Lafayette,

You’re spending far too much time and energy believing in myths, fantasies and phantoms.

Here’s what’s real.

-The wealthiest 20 U.S. congressional districts are represented, disproportionately, by 40% of the Senate.  All democrats.

-Of the 50 wealthiest individuals and families in the United States 37 are self-proclaimed democrats.

IN DENIAL

GRYM:  “It is the Republican Party that represents wealth and wealthy capitalists for the GOP…”

Mantra: a word, phrase or sound repeated to aid concentration in meditation.

Yes, so keep repeating it until it sinks in. It happens to be the truth of a party that sold its soul to the God of Mammon.

grok: Perhaps the conspiracy that I refer to is not so much an “act of plotting”, but more of a current mindset that compels the financial sector to not be just wealthy, but to have it all.

When one observes what is happening, admittedly, it does “appear” to be a conspiracy. A conspiracy is, however, a different phenomenon. It is a secret plan by a group to do something unlawful or harmful. Price fixing is a conspiracy and when the government proves it in court, people either go to jail or companies pay heavy fines and those responsible lose their jobs.

Market-milking by dominant agents is not, thusly, a conspiracy. It’s just a group of companies profiting from an unregulated market and making money hand over fist doing so.

Our government is supposed to oversee markets to assure they are fair. It has failed at that mission.

Martha/ThomasG - “It is the Republican Party that represents wealth and wealthy capitalists for the GOP…,”

-

I find it odd that in 2011 there are still those who believe such bumper sticker slogans.  It seems an unshakable mantra to some.

The facts remain. 

-The wealthiest 20 U.S. congressional districts are represented, disproportionately, by 40% of the Senate.  All democrats. - But we can be sure all of the above vote in the “best interest” of the poorest among us.

-80% of the current administration’s top economic team is derived from Wall Street.  All democrats. - Yet we can be sure they’re working in the best interest of Main Street.

-On nearly 100% of all U.S. corporate boards sits a democrat. - Doing what’s right for labor, we can be sure.

-Of the 50 wealthiest individuals and families in the United States 37 are self-proclaimed democrats.

The GOP represents the wealthy?  Some may wish to rethink reality.

Has he lost enough partience yet to quit?

He could the country a really big favor by quitting. One less incompetent arsehat would be movement in the right direction.

Go Right Young Man, July 18 at 6:35 am,

You want to leave the illusion that the wealthiest 2% are spaced
equally between the Democratic and Republican Party, but it just
isn’t so.

Which political party does the wealthiest elite 2%‘s Grand Old
Party, the GOP, reside in? Clue.  Not the Democratic Party.  This leaves only one political party of the two, the Republican Party.  It is the Republican Party that represents wealth
and wealthy capitalists for the GOP, in fact these two names
coincide to the point that many times the Republican Party is
referred to as the GOP, whereas the Democratic Party is NEVER, EVER, 
referred to as the GOP, because the Democratic Party represents
only the toadies to the GOP.

The American Populace, the 70%
Majority Common Population, NEED a political party and a House of
Commons to represent the 70% Majority American Populace as constituents.

Go Right Young Man, July 18 at 6:35 am,

You want to leave the illusion that the wealthiest 2% are spaced
equally between the Democratic and Republican Party, but it just
isn’t so.

Which political party does the wealthiest elite 2%‘s Grand Old
Party, the GOP, reside in? Clue.  Not the Democratic Party.  This leaves only one political party of the two, the Republican Party.  It is the Republican Party that represents wealth
and wealthy capitalists for the GOP, in fact these two names
coincide to the point that many times the Republican Party is
referred to as the GOP, whereas the Democratic Party is NEVER, EVER, 
referred to as the GOP, because the Democratic Party represents
only the toadies to the GOP.

The American Populace, the 70%
Majority Common Population, NEED a political party and a House of
Commons to represent the 70% Majority American Populace as constituents; this is a GREAT NEED in the United States.

Conason likes to make an issue of Republican ties to “Big Money”.  He tells people that Sen. McConnel is “A faithful servant of big money”. 

What’s most interesting about this well-worn and well-practiced narrative is that Conason never wishes to mention that the wealthiest twenty congressional districts in the United States is represented by Forty democratic senators.  That’s a whopping statistic.  Of course that means that of the 400-plus congressional districts, a whopping 40% of the Senate (democrats) represent the wealthiest 20.

