Attention Boeing... It's Obama's America, and the socialists are now in charge.

Amerika

So now the federal government, using the National Labor Relations Board, can tell a private company where it can and where it cannot build a factory. Boeing, the world’s largest aerospace manufacturer, is finding that out the hard way, and experiencing first hand Obama's US brand of socialism. (Election time is near and I guess he needs those union donations)

The NLRB has now decided that Boeing, 17 months after the company decided to build an assembly plant in South Carolina... after $750 million has been spent to build it... after all the equipment is set up... and after 1,000 workers have been hired so far -- can’t build 787 Dreamliner’s there. The NLRB, which is heavily stacked with union stooges and Democratic appointees, has sited Section 8 (a)(3) of the National Labor Relations Act, as its reason to protect union activists from being penalized by Boeing for building the assembly plant in a right-to-work state. They state Boeing is retaliating against workers in Washington state and punishing them for past strikes by building the plant in South Carolina, where individual employees can join unions voluntarily, but unions can't force required membership across entire work sites.

Boeing’s crime you ask? Their executives referred to the history of labor strikes in explaining their 2009 decision to build a plant outside of Washington state. So I guess all would have been good if Boeing would just have keep its mouth shut about the union strikes as being a factor influencing their decision (yeah right!). Oh the horrors!

So forget that Boeing offered to put the second 787 assembly line in Washington state if the Aerospace Machinists would agree to a 10-year no-strike contract (to which the union declined). Forget the fact that the last strike in 2008 over a contract dispute lasted for 58 days, which caused costly delays that put the 787 over budget and about three years behind schedule. Forget that Boeing will keep the Washington state plant open and continue to send the majority of its 787 Dreamliner business there, or that it has added more than 3,000 jobs in Washington state plant since the 2009 decision to open a second production plant elsewhere (so no workers had lost jobs or suffered any harm). And South Carolina can kiss those 4,000 planned hirings goodbye.

Well, South Carolina and Boeing aren’t taking matters lying down, and on Friday (in defiance of the NLRB lawsuit) opened the plant for business. Three cheers for SC and Boeing!!!

Yesterday, Boeing asked a administrative law judge in Seattle to dismiss a case. Reports indicate it does expect to lose the case with that judge (surprise, surprise), but prevail in the U.S. Court of Appeals.

Republicans have taken a stance on freedom and have scheduled a hearing on June 17 called "Unionization Through Regulation: The NLRB's Holding Pattern on Free Enterprise." Hopefully it will show the corruption of organized labor, and most possibly some illicit White House influence, regarding the NLRB decision.

And too bad the mainstream media has utilized all it’s resources looking into the 24,000 emails of Sarah Palin, and doesn’t have the time to request email’s and contact between the Washington State governor with the NLRB and the White House.

Manic Moran

Bizarre.

Is it illegal to open a 2nd 787 line in South Carolina because it's anti-union (and they gave you hundreds of millions)? No. Is it illegal to openly, repeatedly tell your union workforce here that you're doing this because they went on strike? Yes

Sensationalism aside, and I'm not going to place the blame on Obama because the law in question likely long pre-dates him, the gist of the article is true and generally daft.

NTM

Overheal

Thank you for sharing, if I hadn't been up at 430 this morning I would be able to read this. Ironically, I woke up to drive the old man to the airport, which again gave me a rather crisp look at the Boeing facility in North Charleston. A rather significant investment to be sure.

The NLRB, which is heavily stacked with union stooges and Democratic appointees

Ah pfft. As true (or untrue) as that may be, it's conjecture. Your argument stands up pretty well without it.

Amerika

Overheal wrote: »

Ah pfft. As true (or untrue) as that may be, it's conjecture.

Hmmmm..... Let’s look at Obama’s 2 recess appointments to the 4 member executive board of the NLRB, so he could bypass the Senate confirmation process:

Craig Becker served as general counsel for the Service Employees International Union and the AFL-CIO.

Democrat Mark Pearce has spent his entire career practicing union-side labor law in New York State.

