the railroad are the two big examples. If you dont like it, dont use them. Now who will actually do that? No one.

One last point is that even if all drilling was permitted and we let the flood gates open. That would only supply our rampant demand for a short while and we would be back to buying foreign oil. The domestic supply falls woefully short of the demand. There is no debating that. Americans with their big trucks and SUV's are wasteful. If we would be responsible, this would not be an issue. And for your information, gas was subsidized until the late 80's. Americans were only paying 15% of market value so really they are not getting screwed.

I wont blather on but I feel that Americans need to stop demanding the services that politicians offer. Americans need to realize that there will be some poor and some not so poor. Equalizing the field is part of the problem that frustrates Americans.

On the surface, it sounds good. The issue is that give 100 people $1000 and see what they do with it. Not all of the people would maximize their best interests with that. Some will blow it and then want more because they know that the funds will come at some point in time in the future. A boycott or some other civil disobedience would change the fundamental picture. Violent revolt would only instill fear and fear does not yield logical, well-thought out responses. Overall, Americans should not complain when politicians dont fund their causes. Taxes are not all from the Federal level but on all local levels as well so take your issue up with them too.

By saying "Tea in the harbor is all they're gonna understand., because they surely do NOT listen to us, nor care" do you mean taking up arms and taking up a bloody civil war or an act of civil disobedience such as Gandhi's march to the sea to protest the monopoly that the British had on sea salt.

this is a pipe dream but if everyone refused to drive. That means truckers, ferries, passenger cars, etc. it would send a message that would be felt worldwide.

I have spoke of civil disobedience and there have been a few who have agreed with me. The "Tea Party" was reinacted last week, I think in 24 cities. I wish that Boise had done one in the river.

Bazooka and twilcox1978 both mentioned stop driving. I have told many many people that if we all really got together and made a true committment, we could make a real statement. I would stop driving for a week if others would join me, but realistically it would be a miracle to get people to do it for one day. I know that it would make a great statement and cost billionaires lots of money. I'm all for it!

I am all for people agreeing to hold off on their taxes for awhile. If enough do it, the government would have to take notice! Just send a nice note with a blank tax form. Could you imagine the news that would get if thousands and thousands of blank tax forms with notes were mailed on April 15? How major would that be. The media would have a great time with that and the politicians along with Obama would be sick. But it doesn't matter if just one or two or three do something. It must be a large number who are willing to do something together. That is going to get noticed.

Revolution is the final last attempt when other nonviolent things fail. Lets focus on great civil disobedience! How can we get them to take notice? We must do that before taking up arms.

If one needs an example of this concept, watch Gandhi. The man made the mightiest country on the planet leave India with very little armed resistance. They would have lost millions of lives for no good reason if they would have reacted violently. With tact, class, and exact purpose they expelled the British Empire and its overly oppressive taxes and policies. The general service worker strike depicted in the movie which is factual crippled the economy in just two days. The GNP of British India shrunk by 3% in one day.

Now that would not have the same effect numerically in the US but if everybody quit driving for a day, it would have a bigger impact than any violent uprising could ever hope to have. One forgets that the government has the military behind them and most civilians are not former soldiers or trained to be. Overall, the culture that makes politicians be the way that they are has to start at the core. They are creatures of opportunity just like every one of us. They win elections because they do promise to do things that others were criticized for not doing. By not incentivizing their actions, we make it less likely they will fund these unproductive causes.

"Now he wants to 'reach out to the Taliban.' If Reagan was still around, HE would "'reach out to them!'"

"Why don't you ask the families of the victims of 9/11, if they'd like Obama to 'reach out' to the taliban.............you know, BUSH didn't handle it right either, but at least he didn't offer any comprimise with the enemy."

Nice try, Bazooka Man, but Reagan aided Saddam Hussein's regime and armed the terrorist network which attacked us on 9/11 - the mujahideen, now known as al-Qaeda. And Bush compromised left and right with Pakistan and Saudi Arabia. The Taliban are vicious tyrants - the kind every president, Republican and Democrat, has dealt with for at least seventy years - but they didn't attack us on 9/11.

"Own your own home, Ex?....making your mortgage payments on time? If so, I guess you surely don't mind helping the irresponsible make theirs too, eh? And your kids can take over doing that after you're gone as well. It's called 'spreading the wealth.'"

No, I rent. I saw enough co-workers and friends get suckered by realtors and banks. And to think, they all thought I was being eccentric. What I'd like to see is interest rate caps on mortgages to stop the usurious gouging - actually I'd like to see rate caps on all forms of lending. And I'd like to see federal and state governments aggressively pursue policies which increase middle-class wages and earnings - I think people with jobs ought to be able to afford nice houses - I don't know if that makes me a sickening liberal or not. I do know I won't ever get to see any of that with any candidates who think government intervention in markets is always too fraught with peril, and what I would see is what meager progress has been made get rolled back.

Claiming to show a profit and actually being profitable are two different things. If one has ever worked in accounting or a like field, one will know what I am getting at. There is probably a bit more to that situation than that simple statement implies.

Bush and his comrades could not have handled that situation worse. Obama should not be trying to be a friend. Simply pulling out and letting that part of the world hate one another would be best, in my opinion. I would be in support of just letting them be. That might hurt some diplomatic relations in the short term but thats life.

Fortitude in the White House is overrated. The decisions and choices made by the masses have more impact than any one man or person could ever hope to. Forget complaining about politicians, why dont we start at home. They simply manage the results of our decisions.

I wont go on about this. It would hurt diplomatic relations and some import prices would go up but is that such a bad thing? Yes, the extremists will always despise us but that is unavoidable. I would say just quit wasting money and lives. As one wise man named Gandhi said, "One will always prefer the bad rule of oneself over the good rule of a stranger." We have nothing to gain by trying to Americanize people who dont want to be democratic. Our democracy or lack thereof depending on who you talk to was the evolution of thousands of years of European cycles and changes.

to clarify, I am speaking about Iraq and the Middle East as a whole. They will always prefer the bad rule of themselves over the good rule by the US. These people do not want us there and never will. The time to move on was upon us a long time ago. We are wasting our time trying to be an imperial power of sorts. We are not improving their lives. From a pure economic sense, they are benefiting but there is a cultural difference. We are spinning our gears trying to Westernize these individuals. Change comes from within. If they truly want to be democratic and have the open market economy, they will make the necessary sacrifices with or without a foreign country dictating to them.

The democracy that we enjoy or despise was the result of hundreds of years of conflict in Europe. Without the history and bitter memories, the revolution would not have had the almost unanimous support that it did. Iraq, Iran, or whoever needs to go through that evolution on their own. Americans telling them what to do just ****** them off, wastes our money and lives, and gives them a reason to be ignorant.