Conason gets agitated when this fact is brought into the light.  It obliterates his election season narrative.

-

It’s hard to keep up with all the arguments and proposals in the debt limit struggle. But what’s at stake is fundamental.

The bedrock issue is whether we should have a larger and more expensive federal government. Over many years, federal spending has averaged about 20 percent of gross domestic product.

The Obama Democrats have raised that to 24 or 25 percent. And the president’s budget projects that that percentage will stay the same or increase far into the future.

In the process, the national debt as a percentage of gross domestic product has increased from a manageable 40 percent in 2008 to 62 percent this year and an estimated 72 percent in 2012. And it’s headed to the 90 percent level that economists Kenneth Rogoff and Carmen Reinhart have identified as the danger point, when governments face fiscal collapse.

This is a level of spending as a share of the economy Americans haven’t seen since World War II. It seems more like Europe than like the America we have known.

President Obama insisted in his somber press conference Friday that he is willing to reduce federal spending from these levels. But he remained vague on specifics and intransigent in his demand that any debt limit deal include “revenue,” which translated into English means tax increases.

Mainstream media have pummeled Republicans for pushing spending cuts and refusing to support tax increases in connection with raising the debt limit.

But Republicans had a mandate from the voters in November 2010 to advance such policies. In contrast, it’s not at all clear that voters in November 2008 gave Obama and the Democrats a mandate to increase non-defense discretionary spending by 24 percent (84 percent if you count the stimulus package) in 2009 and 2010.

To “Go Right Young Man”,

To reinforce your point, with a Democratic House, Democratic Senate and a
Democratic President, the Democrats would simply have had to stand up and
say:

“Seventy-two percent of the American people support ‘a government
administer­ed insurance plan - something like Medicare for those under 65—
that would compete for customers with private insurers.’ We stand with the
American people who voted us in in 2008.”

But, instead, Obama supported a private-se­ctor, for-profit health insurance
‘reform’, guaranteei­ng profits with ‘mandated customers’ & 20% more for
‘overhead’­.

Thus, one more reason to vote out Obama in 2012, support a Democratic
challenger and elect, not a nominal Democrat, but a real Democrat.

Lafayette,

“You are ignorant of the negotiations over the recent Health Care legislation and purposefully disregard the fact that” Democrats held the House, Senate, and White House for 18 months and could have passed any legislation they desired.

@lafayette   Perhaps the conspiracy that I refer to is not so much an “act of plotting”, but more of a current mindset that compels the financial sector to not be just wealthy, but to have it all.
As far as electoral politics goes, the system is beyond repair, it is owned, and the same thinking that got us into this mess (electing politicians) will never suffice to solve the problems of campaign finance reform, the war machine, media conglomeration etc. Candidates that have anything new to say will be banned from the debates. Stupid progressives will dismiss them as “unelectable”(whatever that means), and will always vote against their own interests. Time to run this jalopy off the cliff and start anew somehow.

MUSN’T UPSET THE APPLE CARTS

grok: Yeah, a conspiracy.

Ever try to mount a conspiracy? It is not as easy as you think. In fact, the probability that it all falls apart is exponentially a function of how many people are involved.

No, there is no conspiracy. There are only three factors behind Income Inequality (that is, the financial rip-off of the body politic).

Taxation is one and the lack of constraint of the game rules (that is market oversight authority) are two of them. Both made possible by the third - a misguided notion that “markets self-regulate” and do not need government intervention. Which is the biggest political fallacy since Karl Marx opined that the sources of production should belong to the people.

And we have seen where that silliness, in the form of Communism, has failed. The opposite, that of supposedly “free markets”, has proven just as idiotic.

I submit that we are seeing how the laxity of non-governmental intervention has failed as well. When there are no referees, then the game becomes a free-for-all. Which is what we have in far too many domestic markets.

That’s no conspiracy, except to those blind to what the fatcats have been doing. Why do we have speed limits on highways? Because speed kills unless regulated.

The same truth holds for markets. Unregulated markets kill competition by allowing market dominance by one or a few players. Which is how monopolies and oligopolies are milking market sectors in the US - and we, the sheeple, pay the higher prices.

Which is also why the Republicans want No Government Intervention in markets - because it upsets the apple carts.

