Mark you must have your parties mixed up, or you don't know anything about either
one. and they let you out to vote. Oh MY!

No one "lets me out to vote", Audre. In the United States, all you need is to be a citizen to be afforded the right to vote. Countries that endorse the kind of suppresed voting that you seem to endorse are known as authoritarian, totalitarian govenrments, or countries run by despots.

We decided not to use the kind of government you seem to support hundreds of years ago because this one seems to be the most free, and most representative of the people.

There are books about it. Read one.

Audre the worst thing is they let him breed.....

And what a shame there isn't at least a minimum standard of understanding of what the people that you are voting for are doing before you can vote. This allows them to con people into believing them with speeches instead of really doing something.....

Mark, you believe his two stimulus bills and healthcare were cut from Republican cloth?

Maybe not the republican party we now know after it met Karl Rove and, and permitted the ravings of the "teaparty" to dictate its navigation ... but yes. That's how far the republican party has moved off into ranting righty land. But yes, the policy changes he ultimately yielded to, and the final product was a decidedly republican product compared to the plans most people were expecting. The stimulus bill was mostly Welfare for Corporations, which has been a hypocrisy the right has about "socialism" for many decades. And the lack of a health reform bill that centers around a public option, that may as well have been written by the very drug distributor corporations and insurance scam artists that have ransacked the system in the first place missed the entire point of the Progressive agenda. One need only look to Mitt Romney's final health plan to see how a pre-teaparty republican might have behaved before Grover Norquist, Andrew Breitbart and the cave dwelling zombies from libertarian militia crowd hijacked the republican middle ground and sent it into the wacky weeds.

Your disapproval of welfare for corporation is a tea-party tenet. And what many people misunderstand about the Massachusetts plan is that it was enacted by a state, not the federal government. States are not limited by the federal constitution from doing such things. Indeed, if such a thing were considered in Michigan it would be a different debate here than it was, or remains, regarding national healthcare.

If people in Massachusetts want a state-wide program and residents of Oklahoma do not, that is their privilege as citizens of separate states. Romney did what was right as governor that which a president and congress should not do for the nation.

The federal government seems lately (past 30 years or so) to be following a manifest destiny over the states and the 10th Amendment. This is one of the trends that helped create the tea-party. If more people understood this they might find they have more in common with the tea party than not.

Thanks for replying with the same Sean Hannity talking points I've heard four thousand times already.

The teaparty was born on April 9th 2009 when corporate lobbyists disseminated instructions on how republi-tarians were to behave in the upcoming Town Hall meetings on Health Care reform.

It wasn't a grass roots movement. It was corporate instruction. Trying to make them sound like an organized group of free thinkers is an insult to lemings.

http://tpmdc.talkingpointsmemo.com/2009/08/tea-party-town-hall-strategy-rattle-them-stand-up-and-shout.php

A) Stop listening to Hannity. He seems a bad influence. Be glad his show is cut short, before the interviews with Ann Coulter, for Mitch Albom's show.
B) I've read multiple stories of the Tea Party's creation--most recently by the WSJ, and none of them attribute its origin to corporate interests
C) Even if corporate interests started the tea party, the pit-bull is off the leash and capable of gnawing the arm off holding the other end.

Mark, how can you say you vote or policies, when policies are made by the people
you vote in office. Now do you understand why I said about you voting. You need
to go to classes that give lessons in how to vote and read about the people that make the policies. You're getting to talk like Ob, out of both sides of your mouth, and he is still looking for his.

MB, everytime you open your mouth, you stick your foot into it, Talking about voting,
now you say you don't vote for a HIM or HER but, a IT--- can you tell us what a IT
is. I have not seen that on any voting machine or ballot, You must be voting in another country, it can't be America.

Who has a policy for using new infrastructure to produce jobs? (And not just a good line of lip about it). Who is serious about harnessing sustainable energy to free us from dependance on foreign oil? Who has a plan for reducing carbon emissions and tackling climate change? Who is more friendly to small business than they are their lobbyist checks, and can bring about an administration to force corporations to pay their taxes and stop dumping their filth in our water, air and food supply? Who can finish what Obama pretended to be interested in for Health Reform so companies don't go broke from having to cover their employees, and the middle class doesn't continue to get milked like veal cows in a cage by the drug and critical care industry?

That doesn't sound like any candidate that's currently running. That is who will get my vote.