Add to that:

Beth Maxwell will head to the U.S. Department of Labor, while two experienced worker advocates—Craig Becker and Mark Pearce—have been nominated to the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB).

Maxwell, the executive director of American Rights at Work and a strong advocate for the Employee Free Choice Act, has been named as a senior adviser to Secretary of Labor Hilda Solis and a member of Vice President Joe Biden’s Middle Class Task Force. She’ll bring to the administration a history of speaking out in support of workers and their freedom to bargain for a better life.

http://blog.aflcio.org/2009/04/27/maxwell-new-nlrb-appointments-change-we-can-believe-in/

After the appointments, the U.S. Chamber of Commerce issued a "red alert" because of what they considered to be radical changes.

You decide for yourself, but for my part, I don't see it as "conjecture."

gargleblaster

Manic Moran wrote: »

Sensationalism aside, and I'm not going to place the blame on Obama because the law in question likely long pre-dates him, the gist of the article is true and generally daft.

Correct. The National Labor Relations Act dates back to 1935. It was very much not "Obama's America" that passed it.

As for this issue, the country has drifted very far to the right in the past 30 years, so as I see it, this battle will most likely result in a further weakening of worker's rights. Which according to some of Obama's more progressive critics, might even be the goal (due both to the weak case the NLRB has, and among the more suspicious of them - the fact that a former Boeing director is the WH's chief of staff).


As an aside: This socialism bugaboo that the right enjoys waving around is somewhat amusing, in that it seems not to be tied to anything Obama is actually doing.

Amerika

But wouldn’t you agree President Obama, probably more than any other recent president, has a tendency to ignore laws he doesn’t like, such as the War Powers Act, the Defensive Marriage Act, the Medicare Reform Act, etc… And selectively apply or manipulate laws against political enemies while turning a blind eye to his constituents, such as the Voter Intimidation Laws, attacks against Arizona’s SB 1070, the “Wall Street Reform & Consumer Protection Act,” and now Section 8 (a)(3) of the National Labor Relations Act?

And as for Socialism… maybe not European Socialism, but most definately his brand of it (by US standards).
http://www.humanevents.com/article.php?id=31643

gargleblaster

Not at all. If you'd like to attempt to make a list of which laws the past five or six presidents have ignored we could compare and contrast them, though. (Also, it's the Defense of Marriage Act, and it is unconstitutional.)

As for the claim about socialism, that site is hardly a good source. Perhaps you could explain which of the things he's doing you would consider the most socialist?

I'm not sure what you mean when you refer to socialism "by US standards" - would this be in the context of libraries, police departments, fire departments, public schools and universities, etc? If not, what do you mean?

Amerika

gargleblaster wrote: »

If you'd like to attempt to make a list of which laws the past five or six presidents have ignored we could compare and contrast them, though.

I’d think since you brought it up… that would be your responsibility.

(Also, it's the Defense of Marriage Act, and it is unconstitutional.)

You are correct (I always say it that way for some reason and at times it has a tendency to transition to my typing.), and no it's not unconstitutional just because some idiot bankruptcy judge said it was.

As for the claim about socialism, that site is hardly a good source.
Perhaps you could explain which of the things he's doing you would consider the most socialist?

I'm not sure what you mean when you refer to socialism "by US standards" - would this be in the context of libraries, police departments, fire departments, public schools and universities, etc? If not, what do you mean?

Try to ignore the source and focus on the points of issue. Would you dispute the author’s claims about President Obama and that they are socialistic tendencies?

Socialism to many of us in the U.S. is the transition stage between Capitalism and Communism. To me Socialism is a new type of society that grows out of Capitalism, and Communism is the later development grown out of Socialism. European Socialism is farther down the road of Socialism almost bordering on Communism, and US Socialism is on the other spectrum - just transitioning out of Capitalism.

As an example... the bailing out of GM, giving majority ownership to the Labor Union (the workers) in the process, and firing their CEO. Under Socialism you can own a car, but Obama’s administration took away the means of production from the stockholders in order for there to be more private property in the means of consumption for the many. That part of the wealth (stockholder dividends) which is produced by workers (and taken from them - in the form of profits and dividends) would now be theirs. And under socialism they (the workers) are now provided with the ability to buy more private property – more cars.