MY POINT

We, the sheeple, deserve better. And we can have better. But we shall have to fight for it this and next year in the run-up to the elections. Not just for the presidency, but to rid ourselves of the dogmatic Rabidly-Right Republicans in both the HofR and the Senate.

IT’S ALL ABOUT ELECTIONS

tw: For evidence, I repeat:

Repeat all you want. What the public gets is what it votes for and that is not always what shows up in the polls.

In Massachusetts, traditionally a Dem state, we, the sheeple, voted for a Republican to replace Ted Kennedy. That one vote allowed minority Senate Republicans to filibuster any legislation to death. That’s “democracy” on which planet of which solar system ... ?

A year later, the sheeple stayed away from the polls and the Tea Party Crazies took control of the HofR. The gridlock mess we are now in is a direct result of those two elections. (Your opinion polls be damned.)

You are blind to how politics works in this country.It’s all about elections and not about opinion polls. We have met the enemy and he is us.  (Pogo by Walt Kelly)

MY POINT

Let’s change what’s wrong with the election system (gerrymandering, a berserk Supreme Court and election funding), then we might just give real democratic power back to the people.

Yes, we can ... because we must.

tw and lafayette -  you are more on the same page than you probably realize. The puppet Obama has done something of great historical import, for better or worse. He has succeeded in getting the Left to cut their own throats. No Republican could have pulled what he has done for the financial interests that are pulling all of the strings globally. Only a wolf in sheeps clothing could have succeeded in looting the remaining middle class wealth. All of this useless quibbling between Democrats and Republicans are the real smokescreen as the rug gets pulled out from under our feet. Unless you are rich or stupid, you can’t possibly see the pattern of wholesale theft going on throughout the world and think its some normal evolution of economic market forces. It has a deliberate intelligence behind it. Yeah, a conspiracy.

Blustering, bulling and pretense are great fun, arent they Layfayette? But they
risk becoming buffoonery.

Obama has established a right-of-center record on the four major issues of his
Presidency. He has done so, even though his original supporters and the vast
majority of Independents and thinking Republicans have clearly supported
contrary positions.

When the history of this Presidency is written honestly, Obama will have failed,
not because he was a ‘big government liberal’ (as the Foxes, NBC, CBS, ABC,
CNN, Washington Post/Times, etc would have it), but because he turned his
back on the American middle class, the majority of the voters, the voters who
originally supported him.

For evidence, I repeat:

1. Debt & Taxes: 72% of us support raising taxes on the rich including 68% of
Independen­ts and 54% of Republican­s -Washingto­n Post-ABC poll Washington
Post-ABC poll, Spring 2011. Obama first with McConnell, then with Boehner
‘bargained­’ to extend the Bush tax cuts for the wealthy.

2. Financial Bailout: Over 70% of us opposed the bailout. Obama accelerate­d it
with two Bush carryovers - Geithner & Bernanke.

3. Health Care: 72% of us supported “a government administer­ed insurance
plan - something like Medicare for those under 65—that would compete for
customers with private insurers.” Obama supported a private-se­ctor, for-profit
health insurance ‘reform’, guaranteei­ng profits with ‘mandated customers’ &
20% more for ‘overhead’­.

4. “Wars on Terror”: 64% of us opposed expanding war in Afghanista­n and
wanted to disentangl­e from Bush’s ‘preventiv­e war’ policies. When Obama
leaves office more troops will be involved than when he began.

Im prepared for the blast of hot air to follow. Begin.

It’s dangerous when we tilt against windmills.  The debt ceiling debate (make the rich pay their fair share) is just such a windmill.  It is a smokescreen which clouds the dangerous battle waged in our economy and society. Wisconsin demonstrates the battle taking place.  Busting unions, denying worker rights, cutting wages at the bottom, investing profits not creating jobs, denying health care (raising worker share of insurance costs) and the list go on and on.  They (GOP) wisely frame the debate around the Bush tax cuts… a smokescreen which will make little difference to them, but these other issues we ignore are damaging the future of most Americans for generations to come.  Sadly I believe that the same political action groups fund both parties.  They couldn’t be happier that when one of the “opposition” passionately attacks the smokescreen and holds government hostage while this windmill is tilted.  Alternative media needs to get it together, look beyond the smokescreen and provide information for real people to make a real difference in a real crisis.

tw: Why did Obama ashcan sixty-plus years of Democratic public policy?