Tran, I think you have Mark figured out, and good for you. He told me to go and read.
I was brought up in a dem household with a Father that was head Union Leader, I have
campaigned since I was 21 for people I read about and still campaign today. and I
am over 60. By the way, my father turned Rep,years before he died and said get rid of unions, they will be the death of our country and I believe that is true. good job Tran

Tickets are handed out on Sunday in Detroit as well. The only purpose of the tickets is to get you better seats, but all can attend.

Sorry Richard, if you don't vote at all, that would be a vote for Obama. I have worked
more elections to understand how people vote, you should get envolved with your
city and check in the elections. Might even help Mark if he did the same thing

Richard, who is going to pay for all that stuff? We're broke, remember?

Ed, you said a good mouthful, now only if they opened their eyes and read what you
wrote, good job

Ed You watch too much FOX NEWS

Mindless dogmatic flapdoodle comments are no substitute for intellectual accuracy or honesty, particularly in politics, MB. The Liberals, driven by a wannabe dictator and incompetent Chicago organizer, are ascending into socialism (truly oligarchical) which has ruined England, Germany, Greece, Ireland, etc. etc. My education did not begin or end with daily perusal of MediaMatters or other Liberal Party publications, as do the lemmings of Liberalism.

yep we were

He can't. He uses the name Brash Brazen on another Patch site where he spends his time accusing people of being Tea Party members, racists, and anonymously slandering and attacking political candidates. A quick Google search will give it all away. You will notice he never had a Patch account here until I arrived; he uses Google to cyberstalk people.

He's angry because the local government he is part of was busy closing children's parks and eliminating school crossing guards while paying thousands of dollars to redevelopment consultants, and even a consultant to see about building a golf course on land adjacent to SF Bay. Part of this effort was to replace Old Town, a traditional, prodominantly Latino area, with condos for yuppies and Big Box stores. Unfortunately for me, I helped rally opposition to these plans. His sense of entitlement is pretty obvious. Ever heard of the "right man" syndrome? Well, he's like the poster child.

Ed, don't waste your time reading the above, I wasted my time reading that crap.

Nadja Adolf

you sound like leader that rean Germany in the 1940's

Sorry to see, Nadja, that you are as confused as MB when you deduce a virtual unknown's political agenda by using a skewed and rather illogical interpretation of one or two of Paul's comments at a couple of rallies. You need to delve into each of the candidates background with more intellectual intensity than used in the past.

I think you could become a true Conservative, but more research and a better understanding of the reality and actual meaning of Conservatism is in order for the next year and a half. But you're on the right track.

Exactly, Nadja. Republocrats, Demopublicans, its all the same. Let's mind our own business for a change. The average politican is out of touch with the people. They vote for their "conscience" rather than what the public demands of them. They are not representing us, but their own interests instead (and the interests of those who line their pockets and the pockets of their pet projects).

If you consider Ron Paul a "virtual unknown" you must have confined your attention to the news channels. I have read his Congressional voting record; and began supporting him in 2008. He is only a "virtual unknown" to those who have not been following the actions of our government.

I don't know what you think a "true conservative" is - but if it resembles John McCain, Mitt Romney, Mrs. Bachmann, or Governor Perry in any way, shape, or form, may God preserve me from such a fate.

Oh, Ed? I'm the one who got the Million Mom March kicked out of their taxpayer provided office in San Francisco and forced the city to stop funding all sorts of political lobbying groups.

Nadja, so did Hilter have charisma and look what he started. Clinton had charisma and
look what he done in the White House, OB states his Father was in WWII, that was a
lie, and most things that come out of his mouth is the same. he is a party body that likes a lot of attention, He is not Presidential material and never will be.

Yep. He's not perfect, but he's the only real chance we have.

He will also let you die if you do not have health insurance and get very ill.

Accurate post, Jim--At the G20 Conference in Toronto (the 20 major countries in the world) the UK, Germany , Spain, Italy and a multitude of others denounced the fallacies of government healthcare, then literally snubbed Obama out the door. Only Dave Cameron, U.K.'s relatively new Conservative P.M. put his arm around the dejected, beaten Obama and walked him to his car (see U-Tube). Germany's Chancellor addressed Obama as he began leaving, saying: "Mr. Obama, socialism is the tool of a fool, sir, and you ARE the fool". His mouth agape and wallowing in the utter derision of the other 19 countries, he walked briskly to his car and waiting entourage. The rest of the world, Jim, is breathless at Obama's total repudiation and rejection of our Constitutional protections and our illimitable (and envied) freedom to succeed without interference from government dictates.