Amerika

Hey, those honorable Blue Dog Democrats are taking a stance on the Boeing/NLRB lawsuit... RUN, HIDE!
http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0611/57068.html

Manic Moran

(Also, it's the Defense of Marriage Act, and it is unconstitutional.)

It's still being enforced by the Federal Government, so if it's unConstititional, nobody's told the Attorney General.

NTM

Amerika

Charles Krauthammer has a great piece today regarding Boeing and unions in general, which illustrates how they continue their harmful influence of both government and judicial decisions to the detriment of us all.
http://www.ocregister.com/opinion/democrats-304838-unions-obama.html

Memnoch

Amerika wrote: »

Charles Krauthammer has a great piece today regarding Boeing and unions in general, which illustrates how they continue their harmful influence of both government and judicial decisions to the detriment of us all.
http://www.ocregister.com/opinion/democrats-304838-unions-obama.html

Is this the same Charles Krauthammer who said, and I quote: 'There is no humanitarian crisis in Gaza.'

Exile 1798

Amerika wrote: »

But wouldn’t you agree President Obama, probably more than any other recent president, has a tendency to ignore laws he doesn’t like, such as the War Powers Act, the Defensive Marriage Act, the Medicare Reform Act, etc… And selectively apply or manipulate laws against political enemies while turning a blind eye to his constituents, such as the Voter Intimidation Laws, attacks against Arizona’s SB 1070, the “Wall Street Reform & Consumer Protection Act,” and now Section 8 (a)(3) of the National Labor Relations Act?

And as for Socialism… maybe not European Socialism, but most definately his brand of it (by US standards).
http://www.humanevents.com/article.php?id=31643

Human Events, great site that. Today's fare:

Coulter’s Way of Dealing with the Leftist Mob: Smash Their Faces!
by Jason Mattera
VIDEO: The 'Demonic' author would have handled Sarah Palin's rabid Code Pink hecklers a bit less, hmm, conservatively.
The Obama Failure, From a Freshman Senator's Perspective
by Human Events
VIDEO: Ron Johnson on why Obama has not stepped up to the
Reagan's 100th Birthday Celebration Inspires 'Happy Warriors'
by Sarah Saunders
Young America's Foundation forum encourages conservatives to shape 21st-century America using this outstanding President's ideals and optimism.

Hollywood & Slime: A Round-Up of a Summer Week
by Andrea Billups
From Piers Morgan's tweets, a poor Hugh Hefner, and the Kardashian wedding registry, the latest from another sultry summer week.

Lefty Feminists Expose Themselves by Putting Out for Weiner
by Lori Ziganto
Is it all about abortion? Or sexual freedom? Not sure, but these sham women's advocates' defense of the creepy congressman's crotch shots, is, um, limp beyond belief.

Top 10 Scariest Economic Developments
by Human Events
Dismal unemployment, out-of-control spending, the health care fiasco and more could make the hair on the back of anyone's neck stand on end.

Obama's the Target of Mexico Gunrunning Probe
Friday, 17 June 2011 5:01 PM

Called Operation Fast and Furious, agents' testimony illuminates a shifty Justice Department operation that may have been a gun-control ploy.

Why Do Liberal Men Hate Sarah Palin & Michele Bachmann? Friday, 17 June 2011 5:01 PM

VIDEO: Women manifest morality, a touchy issue for males on the Left these days.

GOP's Ulrich Has a Shot in Special Vote to Replace Weiner Friday, 17 June 2011 5:01 PM

The district, NY9, is a wild card, and the youthful Queens councilman has Giuliani's backing.Sen. Coburn Fails to Sway Republicans

From Taxpayer Protection Pledge Friday, 17 June 2011 5:01 PM

The GOP stuck to its guns on spending cuts and no tax hikes despite rigorous wheeling, dealing and wrangling from Obama and the Republican senator.

Union Owned and Operated Friday, 17 June 2011 5:01PM

"Shovel-ready was not as shovel-ready as we expected," observed President Obama this week, enjoying a nice chuckle about the unhappy fate of his near-$1 trillion stimulus.

