My thoughts exactly!!!

Gee!!!! Someone after my own heart. THANKS!

He needs to talk about jobs and control his side of congress. Obama is great at saying the right things, poor at delivering them. He has to get his party under control and on the same page. The Republicans need to stop gloating in their victory in Mass. Someone needs to get by the polar politics and start working in behalf of the ordinary citizen, small business owner and large corporations that support US workers and tax payers.

The more I watch this President, the more I believe that congress actually sets and runs policy in this country.

The Democrats needs to reign in spending, dump stimulus and start working for the better of the entire country not just 53% of it. They have had over 3 years to get things done, no results in that 3 year period.

OMG...I resign, Good Night America. What a dream come true, one more thing he could add is "I plan on turning it back to the Republicans".

At some point, Obama has to stop blaming Bush. His buddies, Pelosi and Reid, controlled Congress for the last 2 years of Bush's presidency. They controlled the purse-strings, they controlled spending, they were overseeing the financial industry - and from the top on down they ignored the warnings and signs. Bush doesn't escape blame, but Pelosi/Reid/Frank played as large a part if not larger in the disaster.

Obama's Jimmy Carter/FDR impression has continued the crisis and deepened it. I especially like the spending cuts Obama through out this week. We're $1.7 TRILLION in the hole and he limits reform to $15B...... that's like giving the Titanic survivors a bar of Ivory soap as a raft.

cdhal- Congress is SUPPOSED to set policy in America. The congress and senate, per the constitution, have more power than the president.

Left, right, dem or repub.... they are all the same. All of them are for bigger government and out of control spending. What I don't understand is why nobody is discussing the only real important issue.... the devaluation of the US dollar. All this talk about programs, who's right and wrong, who would be better.... it's all crap. The dollar will crash in 2-4 years, halting ALL of these programs before they can even be implemented, and plunging us into the worst depression in US history. The only thing that should be discussed here is if everybody has enough food and water in storage for the upcoming times. WAKE UP PEOPLE!!!!

Might want to apologize, as well.

Steve,

Dream on. Bush II and the Republicans caused these problems and will own this mess until it is resolved, which will likely be years.

Bush II should have listened to his wiser father, who told it like it is -

1. Reaganomics is 'voodoo economics'

2. By invading Iraq 'the U.S. could conceivably still be an occupying power in a bitterly hostile land. It would have been a dramatically different--and perhaps barren--outcome.'

I agree 100% with you. He should have NEVER been elected in the first place. He's a liar & can't be believed.

Bow and apologize to America for all his lies.

cdahl,

I disagree with you. He needs to talk about reducing the deficit and debt. The only thing he needs to say about jobs is that the government will stop interfering and will not pass any legislation that would have businesses waiting to see what effect that has. However, he is incapable of admitting that little truth, so he will talk about passing Health-care Reform, Cap-and-Trade, another Stimulus, and increasing the penalties on businesses. Therefore, jobs will not be created in the short term, and the recession will become a greater depression than the Great Depression. Also, the government will become even more bloated, and then our country will become like Paraguay.

Alan,

I second that. Obama is a sham man. He should quit and take Vince's place selling sham wow

Steve, you need to wake up from your dream. Bush and the reps did not cause this mess, it was the democratic party. It started with Carter, then was enforced by Clinton (and the republican party under Clinton is the ONLY party who had a balanced budget, never a democrat) and then Bush didn't stop the spending the dems were doing in congress and Obama expounded the debt and problems 100-fold. If you want to assign blame then you need to research your facts on who is to blame.

Obama is coddling his leftist extreme radical party and ignoring main street America. The majority of this country wants to be left alone and for government to get the you-know-what out of the way so the private sector can start creating jobs again and we can rebound from this recession we're in due to the porkulous bill, the omnibus bill, the federal spending limit, the health care bill in process, the raising the debt limit to 14 trillion dollars and so on. Obama IS to blame for this. He asked for this administration and he needs to stop whining like a baby and accept the problems his party has caused with the agenda.