Did you see yesterday's incredible humiliation of the Regime's job pronouncements?

You listen to Russ Limbourgh too much.

"I'm absolutely convinced that some day, 50 or 60 years from now, an American president will be speaking to an audience saying, thank goodness (I) rose to the challenge and helped people be liberated from tyranny."

George W. Bush

You're not the first person to make that unsubstantiatable claim, Thomas.

Unutterably wrong, Thomas....The Obama Regime is hell-bent on destroying this country as it was founded. They've taken over one-sixth of the US private sector with Obamacare, co-opted the auto companies, are essentially running the student loan business and the lending business in toto, demanding you purchase health insurance or they punish you with fines (in direct contravention of the Constitution), and virtually installed nearly 10% perpetual unemployment-- with blacks suffering the most at a massive 16.7%, the highest it has been since the BO's election. They supported him 97% and he returned their munificence with loss of their jobs and foreclosure on their homes. Obama thinks that he is such a gifted propagandist, such a gifted demagogue, that his prompter reading will divert your attention from the fact that he is a one-man wrecking crew, destroying the greatest health care in the world, destroying our currency, increased our massive debt and deficit, created the worst housing market since the Great Depression and bought the unions, both private and public-sector in a gigantic money-laundering scheme.

Thomas, can you or any Liberal lemming, identify & explicate (analyze & explain) one major spending program, initiated by the BO since his inauguration, which has been unequivocally & demonstrably beneficial to the average US working man/woman?
Just one...major...successful... spending program. The New York Times said there is none as did the WSJournal.

Great "tongue in cheek remark"! haha The generations who will STILL be paying for the MESSES of ole barry!

Maybe all of you should have the job that he had, a Community Organizer, they have
them in China to tell you if you can get married and if you can have one child. how
he made it to the Senate was on poor judgement and as President, the mistake of
everyone that voted for him ---- not that I was for MaCain either.

Thomas, I hope you are old enough that you will not get caught up in OB's money plans, because if you are young, you will be paying off all of his debts---- best thing
we could have would be a real change in 2012,

Yay Lorenzo!

Lorenzo, to debate is to argue. Debating is meant to point out the weakness of the other person’s argument. Good debate is when you can give your educated opinion and it stands with little intellectual challenge. Bad debate is name calling, attacking the messenger and "because I say so" mentality.. Debate and the open exchange of ideas are what makes this country great and I am always pleased when I see this many comments on a subject I feel deserves the citizens up most attention. Elected representatives work for us, we do not work for them.
It’s when people are afraid to use their real name in debate because they will be called names or personally attacked it’s a shame.

I for one hope Lorenzo voices his opinion whenever the moods strikes! We adults have screwed things up so bad only the younger ones coming up stand a chance at fixing it. lol

Out of the mouths of babies. Perhaps the grown ups can learn from Lorenzo how to play nice with others.

Yes, let's keep our mouths shut so that we don't run the risk of hearing responses that might cause us to have a creative thought. After all, our leaders are so much wiser than we are.

Lorenzo, take this as a learning tool from everyone. Read what they say, divide it in
half (this means don't believe half of what you read, especially from the ones that think
they are so smart and know everything). A lot of our troubles started with President
Roosevelt when he put in wefare and a couple other free bees. The more free
money they got, they didn't want to work. We would be better off without unions
also, I say this because my Father was a head union leader, and he said the unions
will be the death of our country and they are going in that direction.

Great call Michael, Clark Durant is a great man, we'd be lucky to have him as our next senator.

No. I'm interested in stopping control by anyone using the "conservative" system of government overthrow and middle class attack whenever, and wherever possible. Conservatism is a cancer on our political system.

No, the G-20 is made up of countries who can no longer support their entitlement programs and have riots in the streets - UK, Greece, Spain, France, etc.

The founding fathers were interested in paying lower taxes and smuggling without interference. Of course they didn't like the British elites exploiting them; they had spent too many years living alongside the Six Nations, the Algonquins, and others who were far more open to success and social status by excellence than the British. There are some excellent books on the subject; it might be worth reading them.

Matt, then how do you explain ALEC if not as a right-wing business conspiracy to make the entire country look the same = Just Like TEXAS? Personally, I don't want to live in Texas. If people like TEXAS and their policies, I suggest they move there rather than turning Michigan into a minimum wage right to work state. Certainly there is enough room in these United States for there to be one Texas and one Michigan.