Weiner's Woes: No Skillz To Pay the Billz Friday, 17 June 2011 5:01PM

"There is life after Congress for Anthony Weiner," New York Democratic Rep. Nita Lowey grimly assured reporters on Thursday before his resignation announcement.

Fed Up With Freeloaders Friday, 17 June 2011 5:01 PM

In Afghanistan and Libya, NATO went out of area. And given the trend in both conflicts, NATO may soon be going out of business.

Run, Rick, Run!Friday, 17 June 2011 5:01 PM

Texas governor Rick Perry, 61, could cure the GOP's boredom. As America's economy slumbers, Perry tells a stimulating story about Texas' pro-market growth and job creation, two subjects that top the American mind.

Connecticut GOP Chairman Backs Pawlenty Friday, 17 June 2011 5:01 PM

In a surprise political move, Connecticut State Republican Chairman Chris Healy will soon endorse former Minnesota Gov. Tim Pawlenty for the 2012 GOP Presidential nomination.

The 'Party of Entitlements' Gets a Free Pass Friday, 17 June 2011 5:01 PM

VIDEO: The media are mum as cunning Democrats trash Ryan's Medicare reform, but offer no debt-relief plan of their own.

The Fountain of Prosperity Thursday, 16 June 2011 12:55 PM

Earlier this week, President Obama attempted to blame high unemployment on automation, specifically the rising popularity of ATMs and airline ticketing kiosks. The idea is that such machines wipe out jobs by making human bank tellers and ticket counter attendants obsolete.
In reality, such machines are among the tools that help us. . .

Coulter: Democrats Appeal to the Stupidest Voter Thursday, 16 June 2011

5:01 PMVIDEO: The GOP's reasoned arguments don't hit home with the emotional groupthink of the liberal bloc, says the author of 'Demonic.'

The King Hearings, Round 2: Jailhouse Muslim RadicalizationThursday, 16 June 2011 5:01 PM

The embattled chairman cuts through the three-ring hyperbole with a compelling defense of his probe into U.S. prisons as a terrorist breeding ground.

Rare Ann Coulter Book Signing This Friday in Washington, DC! Thursday, 16 June 2011 5:01 PM

Join Human Events' own legal affairs correspondent for this Heritage Foundation/WMAL Event June 17, 4:30-6:30pm.

Romney in Front as Feisty Bachmann Gains on Pawlenty Thursday, 16 June 2011 5:01 PM

Barack Obama did not watch the Republican presidential candidates' debate in Manchester, N.H., on Monday night, we are told. He was busy addressing a campaign fundraising event in Miami.

Without Government-Shrink, Sen. Ron Johnson's Voting No on Debt-Limit Hike Thursday, 16 June 2011 5:01 PM

VIDEO: The Wisconsin lawmaker says we should shoot for 18.8% in federal revenue, which means serious spending cuts.

What GOP Presidential Candidates Can Learn From Marco Rubio's Exceptional Maiden Speech Wednesday, 15 June 2011 9:08 PM

The freshman Senator from Florida delivered a passionate defense of American exceptionalism on the Senate floor; GOP presidential candidates could do a lot to learn from his infectious optimism.

Tea Party Caucus Leads GOP Charge Against Budget Crisis Wednesday, 15 June 2011 5:01 PM

The numbers have proven the doubters wrong: This grassroots movement and its freshmen lawmakers have forced the 112th Congress to address the U.S. spending problem.

Reality Check: Higher Taxes Simply Won't Solve the U.S. Revenue Problem Wednesday, 15 June 2011 5:01 PM

Liberals miss the point: The segment of society that pays the lion's share of taxes isn't earning enough to produce a harvest of wealth that offsets out-of-control government spending.

Traditional Judeo-Christian Values and Gay MarriageWednesday, 15 June 2011 5:01 PM

It's always been our cross to bear: Bucking popular opinion in the name of what's morally right in the context of our religion.A Nation Like No Other:

Why American Exceptionalism MattersWednesday, 15 June 2011 5:01 PM

Our nation is at a cultural crossroads...