Arthur.

Ignorance is bliss. Congress sets the spending/financial direction of the country. The president requests projects and goals. The Democrats have been in control of congress for 3 years and the majority of the last 40 years.

And I truely hope that you are correct, and if you are spending will be limited to the revenue taken in, or slightly less with the balance reducing the deficit.

Read Revolutionman.

Our economics is more about free trade policy than anything else. And your Democrats support it along with Republicans. Jobs ship over seas, each dollar sent out of this country is a dollar lost. A dollar kept here multiplies itself. (I get dollar, keep $.10, the .90 goes to my supplier that keeps .09, .81 goes to his supplier (suppliers can be payroll, taxes, etc). It multiplies itself. When our $1.00 goes to China, it is gone and roll their economy. If you want to tax the rich, do it. It's call China and the tax is called a tariff.

tomwcraig.

We actually agree, I just don't like long postings. We need to stop exporting our wealth, tariff imports, leading to increased profits here on companies, leading to jobs and increased pay, combining the taxing of profits and tariffs to balance the budget and reduce the deficit. I fail to see how the smartest people in the world (self assigned by congress) think that spending $1.00 and getting back .30 or less is good policy???

Ever since Bush/Clinton/Bush/Obama supported Free vs Fair Trade, our country has been negatively directed. And both Reps and Dems controlled congress during that time. I'm still waiting to hear from either side how they are going to fix it. Nice post Tomwcraig. We need more of the common sense one, not just the bashing ones. Thanks.

How dare you insult Vince!!! Stop having a boring tuna, stop having a boring life!!!!!

Reaganomics is 'voodoo economics'

Arthur,

I'm betting you are a big fan of John F. Kennedy. You know what, Reaganomics is actually Kennedynomics. Reagan only enacted the SAME economic policies of John F. Kennedy!

The reason for the deficit is not so much in the spending (a large portion of which goes to that "strong military"/industrial complex the neo-cons love some much!), but a lack of revenue created and collected due to the economic downturn. Of course the gov could cut it's spending in half and then we would all be in a bread line by next month! BTW it was FDR and WWII that pulled us out of the Depression, and it was FDR's policies that kept us out of one this time...but I am sure the conservative talk radio hosts have lied to you enough (and you foolishly believed it) that you deny that too.

As an independent I truly don't understand the loathing this President brings out in so many. I don't really think it is racial since they'd probably support Colin Powell IF he was elected as a Republican, nor has he done anything that truly makes him a socialist never the less a communist..or a Maoist or a Nazi....having lived & traveled in communist, socialist and totalitarian nations I'd know it if I saw it!

How about "Thank you very much, you're on your own, good night".

50% almost of all the choices listed says one thing to me. Lots of people see tha ovbious, and are caught up in it.

Maybe this boob, will start looking at a REAL agenda this year?

Where is the "Like" button like Facebook has?

exactly!

He's apologized to the world for Americas shortcomings as he perceives them, so now he should apologize to America all of his shortcomings. A heartfelt "I'm not up to the job you elected me to do" would be the first honest statement out of his mouth since the election. He could probably even pull it off without his teleprompter. Forget it!... No chance of honesty or a speech without the (crib notes) teleprompter from this guy.

I WANT EVERYONE TO BRING A BIG STICK

can my big stick be loaded?

Amen, Alan!

I couldn't agree more! Never has there been an Administration, Republican or Democrat, that has created Trillions of Dollars in Debt, with hundreds of Billions more in projected spending. Obama is a dreamer, that is fine, except his dreams don't have focus; he is jumping from one project to the next. In the meantime, he is creating exorbitant national debt. We need to get this idiot out of office as soon as possible. Isn't it 2012 yet? I don't care how wonderful Obama's speeches are; the gift of tongue is his talent, and actual follow through is his downfall. The only upside to this whole mess is it took an inept President Carter to give us President Reagan, (who got this country back on track); let's hope in 2012, we can kick out this idiot and actually vote for someone who knows what they are doing!