Usually when someone makes the "too much control" argument as Matt is doing what is at the root of their complaint is regulation.

They will almost never give any specifics to their point, they will always just present the canards of a sinister power of dark suits and sunglasses trying to oppress like waves of loan sharks. But they never actually give data or more than one or two anecdotes to support their charge of how regulation has harmed, and indeed prove it hasn't IMPROVED life in America.

The truth is, regulation is something the government does at the behest of the populous. WE make them regulate. Because if they didn't we'd be dying in huge numbers by corporate greed and indifference.

I good example of regulation is "right to work", why is the government forcing an employee to join an organization and pay that organization a "dues" for which that organization uses to promote politicians that work in favor of the unions and against everyday workers. Big government and big corporation (UNIONS) working against the worker they claim to represent. Why no freedom of choice for the worker, why forced to support the huge greedy union and government?

I think it's only "a good example" to you if it's anecdotal to the agenda you've already endorsed.

But there are other "good examples" of regulation. They just don't happen to be ones that jibe with your conservative bent.

most libertarians are like us Republicans, we believe in a smaller government and OB
has made it larger, especially in the White House, and now he wants to by pass the
Congress to get things done his way or who is ordering him to do it. Matt you are
answering all the right things and giving good information

Well, you asked for "an example" of regulation and "red tape" that harms the expansion of businesses hiring and growth.... I give one and it is instantly struck down as "just my opinion" instead of arguing where this regulation might be good for business growth and make it easier for business to hire and expand it's work force. Right to work makes jobs and helps business growth.... it is a fact that companies relocate from forced union states to right to work states every day..... it is the democrat elitist view of "what is best for you" thinking that is killing the American worker. So we have fewer union workers and more welfare recipients. Thanks to the democrat/union agenda... Well, thanks for all the help.

You didn't give an example of regulation harming business. You gave a republican talking point that you heard on a talk show.

Of course corporations flee from union representation. Their best case scenario is slave wage if possible. And if they can't get it here, they'll get it in some other country. The conservative agenda supports that business model.

And anyway, business weren't fleeing the state because of unions, they left because the manufacturing infrastructure began to collapse thanks to conservative policies.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kNqQx7sjoS8

A housing bubble which came about when GW Bush exploited the de-regulation of the banking industry naturally failed, because all republican policies fail. That led to banks going bankrupt and folding, which led to a shut down of lending. States that sought to steal business from Michigan offered temporary tax breaks which attracted those business to uproot and move. But of course, we now see that those businesses still to this day are not hiring, banks to this day are still not lending like they were before Bush. So nothing got better because of your poorly constructed "right to work" spook story. It just made everyone rearrange the deck chair on the Titanic. Just a bunch of republicans at the top of huge corporations trying desperately to avoid having their conservative policies shown to be failures, trying to run from the truth and ending up right where they started.

I can't believe anyone can look at the democrat policies in effect since 2006 and say we are doing great. Both houses in congress were controlled by democrats in 2006 and they had plenty of time to "save us" from the housing bubble and evil conservative policies if they wished. The truth is, democrats put us where we are today. Democrats are elitist who think only they can save us from big business because we are too stupid to think for ourselves. Really! Without the competition of foreign markets we would be like the old USSR driving inferior vehicles, with inferior workers guaranteed employment for life in an eventual inferior country..... wait... that's right where Obama is leading us to..... crap!!!

Well that's your right to think foreign labor is somehow superior to domestic labor, and that Americans put out "crap." I disagree.

As far as democratic policies you claim have been in effect since 2006, I've gotten used to that. Republicans pointing to their own failures and saying "look what you did." Since 2006 nothing has gotten done. There haven't been any policies of any consequence passed because republicans have perfected the art of ransacking progress with the filibuster...killing meaningful legislation with the 60 vote requirement. Corporations and the rich are doing great right now. The numbers prove that out. But the only way the middle class will ever get any attention again is if there is a progressive majority in every branch of government long enough to pass some laws without teabagger meddling and republican stalling.

There's a giant sucking sound coming from Washington D.C. and it's Obama's policies and the unions sucking the middle class youth dry of any entrepreneurial possibilities. They won't be happy until the whole world works for the government and pays their union dues.