Rubbish. No Democrat president has been able to pass Health Care legislation. And one Republican president who tried failed as well. So much for you history of Health Care in America ...

You are ignorant of the negotiations over the recent Health Care legislation and purposefully disregard the fact that Republicans held the upper hand in the Senate - by which they were prepared to filibuster the HC-legislation to death.

Obama got what he could get. Universal health care based upon private HC-insurance that is far to over-priced. Because the Republican refused a Public Health-Care Option.

You are shilling for who? The TeaPartiers?

Go away ...

I guess Conason is someone who is supposed to know something about
President Obama, a nominally Democratic President. If so, perhaps, he can
explain the following to us:

1. On Debt & Taxes: 72% of us support raising taxes on the rich including 68%
of Independen­ts and 54% of Republican­s -Washingto­n Post-ABC poll
Washington Post-ABC poll, Spring 2011. Obama first with McConnell, then with
Boehner ‘bargained­’ to extend the Bush tax cuts for the wealthy. Why did
Obama do this clever negotiating?

2. Financial Bailout: Over 70% of us opposed the bailout. Obama accelerate­d it
with two Bush carryovers - Geithner & Bernanke. Why did Obama expand and
accelerate the financial industry bailout and then protect all the bankers’
bonuses?

3. Health Care: 72% of us supported “a government administer­ed insurance
plan - something like Medicare for those under 65—that would compete for
customers with private insurers.” Obama supported a private-se­ctor, for-profit
health insurance ‘reform’, guaranteei­ng profits with ‘mandated customers’ &
20% more for ‘overhead’­. Why did Obama ashcan sixty-plus years of
Democratic public policy?

4. “Wars on Terror”: 64% of us opposed expanding war in Afghanista­n and
wanted to disentangl­e from Bush’s ‘preventiv­e war’ policies. When Obama
leaves office more troops will be involved than when he began. Why did this
man continue to use Bush-era ‘advisors’ and listen to their advice?

Why, now that Obama has joined the Republicans in the destruction of
Democratic programs should we Democrats support him?

There will not be a default because no one really wants one, Republican or Democrat. What they do want is to create an illusion of crisis. With an illusion of crisis they can introduce a solution to the crisis that will make fortunes for them all. The safest investment of all are t-bills. With a default, we would lose the whole basis of American empire - that is the ability to write IOU’s that it never intends to pay. With a default, the U.S. would lose its position in the world financially. Obama will sell out his constituency to the forces on Wall Street that got him elected. He will bring on the Depression that a Republican could never have gotten away with.

I concur 80%, give or take 1 or 2%.

80% would be fair.

The Democrats’ position in the negotiations to raise the debt limit and deal with runaway government debt can be summarized in one mantric phrase: the rich must “pay their fair share” in taxes.

Earlier this year, Illinois Congressman Jan Schakowsky introduced legislation called the Fairness in Taxation Act, which she justified by saying “It’s time for millionaires and billionaires to pay their fair share.” Clearly, the Democrats think this is a winning formula going into the critical 2012 elections, despite the historically verified fact that raising tax rates on top earners will not over time generate more tax revenues.

Some political Socrates needs to challenge this formula by asking for a definition of “fair.” Clearly, having the top 10% of taxpayers pay 70% of all income taxes — while nearly half of taxpayers pay nothing — isn’t considered “fair” by those who want to increase taxes on high earners. So what would be fair? Having the top 10% pay 80%, or 90%, or 100%? The US already has the most progressive tax system among 24 OECD countries, ahead of socialist heartthrobs like Sweden and Norway.

-

By “fair” most Democrats mean what then candidate Obama let slip that it benefits everybody to “spread the wealth around.” Federal tax policy is the way to do that and correct the “income inequality” that to progressives is a sign of this country’s systemic injustice. But lurking behind that estimation is the radical egalitarian hatred of differences in achievement, wealth, talent, drive, or sheer luck that create most inequality. - How dare humans act human. It’s simply not “fair”.

In other words, the real issue here isn’t economics, it’s philosophical. The essence of the progressive vision is the equality of result predicated on the assumption of radical egalitarianism, the notion that “those who are equal in any respect are equal in all respects” as Aristotle put it. And since people in reality aren’t all equal and success reflects differences in ability, virtue, and hard work, the coercive power of the state must be used to achieve the aim of what Plato criticized as “dispensing a sort of equality to equals and unequals alike,” a form of injustice, often brutal, that ignores differences of talent, effort, and achievement.