Two words, "I quit", and while he's at it take Harry Reid, Nancy Pelosi, and Barney Frank with him.

I want him to discuss how he has run such a transparent administration, and cleaned up all of that corruption!

And just who would that someone be? For God's sake please don't say Palin.

To all who are absolving the Repugs of any blame for the massive national debt

What the hell are you talking about . . . get your facts correct before you post and make a fool of yourself . . .

reagan-bush1 more than tripled the National debt from under 800 billion dollars to about 3 trillion !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Now onto bush2 - the National debt was still around 3 trillion dollars (after President Clinton left a balanced budget) when Bush2 was selected as president, when he left, the National Debt was over 10 trillion, another more than 3 fold increase, so don't talk to me about big spending presidents unless you're going to include the last three republican presidents . . . and the republicans had complete control from 2002 to 2006 during which time the debt increased by about as much as it had in the previous 200 years, so don't tell me it was a Democratic Congress that increased the debt !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

. . . and finally, the current deficit is about 10% President Obama and about 90% leftover from guess who . . . bush2

. . . look it up, ditto head !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

http://zfacts.com/p/318.html

http://zfacts.com/p/318.html

. . . and just in case you have forgotten; at the end of his term bush and the boys gave 700 billion dollars to wall street with no strings attached . . . at least there were some rules with President Obama's stimulus package . . . not to mention the 4400+ young Americans who lost their lives unnecessarily in george w bush's war of choice !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

I'm more scared of Terrorism from the GOP, Wall Street and the various Business Coalitions than I am of Al Qaeda.

As for creating debt, GWB took a $400B surplus and turned in into a $600B deficit in 6 short years. This and the snowballing job losses is why the publicans got ousted in 2006 and 2008. Now after 3 years we are just getting a handle on this snowball and things are turning around. But thanks to the Republican Agenda of off-shoring America, the middle class will never be the same.

And think of this, if GWB had not increased the deficit ONE TRILLION DOLLARS, the current deficit projections would only be $2.7B.

Great! Wish i'd thought of that.

As Democratic attack dog James Carille said several years ago "It's the economy, stupid".

Somehow, I don't think Obama is listening.

We can dream I'm out of here would work too and I'm taking most of congress with me would be great.

Steve13 "At some point, Obama has to stop blaming Bush. His buddies, Pelosi and Reid, controlled Congress for the last 2 years of Bush's presidency. They controlled the purse-strings, they controlled spending, they were overseeing the financial industry - and from the top on down they ignored the warnings and signs. Bush doesn't escape blame, but Pelosi/Reid/Frank played as large a part if not larger in the disaster."

You are correct, but I would also include Chris Dodd in that group that ignored all of the warning signs.

Actually, Bush's overall performance on economic issues was quite good. Consider the following;

FACTS ABOUT BUSH'S PERFORMANCE

In 1976, Jimmy Carter touted the "Misery Index" to use as a campaign tool against Gerry Ford. It was derived by adding together the Unemployment and Inflation Rates - two of the broadest measures of "misery" that people had to deal with. Unfortunately for Carter, by the time his first term was over, the Index had INCREASED by about 50% to an average of 20.27%, and Ronald Reagan took over.

I took a look at the Misery Index on Wikipedia to see how other Presidents had fared, and guess what - BUSH'S RECORD (8.1% Average) WAS THE BEST IN THE LAST 40 YEARS - EVEN BETTER THAN BILL CLINTON (8.8% Average). The link is below;

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Misery_index_%28economics%29

Of course, there are other factors that should be considered, such as Interest Rates, Economic Growth and Interest payments on the National Debt. But even here, we find that the results are perhaps surprising to many people. While the economic growth rate (adjusted for Inflation) for Clinton (3.03%) averaged slightly better than Bush (1.95%), Interest Rates on government debt were significantly better under Bush (2.59%) than under Clinton (4.40%), and average monthly Interest on the National Debt under Bush was only $16.6 Billion, versus $18.9 Billion under Clinton.