Sorry, I keep thinking of the left-wing business conspiracy known as redevelopment, such as in the Kelo decision, that was designed to make every thing look like Cabrini Green. You know, the one where the steal the poor people's houses and small businesses, relocate them into congested and cracker built "Transit Ordered Developments" along the New Urbanism line, subsidize developer profits and big box stores, and give away land and building costs to big business.

Agreed Sue. Obama has been disappointing at best.

She was my first choice. But of course you never know til they're in office and show their stripes. She seemed like more of a champion for health care than Obama. He just knew that it was her strong suit, so he co-opted the agenda. Then of course he got in office and blew it.

I would be less against Obamacare if there were no allowed opt-outs for government workers and unions..... It's the unfair application of the "democrat agenda" that turns all people off. One country, one health plan.... politicians and all. The Obamacare justifies a lower class of citizen with no chance of upgrade in an elitist democrat run society. Democrats claim for fairness is really a grab to help out their biggest supporters.

I agree with Matt that a Public Option that's enforced by codification has to be fair. Ironically, the way Obama set up this bill was through pressure from insurance company lobbyists. This president has shown he cares more about what their dollars say to him than what a simple American vote says.

Matt and I have grounds upon which to build agreement.

James Carville, a former advisor during Clinton's Regime said awhile back that" 'this guy Obama has got to get some backbone". He's afraid of everything and everybody. He needs to find some guts. If Hillary would give Obama one of her gonads, they'd both have TWO"..... That about sums up our wannabe dictator's entire Regime to date.

No, she would be almost like OB, Ms C. Rice (Sec of State) would be one of the most
smarest woman to become VP or President.

Clawson Citizen, you are right, the unions are for the unions (the higher up ones - they
have to live in these big houses and all union workers worke for them, not the company.
I know, I lived in an all union -Dem house and when i got married, the union got thrown out, and my Father turned Rep. he was a head union leader of the company he worked for and he saw what was going on. this President is in bed with them or he would not have let Hoffa say what he did at the meeting.

Nadja, Rand Paul is not the answer. Paul is an eccentric admixture of "isms" pathologically reluctant to affirm anything other than Libertarian propensities. Although sign-carrying yuppies & juvenile collegians find him amusing, intellectually-inclined taxpayers see him as radical, politically indecisive and bigoted. His early 'newsletters' reveal decades worth of obsession with conspiracies, and deeply-held bigotry against blacks, Jew, and gays. He is not the plain-speaking antiwar activist his ill-informed supporters believe they are backing. His fear of commitment to either major party and his theoretical pronouncements enable him to claim victory regardless of which major party wins. This personal peculiarity is equalled only by his claim (during the 2008 primaries that the 9/11 hijackers were 'forced to kill 3000 innocents because of American aggression' and our 'incessant interference in foreign countries') (!)

Paul's radical proffering of sympathy to terrorists, hypocrisy & inconsistency in his voting record, as well as his unfocused and inapplicable abstract reasoning dub him unelectable.

Voters ask: "Who is this fountain of eccentricity?"......The answer: Just ask a yuppie.

Well, Ed, first of all I was referring to Ron Paul, not Rand.

I consider myself a reasonably intellectually-inclined taxpayer since I did earn my Master's degree at the University of Washington. Funny thing, I hang out with a lot of people who have advanced degrees, including PhDs. We don't see him as radical, nor do we see him as politically indecisive, let alone bigoted. Since he has been a Republican for decades, I don't understand why you are suggesting that he has a reluctance to "commit to either party"; in any event, at this point both the mainstream Republicans and the Democratic Party deserve to fail since neither is operating to benefit the general public.

The entire anti-Semitic propaganda against Dr. Paul is based on his consideration that the US should NOT be supporting Israel when it violates international law; nor does Israel need any military aid funding from us - but like most people who have no clue about his voting record, you fail to mention he doesn't think we should provide foreign aid in any way, shape, or form as it is usually used either for proxy wars or for the benefit of dictators and ruling classes.

I'm an American. I am not an Israeli, a Libyan, or a whatever. I see no reason for Americans to fight for other countries, nor for us to bankroll their wars.

Nadja, you are wrong when it comes to me, I did check in on what he was all about, but when he went to the Democratic Convention for Clinton, I happened to watch a little of
it at the time he was introduced, and when he got done, I just said to everyone, mark
my word, someone is going to push him for President. I didn't vote for him because I wrote to a friend of mine in Africia and learned some other things about him.