As always, behind every policy is a good idea or a bad idea about human nature and existence. The progressive notion that the power of the state wielded by progressive techno-elites, not unlike themselves, can create a more just world is one of modernity’s worst, and most dangerous, ideas.  More often than not, when fully applied, tens of millions of people usually starve to death in the most horrific conditions.

-

Why do so many, so-called, progressives deeply feel themselves to be amongst a small group of highly intelligent “thinking” elite?  Precisely because they are so few.  In that mankind may find comfort.

“As someone stated earlier, employers really just
want to do away with their own Medicare and
FICA payments - not to mention the Fed and
state unemployment insurance payments,
pension payments (including 401k matching), and
any form of employee insurance other than their
own.”

Without paying wages that amount to much for
labor, I can not see how employers can do away
with their part in Medicare and FICA, but it will
probably be done by the ALEC’s. 

ALEC, American Legislative Exchange Council
EXPOSED,

ALEC’s model legislation reflects long-term goals:
downsizing government, removing regulations on
corporations and making it harder to hold the
economically and politically powerful to account.
Corporate donors retain veto power over the
language, which is developed by the
secretive task forces. The task forces cover
issues from education to health policy. ALEC’s
priorities for the 2011 session included bills to
privatize education, break unions, deregulate
major industries, pass voter ID laws and more.

“Dozens of corporations are investing millions of
dollars a year to write business-friendly
legislation that is being made into law in
statehouses coast to coast, with no regard for
the public interest,” says Bob Edgar of Common
Cause. “This is proof positive of the depth and
scope of the corporate reach into our democratic
processes.”

http://www.commondreams.org/headline/2011/07/13-8

In April 2011, some of the biggest corporations in
the U.S. met behind closed doors in Cincinnati
about their wish lists for changing state laws. 
This exchange was part of a series of corporate
meetings nurtured and fueled by the Koch
Industries family fortune and other corporate
funding.

At an extravagant hotel gilded just before the
Great Depression, corporate executives from the
tobacco giant R.J. Reynolds, State Farm
Insurance, and other corporations were joined by
their “task force” co-chairs—all Republican state
legislators—to approve “model” legislation. They
jointly head task forces of what is called the
“American Legislative Exchange Council” (ALEC).

http://www.readersupportednews.org/off-site-news-section/69-69/6619-exposed-congressional-legislature-approved-by-corporations

Through the corporate-funded American
Legislative Exchange Council, global
corporations and state politicians vote behind
closed doors to rewrite state laws that govern
your rights. These so-called “model bills” reach
into almost every area of American life and often
directly benefit huge corporations. Through ALEC,
corporations have “a VOICE and a VOTE” on
specific changes to the law that are then
proposed in your state. DO YOU?

http://www.alecexposed.org/wiki/ALEC_Exposed

“Any rational person can look at what these
corporations are doing through ALEC and on their
own and know that essentially for-profit
corporations are writing legislation in Arizona,”
said Caroline Isaacs, AFSC program director. “The
spirit of the law—which I think most of us believe
is there to prevent money from buying undue
influence in politics—is clearly being violated.”

http://www.alternet.org/story/151627/inside_alec,_the_koch-funded_group_behind_right-wing_state_laws?page=entire

The above is what Fascism IS. Corporations
ruling the government.

“Remarks of President Barack Obama
Weekly Address
The White House
July 16, 2011
Page 1 of 2

Today, there’s a debate going on in Washington over the best
way to get America’s fiscal house in order and get our economy on
a stronger footing going forward.

For a decade, America has been spending more money than we’ve
taken in.  For several decades, our debt has been rising.  And let’s
be honest – neither party in this town is blameless. Both
have talked this problem to death without doing enough about it. 
That’s what drives people nuts about Washington.  Too often, it’s
a place more concerned with playing politics and serving special
interests than resolving real problems or focusing on what you’re
facing in your own lives.

But right now, we have a responsibility – and an opportunity – to
reduce our deficit as much as possible and solve this problem in a
real and comprehensive way.