I wonder how long it will be before we start longing for “the good old days” of G W Bush? LOL

Bush messed up worse, and he didn't resign in disgrace as he should have.

Obama should say it took Bush 8 years to destroy America, and the voters should give this administration 8 years to stop the bleeding.

Amem, Brother!

I resign, Good night America.

Crap, Alan. You beat me (and many others) to it. That's exactly what I was going to say.

Yeah, we need another Republican dictator to suspend the Constitution and lead us into the worst domestic and foreign policy disasters in our nation's history. GWB cut your taxes, but your real money evaporated while he was asleep at the switch. Ah, but keep listening to FOX news and you won't have to face that reality.

I love the way Roy uses numbers (all though a little skeptical of Wikipedia) to make his point and condew uses rhetoric. Roy uses data back to Obama's first term in 1976.

Roy: here's a possible answer to your longing for Bush question. 44% in December.

http://publicpolicypolling.blogspot.com/2009/12/obamas-december-standing.html

How about, "the buck stops here." This is my presidency and I am responsible for everything that is happening now, both good and bad. I am fully aware that public opinion is wavering, but we are working hard to establish policies that will ultimately help our beloved country (insert big dollar programs here). It'd be refreshing to see him take ownership of anything rather than the usual dodge and redirect to the Bush administration.

Alan, This is simple concise and accurate...

CEMottIII

The reason for the deficit is not so much in the spending (a large portion of which goes to that "strong military"/industrial complex the neo-cons love some much!), but a lack of revenue created and collected due to the economic downturn.

The free trade sent the revenue creation of a war overseas. Don't forget, WWII with manufacturing on our own soil brought us out of the depression.

And you need to look up what % of the $$ goes into the "strong military" and try not using words like "neo-cons" if you want to gain respect for your viewpoint. It's a VERY tiny %. The cost of both wars so far PLUS the stimulous during the Bush years is only a tiny % of just what Obama's stimulous cost in the first 11 months. If you're really that concerned with that amount of $$ you should be outraged by the Obama stimulous.

Bush had 8 years to ruin this country on our soil and all around the world!!!

Obama will not fix it all in 1 year! He needs to revamp his administration and get people of our country back to work! The workforce in AMERICA is the best 'stimulation' this country needs right now. NO MORE IMPORTS FROM CHINA!!

CREATE JOBS and stop giving money to the fat cats on wall street!!

TAX THE RICH AND REFUSE TO ALLOW THEM THE LUXURY OF SAPPING THE MEDICARE BUDGET!!! Like the rich cannot afford to pay their own way for medical expenses!!!!

C'mon!!! :O

The TRUTH would be nice! ! O'Bama should admit that he has not idea how to lead and govern and as a result he is announcing his resignation effective immediately. As an added good-faith gesture on O'Bama's part, he should also announce he is taking the Dementia Riddled Biden, the White House Village Idiot Reid and the Lying 2-faced Pelosi with him. Together they are forming a company to assist N. Korea and Iran in learning how to play nice and share with their neighbors. As a final gesture, the White House Chef and His Driver will assume the job as President and Vice-President because they have more experience then he ever possessed.

Jan. 27th, 2010 and you are there. Barack Obama----------good day.

Really funny, the problem is that Biden is the backup and and even larger problem is tht Pelosi is number three. How did we get such a horrible line up?

Very well said, I've heard that from alot of people, so many people are'nt heard. It takes people like you to speak for them.

Sarah Palin is speaking tonight?

We couldn't have screwed it up any better if we tried-----or did we? We got through Jimmy Carter. We'll make it through this also. Come Nov. and 2012, I'm going to be taking a much harder look at candidates, I.E. Tea party candidates. I'm going center-right, maybe hard right. Which party they are may mean very little unless I have a real dislike for the candidate. I think a lot of folks are thinking that way now. Oh, Palin is speaking at the Tea party convention for $100,000----good night's work.