Nurses in Congress Rip Obama's 'Plan' to Save MedicareWednesday, 15 June 2011 5:01 PM

GOPers with a health care background scoff at a claim that the President's government takeover can salvage the entitlement for seniors from bankruptcy.

The Sleaziness of Politico's Kenneth VogelWednesday, 15 June 2011 5:01 PM

Kenneth Vogel's unprofessionalism and ideologically-driven writing would be better practiced on an avowedly left-wing site. That would demonstrate some integrity.

http://www.humanevents.com/

The problem is not that you read such propaganda Amerika, it's that you marinate in it. (I'll read it to from time to time, but as part of an anthropological study.)

That's why you think a 10% flat tax rate is a realistic goal for a country like the US, that's why you're full of angst, that's why you hate Obama despite the fact that he's by far the most capable man to be US President in your living memory.

That's why you and your kind completely missed what happened from 2000-2008, as the daily cocktail of media you consume suddenly switched from propagandising for and defending the Bush admin to attacking the Obama admin the day after November 4 2008.

I say this earnestly, this stuff it bad for your health. I want to put you on a diet. Cut out all the junk media you're consuming currently. Take a maximum 2 hours of NPR a day, plus the PBS Newshour with that nice Jim Lehrer chap. It'll be hard at first, your mind will reject it and you'll have cravings, but eventually you'll grow to enjoy the taste of reality again.

matthew8

Exile 1798 wrote: »

That's why you think a 10% flat tax rate is a realistic goal for a country like the US, that's why you're full of angst, that's why you hate Obama despite the fact that he's by far the most capable man to be US President in your living memory.

What has Obama done that merits this praise?

Memnoch

matthew8 wrote: »

What has Obama done that merits this praise?

I could write out a list, or someone else could, but the problem is that you are so utterly misinformed through the media you consume that it doesn't matter.

Because ANYTHING, anything positive that Obama has achieved has immediately been diminished, twisted, spun, deconstructed and repackaged by the extremist media that has driven the centre of American politics away and made the far right sound like a reasonable ideology.

The killing of Osama Bin Laden is a case in point.

Obama chose to increase US activity in Pakistan. It was a strategic decision.

He upped the drone strikes against Al Queda and other jidahist types in that country. (though I personally don't agree with this action)

And when the time came he lead decisively at least according to anyone who was involved at any level in that operation.

If it had been Bush or Mccain or Palin or another republican president you would be queuing up to join the choice led by Fox and Co, singing the praises of their 'achievement.'

He made it a campaign promise to capture and kill Osama Bin Laden. And he delivered.

But if you refuse to give him credit for something so obvious, is there any point trying to tease out the nuances of the rest of his achievements?

matthew8

Memnoch wrote: »

I could write out a list, or someone else could, but the problem is that you are so utterly misinformed through the media you consume that it doesn't matter.

Because ANYTHING, anything positive that Obama has achieved has immediately been diminished, twisted, spun, deconstructed and repackaged by the extremist media that has driven the centre of American politics away and made the far right sound like a reasonable ideology.

The killing of Osama Bin Laden is a case in point.

Obama chose to increase US activity in Pakistan. It was a strategic decision.

He upped the drone strikes against Al Queda and other jidahist types in that country. (though I personally don't agree with this action)

And when the time came he lead decisively at least according to anyone who was involved at any level in that operation.

If it had been Bush or Mccain or Palin or another republican president you would be queuing up to join the choice led by Fox and Co, singing the praises of their 'achievement.'

He made it a campaign promise to capture and kill Osama Bin Laden. And he delivered.

But if you refuse to give him credit for something so obvious, is there any point trying to tease out the nuances of the rest of his achievements?

Well if Bush got Bin Ladin you wouldn't care. Personally I care more about the jobless and the 14 trillion dollar debt than killing Bin Ladin. I also care more about the drone attacks than the killing of one guy. Death should not be a cause of celebration either.

Also I never ever watch Fox news, nor CNN, nor MSNBC. I might watch the odd video of Ron Paul or Gary Johnson on these channels on the internet but I don't watch these reports. I just read about the facts. Osama Bin Ladin dead, 14 trillion debt, 9 percent unemployment, drone attacks.