Simply put, it will take a balanced approach, shared sacrifice, and a
willingness to make unpopular choices on all our parts.  That
means spending less on domestic programs. It means
spending less on defense programs. It means reforming
programs like Medicare to reduce costs and strengthen the
program for future generations.  And it means taking on the tax
code, and cutting out certain tax breaks and deductions for the
wealthiest Americans.

Now, some of these things don’t make folks in my party too
happy.  And I wouldn’t agree to some of these cuts if we were
in a better fiscal situation, but we’re not.  That’s why I’m willing to
compromise.  I’m willing to do what it takes to solve this problem,
even if it’s not politically popular. And I expect leaders in
Congress to show that same willingness to compromise.

The truth is, you can’t solve our deficit without cutting spending. 
But you also can’t solve it without asking the wealthiest Americans
to pay their fair share – or without taking on loopholes that give
special interests and big corporations tax breaks that middle-class
Americans don’t get.”

“Remarks of President Barack Obama
Weekly Address
The White House
July 16, 2011
Page 2 of 2

It’s pretty simple.  I don’t think oil companies should keep getting
special tax breaks when they’re making tens of billions in profits.  I
don’t think hedge fund managers should pay taxes at a lower rate
than their secretaries.  I don’t think it’s fair to ask nothing of
someone like me when the average family has seen their income
decline over the past decade – and when many of you are just
trying to stretch every dollar as far it it’ll go.

We shouldn’t put the burden of deficit reduction on the backs of
folks who’ve already borne the brunt of the recession.  It’s not
reasonable and it’s not right.  If we’re going to ask seniors, or
students, or middle-class Americans to sacrifice, then we have to
ask corporations and the wealthiest Americans to share in that
sacrifice.  We have to ask everyone to play their part. 
Because we are all part of the same country.  We are all in this
together.

So I’ve put things on the table that are important to me and to
Democrats, and I expect Republican leaders to do the same.  After
all, we’ve worked together like that before.  Ronald Reagan
worked with Tip O’Neill and Democrats to cut spending, raise
revenues, and reform Social Security.  Bill Clinton worked
with Newt Gingrich and Republicans to balance the budget and
create surpluses.  Nobody ever got everything they wanted.  But
they worked together.  And they moved this country forward.

That kind of cooperation should be the least you expect from us –
not the most you expect from us.  You work hard, you do what’s
right, and you expect leaders who do the same.  You sent us to
Washington to do the tough things.  The right things.  Not just
for some of us, but for all of us.  Not just what’s enough to get
through the next election – but what’s right for the next
generation.

You expect us to get this right. To put America back on firm
economic ground.  To forge a healthy, growing economy.  To
create new jobs and rebuild the lives of the middle class.  And
that’s what I’m committed to doing.

Thank you.”

Are wars on the table?  It doesn’t appear so.  It appears he is
going to betray Social Security and Medicare: 

http://www.commondreams.org/view/2011/07/13-5

The problem is that the “our economy” the
President talks about doesn’t include the
70% Majority Common Population. 
Obama is following Reagan and Reagan didn’t
include the 70% Majority Common
Population,  only the Middle Class and the
Aristocracy.

JOHN Q PUBLIC

ana51: It has never mattered to them whether or not the nation defaults

In fact, it does. If America’s Plutocrats are the ones who have the Great Fortunes parked in Asset Management Accounts (with their cohorts in crime, the banksters), then they are more than likely invested in T-notes - for which the interest bearing rate will rise.

So, the John Q Public tax-payer will be obliged, via the Treasury, to pay THEM more interest on the debt that they hold. For the Replicants, gaining power AND default on our debt is a Win-Win Situation.

In the short term, that is over the next half year. But, come the election next year, America’s affection for the Plutocrat Republicans will wane. We’ve had enough of their magic; i.e., trickle-down economics where tax cuts trickle-up and not down to the lower classes.

MY POINT

You can fool some of the people some of the time but not all the people all the time. I hope, I hope, I hope.

JUST THE FACTS MA’AM

McConnnel: It is an argument that he could have a good chance of winning, and all of a sudden we have co-ownership of the economy.

And they don’t own it already?