Mr. Blackwell,
Those I am choosing not to take part in the political aspect of this discussion, I would like to implore you to vote. No matter how you vote, I would like to encourage you to get out to the polls. I recently gave a speech for the American Legion Oratorical Contest on a citizen's responsibility to vote. I would be happy to send it to you if you'd like, but the bottom line is, it is crucial to participate in the democratic process, because if enough people don't, there will not be one anymore.

PS, I know you are upset about Obama compromising, but think about the reason he had to -- Republicans in the House. Why are Republicans in the House Majority? Low voter turnout in 2010.

Maybe I exaggerate in and that, there would still be a democratic process. However, the lower the turnout, the less truly democratic that process is.

Speaking of personality disorders, how do you explain away Conservative trouncing of the BO and his Regime's network countrywide in 2010?

Do you think, MB, it might have been simply an undivined political/celestial aberration?

Or does the irregular firing of Liberal neurotransmitters over weakened mental synapses reveal to Libs a Conservative conspiracy which may have skewed the nationwide vote outcome?

Never give up looking for avenues of exculpation for the BO's totally failed Regime. If you come up short, Dave Axelrod has a briefcase full which can be obtained by any Lib lemming. Dave's list has been tried by the BO on half the teleprompters in the country, however---and failed horrendously. BO's preposterously destructive Regime can't seem to dodge the fact (now confirmed by the ultra-liberal New York Times), that every major spending program initiated by this incompetent has failed. He is one-term presidential disaster. Face it, Libs; Conservatism always wins in the arena of logic and reason.

MB work the elections and you will find write-ins only count if the people go to the city
and tell them they are running for some office, otherwise it doesn't count.

A lot worse was said by others in the aftermath of 9/11, on both sides of the aisle. You don't get it. Most of America is sick of wars, sick of debt, sick of holy rollers, NeoCons, and wannabe socialists.

A J.D. is considered a professional degree, and does not hold the academic status of a PhD, neither does an MD.

Proof of that is your slinging ot terms like "anti-Semite", and better yet "isolationist"' which you seem to define to suit your purposes.

First, failure to support Israel when she violates international law is not antisemitism, any more than failure to support Ireland if she broke international law would be anti-Catholicism. Failure to send foreign aid or military aid to another country is not bigotry. The last time I checked, I found that at least foreign aid and military aid had not been defined as entitlements.

Not wishing to meddle in other nations internal policies is not isolationism. Not fighting proxy wars is not isolationism. Not fighting wars on behalf of other countries is not isolationism. Choosing not to fight wars period is not isolationism.

I suggest you take a history course on American thought so that you can understand the difference between not wanting to fight wars, proxy or other wise, and isolationism. I suspect you're another confused political science major.

Well, Ed, it is kind of like this. The SF County hospital was talking about reducing services to poor people because of issues regarding space and money. Meanwhile, the hospital was providing free rent on around 7,500 square feet, and a host of other services to the MMM. Now, the MMM is a 501(4)c, not a charity. The MMM also went over to Oakland and wheedled about $4,000 out of the Children's Hospital for "educational purposes" - which turned out to be transportation and other expenses related to a political rally on the state capitol stairs in Sacramento.

Public money should not be going to lobbying groups; it shouldn't even go to private charities unless the public is consulted and allowed to make their beliefs regarding the matter clear.

It seemed to me, that the money for the hospitals could be better used for keeping clinics going, and the educational money could be better used helping parents learn what they need to keep their children safe.

BTW - I consider keeping clinics and other programs open and providing them with needed space more "humanistic" than using public health care money to subsidize a political lobbying group. I'm beginning to get the impression that you are humanistic only towards "the right sort of people" and could really care less about what happens to children with burns, or sick poor people.

Listen up, Nadja. Since you've barely managed a Masters degree, have dubbed yourself over-educated, and have an obviously resentful attitude toward those of us who achieved the pinnacle of academic effort in our chosen profession, your comments appear not only green- with-envy, but reek of juvenile mendacity.

Taking credit for destroying a worthy fight for social justice by the Million Mom March actually, in this instance, fits your personal perspective of racial justice. Judging from the repetitively vicious previous remarks about Israel, Jews are, to you, apparently not worthy of protecting from the criminal element. Bloggers only needed your posted confirmation that 'anti-Semitic' & "isolationist' are accurate delineations of R. Paul & his worshippers, particularly of your ilk. For me, the "right kind of people" does not include those who exploit groups demanding social justice (like MMM), employing a personal hate as justification. Your attempt to redirect attention to a County hospital (which was NOT attacked) reveals mental mediocrity. It was a Jewish Community Center.