On whether I would sing the praises of a republican, that's interesting actually because I wavered on foreign policy over the past few years. Somehow in 2008 I was pro-Iraq but in 2009 I found out about how it had cost over a trillion dollars and I took an anti-Iraq and perhaps pro-Obama stance. So had Bush killed him iin 2007 I'd be praising him, in the same way I'd praise a dem president doing it in 2007. Incidentally, I don't like McCain anymore, though I never liked Palin.

Memnoch

matthew8 wrote: »

Well if Bush got Bin Ladin you wouldn't care.

I'm not really that enamoured with the way Obama killed Bin Laden. However, AMERICANS seem to think it is a great thing and a big achievement for their nation, in that context the fact that the right wing media give him no credit for it just shows the length to which they will go.

Personally I care more about the jobless and the 14 trillion dollar debt than killing Bin Ladin.

This is a slogan. Yes there is a jobless problem, yes there is a lot of debt. But these are slogans. You need to tease the nuance of these issues. I.E. How did this occur? And what will it take to improve things? To me, Obama has been trying everything reasonably possible to try and improve the situation and the republicans have been nothing but obstructionist. Please answer the above two questions. Why/how did the problem occur and what's the solution? How do you magically make jobs appear? How exactly do you balance the budget?

I also care more about the drone attacks than the killing of one guy. Death should not be a cause of celebration either.

I agree.

On whether I would sing the praises of a republican, that's interesting actually because I wavered on foreign policy over the past few years. Somehow in 2008 I was pro-Iraq but in 2009 I found out about how it had cost over a trillion dollars and I took an anti-Iraq and perhaps pro-Obama stance. So had Bush killed him iin 2007 I'd be praising him, in the same way I'd praise a dem president doing it in 2007. Incidentally, I don't like McCain anymore, though I never liked Palin.

Then there might be hope for you yet.

Overheal

Well if Bush got Bin Ladin [sic] you wouldn't care.

Categorically False.

Amerika

Exile 1798 wrote: »

I say this earnestly, this stuff it bad for your health. I want to put you on a diet. Cut out all the junk media you're consuming currently. Take a maximum 2 hours of NPR a day, plus the PBS Newshour with that nice Jim Lehrer chap. It'll be hard at first, your mind will reject it and you'll have cravings, but eventually you'll grow to enjoy the taste of reality again.

Hmmmm... Innuendo and personal attacks... funny how Liberals seem to get away with this kind of stuff here where Conservatives never would.

FYI... I’m pretty well informed. In addition various forms of conservative news, I also read daily news pieces on Liberal leaning news sources, I listen to NPR about one hour a day (drive-time, except for the boring music segments and long-winded schlepping for money segments). I also watch some programs on MSNBC (about equal time viewing on FoxNews and MSNBC), and PBS occasionally (heck... I even helped in the production of a PBS program once in which we were featured). So I have a well-rounded and diverse basis of information in order to form my opinions... thank you very much! But why let the facts cloud your apparent bias and rancor.

gargleblaster

Manic Moran wrote: »

It's still being enforced by the Federal Government, so if it's unConstititional, nobody's told the Attorney General.

NTM

It actually isn't the first time Congress has passed a law that was enforced, but was later overturned due to it being unconstitutional.


Amerika I actually did not bring up the issue of whether or not Obama was more likely to ignore laws than any other recent president.

Manic Moran

gargleblaster wrote: »

It actually isn't the first time Congress has passed a law that was enforced, but was later overturned due to it being unconstitutional.

It is only unConstitutional once the judiciary has declared it so. Until that happens, there's a presumption of Constitutionality. Otherwise the entire legislative system would grind to a halt.

NTM

matthew8

I'd rather Obama was socialist than the bipartisanship crap we get now. Low taxes maintained while spending increased leading to a huge budget deficit. A real socialist would raise the income tax now but he'll just let his country go downhill.

Obama is no way a socialist, my definition of socialism is when on average over half of your earnings are taxes. What is everyone else's opinions on what socialism is? Would you call my simplistic definition accurate?