Some facts:
* Who brought Marginal Income Taxes at the top down from 70% to 30% in his two terms of office? Ronald Reagan.
* Who spent at least 1 trillion dollars over in the sandbox on an illegal war? Lead-head. (The US invaded a member country of the UN, which is against the UN charter signed by the US.)
* What administration lowered taxes yet again at the upper levels whilst increasing the cost of his war to bring “democracy to Iraqis”? Only one guess ...
* The laxity of which administration gave us the SubPrime Mess AND the Credit Mechanism Seizure of 2008, which caused the Great Recession of 2009 - from which we have yet to see the light at the end of the tunnel. Yep, him again.
* Who handed this Economic Mess over to Obama at the latter’s inauguration in 2009? Yep, him yet again.
* Which political party is refusing to raise taxes whilst lowering the DOD budget - because of some of the biggest donors to their campaign coffers?

And McConnell has the chutzpah to insinuate that this economy “belongs to Obama”? 

Wow! What planet to do these people live on ... ?

ALEC has been exposed, but Republicans are
still following ALEC, the American Legislative
Exchange Council , which has agreed that
Republicans will not deal with Democrats as long
as there is any benefit for the 70% Majority
Common Population.  Republicans think the 70%
Majority Common Population only live on love.

http://www.commondreams.org/headline/2011/07/13-8

ALEC’s model legislation reflects Republican
long-term goals: downsizing government,
removing regulations on corporations and making
it harder to hold the economically and politically
powerful to account. Corporate donors retain
veto power over the language, which is
developed by the secretive task forces.
The task forces cover issues from education to
health policy. ALEC’s priorities for the 2011
session included bills to privatize education,
break unions, deregulate major industries, pass
voter ID laws and more.

http://www.alecexposed.org/wiki/ALEC_Exposed

As classes and cultures, neither the American
Aristocracy nor the American Middle Class are
primal, only the American Populace is primal.

Well Spring = Fountain Head = Primal Source

Without the primal well spring of the American
Populace, both the American Aristocracy and the
American Middle Class want to separate, and
have separated from the primal source of their
origin, the American Populace, for their own
greedy self interest, neither can survive as a
class and culture in the absence of the well
spring of the American Populace as the primal
source of their existence, yet they still want to be
better and have advantage over the primal
source of their origin, the American Populace;
this, I say, is a proof of American Aristocracy and
American Middle Class unsuitability for
leadership and a proof that leadership
will always be inferior that is not inclusive of the
American Populace as a Primal Source of society
and of class and culture that has been
excluded from participation in the making and
enforcing of legislated law and order in the
Congress of the United States of America.

The course in which Liberals ought to be
committed is self determination for the American
Populace, the 70% Majority Common
Population of the United States, with regard to
CO-EQUAL participation in the Congress of the
United States with regard to the making and
enforcing of legislated law and order that serves
the best interests of the American Populace of
the United States, rather than to continue to
be led by the American Aristocracy and American
Middle Class with sophism, dialectic, and
propaganda to serve the greedy self interests of
the American Aristocracy and the American Middle
Class ——This is the course that Liberals
ought to take!!!!  The course that Liberals ought
to take is to REJECT paternalistic leadership of
the American Populace by the American
Aristocracy and the American Middle Class, and
for the American Populace to represent itself as a
CO-EQUAL PARTNER together with the American
Aristocracy and the American Middle Class in the
Congress of the United States with sovereign
rights of self determination to make its own
legislated law and order and to administer,
control, and benefit for its own American
Populace along side the American
Aristocracy and the American Middle Class that
follows the same course as competing classes
and cultures in competition with the American
Populace.

The Republicans have held our nation hostage many times in the past in order to get what they wanted. It has never mattered to them whether or not the nation defaults——beacuse none of their affluent constituency will be hurt by such a thing. No fat-cat Republican is going to have to do without a single thing as a result, while the Party knows full well that millions of innocent Americans will suffer. What the Republicans want is what they have been clamoring for since FDR—-complete elimination of all social programs in this country, including Social Security. They will continue to use any means—-extortion chief among them—-to achieve this goal. It matters not to them how many of us suffer as a result of their machinations, how many will lose their homes, or lose their medical care, or go without the monthly checks that keep them alive. This is probably the most revealing look at the Republican “heart and soul” you’ll ever get. This is what they are made of, and you don’t matter a damn bit to them. Get the picture?

“Americans who broadly oppose default, and who overwhelmingly
favor increasing taxes on the rich to avoid it, might well be
persuaded by that argument.”—Joe Conason

This is one American that is persuaded to raise taxes on the rich
A.S.A.P.