For the edification of those of you that barely eked out a mere Masters, neocons were people who, in domestic policy in the 70s, were former liberals. My posts, if translated for you, indicate the direct opposite.

Also, Bill Buckley thwarted, outclassed & destroyed poor Dr. Costigan to the extent he visibly shook with abject consternation. au revoir

Listen up, Ed. Back in the dark ages when I was in graduate school, women were not welcome in PhD programs. At one point I was offered a free ride to a PhD; but since universities and colleges tended to not grant women tenure, if they hired them at all, it was a losing proposition. When I was an undergraduate, women weren't even permitted to enroll in certain programs!

Oh, and since your racing stripes were purple, don't try to play as if you had achieved the academic pinnacle. Misrepresenting yourself as a PhD seems like you might have an ethics problem.

I'd like to hear how disarming the poor and minorities is a "fight for racial justice." Especially when one looks back and notices that the first advocate of disarming the poor and minorities was the KKK.

Obviously, you didn't attend the Buckley-Costigan debate.

Weren't you playing a pot smoker on another Patch locale with a different alias while slandering political candidates?

This week you're either a PhD or a JD. You really, really, really, need to get treatment for that personality disorder.

It's pretty obvious to anyone who reads your posts that you are a liberal pretending to be his personal stereotype of a conservative, and doing it badly. B^)

This is the kind of personal attack and aggressive harassment you can expect from the teabagger crowd.

The screaming to shout down dissent, the constant obsession with firearms and tacit threats of violence, the gang mentality that often culminates in some innocent bystander getting his or her teeth pounded in.

You just have to read the vitriol above and you know exactly what feeds these peoples' psyche at those "rallies".

"The result of the Hoffa speech yesterday was the mass murder of Guardsmen." Nadja, this is a perfect example of your built-in propensity to agitate, exaggerate and thus provide inducements to incite others, entirely without using a modicum of reasoning. If you don't take anything back to California other than some control of your hasty pronouncements and conspicuously rash attitudes toward our closest foreign allies in Israel, it was an eminently successful trip to the Midwest. And you can thank a Conservative.

Thanks for your Liberal input, Lianne Mathie. My attitude toward the BO, as of today, is shared by over 60% of the voters, both Libs. and Conserv. (Check the polls tomorrow, Lianne). He's a failure. You are, therefore, one of the uninformed minority that still expects some rational fiscal and political performance from an incompetent.

Query: Do you feel that you are, in any way, shape, or form better off today than you were nearly three years ago? And if so, EXPLAIN AND DELINEATE, PLEASE.

Query #2: Can you identify and explicate one major spending plan, initiated BY Obama since his inauguration, which has demonstrably improved the way-of-life for the average American working man or woman? The ultra-Liberal New York Times has said, unequivocally, that there have been none during this Regime. Not one. It also declared him to be a one-term president unless he does a 180 degree pirouette turn virtually overnight.

As far as one's soul is concerned, mine will be at rest knowing that I drummed this incompetent out of office, saving the life and livelihoods of generations to come.
Your soul will have to acknowledge, Lianne, your participation in destroying the Constitution, obliterating our fight to continue U.S. exceptionalism & perpetuate our God-given right to succeed & live in security & prosperity. All this, Lianne, when you knowingly ignored the machinations of an openly 'wannabe dictator'. I sleep well.

A comment has been deleted here for violating our terms of use. … http://hartland.patch.com/terms

Darryl, never attempt obfuscation of the realities of politics when facing Conservatives. Your comment is an inordinately juvenile attempt to amalgamate voter response in 2008 into an insipid rebuttal; 2008 has no connection or relevance to my post which stated 3 times, (in the 3rd person plural present tense), "Conservatives ARE the broad middle." We have, indeed, NOW risen to a position of both numerical & moral ascendancy over Democrats & their ignominiously failed leader. As the BO grudgingly stated last November, "We took a shellacking". Additionally, Darryl, I stated "not one Liberal POLICY enjoys majority support." Raising upper tax rates was a precisely limited poll question regarding an infinitesimally small SEGMENT of the BO's overall tax POLICY and the response can only be applied with equal limitation. Every major poll shows 60% of all voters oppose the BO's overall POLICY proposal to raise taxes. Fabricating an inapplicable lexeme (look it up, Darryl) may fool union thugs and other intellectually stunted Dems, but Conservatives own the ball game in the use of politically-oriented linguistics.