The progressive agenda (read that as socialist) isn't going to work in the U.S. because of the enormous access to information in this technological age. It worked up through FDR because it took time to disseminate knowledge and people couldn't afford to spend time tracking it, so they got complacent and forgot. Now they can follow it in real time and the progressives continually get exposed for what they are. This is why they want the fairness doctrine, tax on internet access and to otherwise control the media. Without it, they wilt in the light of truth. That being said, BO needs to address how to get jobs back in the private sector but I'm sure he'll do like all the other Presidents did on this subject and create more government jobs which produce nothing. They don't produce products or profit or techonology. They just eat up revenue from taxpayers. How's that change working for you Dems?

I noticed all the irrational posters are out today.

Blame Obama at any cost. He is responsible for everything. You attack and sqeal to get someone to take on the deficit and then when the President gets the meassage and starts to propose something about it , the conservatives suddenly forget who they are.

(1) Proposal to create a Deficit reduction group to come up with debt reduction strategies. 7 Sponsoring Republicans of the proposal. Then they are all against it a few months later becuse its an election year and Obama is now supporting it.

I guess the GOP was FOR debt reduction before they were AGAINST it.

(2) Recsinding the campaign finance bill. The GOP cries about special interests in Washington having too much power, so the conservative judges on the SCOTUS rule to let the special interests back in to pee in the pool.

I guess the conservatives were FOR getting rid of special interests before they were AGAINST it

(3) Obama requests a 3-year spending freeze. McCAin thought it was a good ide. So did the GOP. Any dollar saved according to te GOP is worth the effort to reduce the deficit. Suddenly 477 Billion in spending reduction 'isnt worth it' and they are out there dismissing the idea, just because Obama is proposing we do it.

Again, I guess the Republicans were FOR Debt Reduction beofre they were AGAINST it .

The GOP has obstructionism down pat, but no solutions to our economic woes. Voters arent going to let you win based on channelling anger. You have to have a plan, GOP. And get ready to explain your non-action on the items I mentioned above to the tea baggers. They will want to know why you arent walking your talk

So many half-truths.

Bush no more was responsible by himself than Carter, or any of our other incompetent Presidents. CONGRESS is responsible for spending. No President in modern history has had the backbone to bring the nation to a halt to force CONGRESS to stop overspending. This lack of backbone, from Kennedy to Carter to Reagan to the Bush's to Obama, none have had the spine to veto until they get it right. And in some cases, Congress had enough votes to override any vetos, so in those cases, CONGRESS is and was 100% RESPONSIBLE for the current economic calamity.

To you silly libs screaming about Bush and 8 years, your party, the progressive dems, have been in power for 3 years now, and this has been the worst 3 years in modern history.

Reaganomics worked - it created new revenue by cutting taxes. Not as big as some claim, but it produced net new revenue by taxing us less. This is the ONLY answer.

Forget the deficit, forget the debt, the solution is not higher taxes.

The solution is to light the economy on fire with huge tax cuts. The proper permanent tax cuts would produce growth. Growth produces new revenue.

Next - cut spending. Enough of this phony "Freeze". We all know it's BS.

Cut all spending by 10% this year, and another 10% next year. Force all Federal, State and Local Governments to buy smarter, do with less, reduce the world-class benefits and retirement programs that we cannot afford and which 95% of Americans do not have available and stop treating government work like some protected class.

Lol all these morons recommending he resign forget he was by far the best choice presented, and still IS. They have no solutions only whining and hand wringing.

He should tell them all to grow up and quit bawling like spoiled babies, ram a single payer health plan down their gullet, and take away all the corporate gravy train tax cuts that have destroyed industry and growth in the USA and put a 5000% tax on companies who sell here and produce elsewhere.