I'll support Dennis Kucinich (a liberal socialist with some integrity) if he runs in 2016 because I get the feeling that he will keep his word on things.

Memnoch

matthew8 wrote: »

I'd rather Obama was socialist than the bipartisanship crap we get now. Low taxes maintained while spending increased leading to a huge budget deficit. A real socialist would raise the income tax now but he'll just let his country go downhill.

Obama is no way a socialist, my definition of socialism is when on average over half of your earnings are taxes. What is everyone else's opinions on what socialism is? Would you call my simplistic definition accurate?

I'll support Dennis Kucinich (a liberal socialist with some integrity) if he runs in 2016 because I get the feeling that he will keep his word on things.

Do you not read replies to your posts or do you just forget them immediately afterwards?

I've already pointed out on at least two occasions that Obama TRIED to end Bush era tax cuts for the wealthy and restore the tax take to the same level that it was under Clinton.

The republicans BLOCKED this.

matthew8

Memnoch wrote: »

Do you not read replies to your posts or do you just forget them immediately afterwards?

I've already pointed out on at least two occasions that Obama TRIED to end Bush era tax cuts for the wealthy and restore the tax take to the same level that it was under Clinton.

The republicans BLOCKED this.

He had 2 years of filibuster-proof senate and massive house majority and he did nothing. Inexcusable for a socialist. He then convienently waited until he lacked cloture and only had 53 senate votes before he put it to the houses. Why in god's name would republicans vote for tax increases? Especially after Obamacare.

Also, how do you make jobs appear? 0% corporation tax rate and lower minimum wage, simple as that.

How do you balance the budget? Cutting the budget by 43%. 50% crime enforcement and 50% military expenditure are easy to cut if they scrap drug laws that are there for the sake of it and stop constantly buying planes to fight Gaddafi and get an actual defence force. Stop Obamacare. Cut medicare by 43%. Cut teacher's pay. The wasteful spending is endless.

Mjollnir

Amerika wrote: »

Hmmmm... Innuendo and personal attacks... funny how Liberals seem to get away with this kind of stuff here where Conservatives never would.

What personal attack? Hmmmm..... Pathological imaginary persecution syndrome.

FYI... I’m pretty well informed.

What a quaint assertion. Nothing, whatsoever, in your posting history indicates that.

In addition various forms of conservative news, I also read daily news pieces on Liberal leaning news sources, I listen to NPR about one hour a day (drive-time, except for the boring music segments and long-winded schlepping for money segments). I also watch some programs on MSNBC (about equal time viewing on FoxNews and MSNBC), and PBS occasionally (heck... I even helped in the production of a PBS program once in which we were featured). So I have a well-rounded and diverse basis of information in order to form my opinions... thank you very much! But why let the facts cloud your apparent bias and rancor.

Uh-huh. Sure you do.

Quite frankly, I don't believe a single word you say.

matthew8

Amerika wrote: »

Hmmmm... Innuendo and personal attacks... funny how Liberals seem to get away with this kind of stuff here where Conservatives never would.

FYI... I’m pretty well informed. In addition various forms of conservative news, I also read daily news pieces on Liberal leaning news sources, I listen to NPR about one hour a day (drive-time, except for the boring music segments and long-winded schlepping for money segments). I also watch some programs on MSNBC (about equal time viewing on FoxNews and MSNBC), and PBS occasionally (heck... I even helped in the production of a PBS program once in which we were featured). So I have a well-rounded and diverse basis of information in order to form my opinions... thank you very much! But why let the facts cloud your apparent bias and rancor.

You'd be best off just seeking the facts from somewhere. All news reports are somehwat biased but I think Politico are fairly bias-free as they mainly report on quotes and a short explanation of the quote, perhaps the odd poll analysis.

shadowninty

This is plain silly.
It seems many union leaders live in their own bubble, unaware what is happening in the economy or the companies that employ their members.


As for the drively links, I see people who read that crud all the time. People actually believe that muck and use it to back up arguments. Tragic, especially when they vote based on it.