Even the most ignorant Lib finds your next statement an hilariously unconvincing argument for Dem. joy: We were beaten "ONLY for that day"-"ONLY of those who voted"- "ONLY by a margin of 2.5%." That's all it takes in an election to demonstrate the will of the majority.

Conservatives always win, Darryl, in the arena of logic, reason and truth.

There you go again, Ed. Your reliance upon a single mid-term election as the sole indicator of the political climate in the entire country is trite, childish, and given your self-declared intellectual level, intellectually dishonest. You can no more claim that than claim that today's high temperature is the indicator of anything other than today's high temperature.

President Obama's declaration not withstanding, the 2010 election was a single survey point in time, composed of a smaller sample than that of just 2 years before; it is logically correct to claim that of those who voted in 2010, the electorate was more conservative, but nothing more. In fact, given how many people have expressed remorse over the election of GOP governors like Snyder, Kascish, and Walker, the 2010 election has yielded something other than what the majority of 2010 desired or thought they would get.

If you want to debate policies and the polls that demonstrate support for them, cite some. A "he wrote/he wrote" exchange of unverifiable assertions is a waste of bandwidth.

(By the way, your condescending "look it up" crack suggests that you possess class in inverse measure of your intellect.)

Finally, your tag line is laughable: "Conservatives always win - in the arena of logic, reason and truth." Unfortunately, too many "conservatives" are paragons of much save the truth. Specifically, which conservative office holders have demonstrated a commitment to logic, reason, and truth, and how?

Thanks Ed, I hope to remember that all the time, I won't let anyone get me upset,
life is too short for that. And they should get on to something else for a change.
Since they are getting no where talking to each other. God Bless the people that
lost their live on Sept 11, 2001. The only thing I am surprised at is that the Mayor wouldn't let any religious leaders come to the cermoney, except the President. too bad because I know some people went for their families.

Dang, on the way to get some real work done, I read this huge whopper of a lie: "Obama's presidency, for all practical purposes, ended on August 8th, the Monday after his nearly incomprehensible feat of ignorance & political immaturity downgraded this country's credit rating to that of a second class nation. Known in both Houses and D.C. economic circles as Barack 'Downgrade' Obama, his maniacal drive to socialize the U.S., plus the attendant totality of his failures, have already assured him of an historical paragraph in history tomes as 'the most destructive president in history.' "

No, the downgrade is not. The S&P actually said "We lowered our long-term rating on the U.S. because we believe that the prolonged controversy over raising the statutory debt ceiling and the related fiscal policy debate indicate that further near-term progress containing the growth in public spending, especially on entitlements, or on reaching an agreement on raising revenues is less likely than we previously assumed and will remain a contentious and fitful process. We also believe that the fiscal consolidation plan that Congress and the Administration agreed to this week falls short of the amount that we believe is necessary to stabilize the general government debt burden by the middle of the decade."

I'll translate for you: the inability for the President and the Tea/GOP to come to agreement led to the downgrade. Stop posting lies, Ed. While it may not be beneath you, it just isn't nice.

1. The NYT is not ultra-liberal, and the fact that the Rupert Murdock owned Wall Street Journal agrees with some reported "analysis" would tend to prove it wasn't. However, cite your "proof", and perhaps we can debate what the article really says.

2. A 1929 like crash is just where the Bush economic policies were leading us. It took more than 14 years to recover from Hooverism. It will take more than 4 to recover from Bushism.

3. The rate of employment loss and the trajectory carved out by Bushism's return to Reaganism was arrested by President Obama. The fact that the American economy has not been fully restored by President Obama in a mere 3 years, not surprising, considering a GOP controlled House and a GOP dedication to filibustering rather than governing in the Senate.

4. I accept your surrender on the idea that the 2010 election definitively indicated "conservative" as the majority and middle of the country. Changing the foundation of your argument to "polling" isn't going to help you. For example, your observation that "After the debt-ceiling deal, a USA Today/Gallup poll showed that only 39% of Americans approved." fails to recognize that many who did not like the deal felt that too much had been given away to GOP hostage takers. An Aug 9 poll suggested 62% say that taxes on the wealthy should be high so the government can use the money for programs to help lower-income Americans. Don't see that as part of the "Conservative Manifesto".

Audre , i do know that you work as a volunteer for MANY MANY things in Troy . The point was missed again by you. Everyone in Troy that pays attention knows you are a faithful volunteer .