That would save us all a lot of time. By the way, are there any good NCAA Basketball games tonight?

Dream on sucker!

Exactly. He would become famous for finally doing something good for America if he resigned

I would like to know exactly what it is that is making him take another fresh look at the direction that we have been going(aside from the obvious political losses that are coming down the pipe), and what convictions that he has had that have suddenly changed... and why they have changed.

The one thing that overrides everything that I see about this President is the reasoning and ideology that motivate him. Is he a "Untied States comes first" President all of a sudden, or is he the same apologetic President that went around the world and trashed his own country thinking that it would somehow strengthen our relationships abroad? Is he going to continue down the path of blame, or is he going to put that to rest and look forward with some kind of new epiphany that is going to help catapult us back into the proper perspective as "the leaders of the free world"?

Will I trust him any more after he makes the speech? Unfortunately I have to take the stand that Reagan stated when dealing with a foe..."Trust, but verify".

How about this? I asked for the job and implied I was up to it when I ran for Prez. I knew the condition of the country when I took the job. Therefore, I will stop blaming Bush and realize the Democrats had control of the Congress at the time I took the job and bear some of the responsibility for the condition of the country also. The time spent blaming Bush can now be spent on something more productive!

Bush screwed up so bad it will still be acceptable to blame him 50 years from now.

Everything you whiners are complaining about was set in place.. by Bush not Obama, why would he take credit for that train wreck?

Health care, Bush ignored it and allowed it to become the mess it is today

Housing, Same thing

Destructive wealth inequality, same thing,

Jobs, same thing

Spending, same thing

Don't say or do anything unless you can do it without lies, deceit and backroom partisan parlor deals.

I'm tired of blatantly open crooks running our government!

I came on here looking to see if "My resignation" was going to be one of the possible topics... but it seems I have already been spoken for... Thank you!

The only thing Obama has to apologize for is accomplishing nothing his first year in office. Unlike his predecessor, he hasn't purposefully set new, bad policies in action that give to the rich and steal from the poor, rape other countries, screw the world, strip Americans of their civil liberties, make the world our enemies and attempt to put a financial system in place that will make him and his cronies multi-billionaires for years after his presidency.

For all of the LOVERS on here (Obama lovers that is) -

We the opposition get it - you blame, hate, despise Bush. I have seen and continue to see folks on our side except SOME of the arguments that Bush screwed up.

Can you answer me this?

When can we reasonably expect that you and yours will accept responsibility for the decisions and policies put forward by your side that have absolutley hamstrung this and even previous economies?

It can't be that ya'll are perfect stewards and superior economist - because if this were true then more Americans would have figured this out and in essence there never would have been a President Reagan (post CARTER era) or Bush after Clinton.

At some point in time our country will need ya'll to MAN UP - admit to mistakes - bring to the table a willingness to debate and compromise - leave all of the whining little crybaby name calling crap at home -

It's time to get after the peoples business - BOTH SIDES -

Obama could and should get this ball rolling tonight - MAN UP - admit he screwed up and that he knows in order to FIX THIS COUNTRY - it will take the blending of ideas from both parties - he MUST admit he does not have a mandate from the people to continue what he has been doing-

From our perspective anything less than this and you can rest assured the divide between us will only grow wider and the road will become significantly bumpier than it has ever been. PROMISE

Agree.........this nitwit needs to say NOTHING...........

And what exactly have the Republicans done for you lately? They have done NOTHING for me. They have no solutions. They created a disaster and now answer with no. Besides yelling no and creating tea parties, tell me anything they have suggested. Instead they just say no. It's an easy answer. No. Of course it fixes nothing but it's an answer.

The country was heading into the dump in the Bush years. It's going to take time to recover. Get over yourselves already.

How's your health insurance? My small business premiums increase every year 28-35% with no one making any claims. But our Congress has great insurance. Why shouldn't the Republicans on the take from insurance companies be content? It works for them. It doesn't work for the rest of us.

How's your employment? Tell me anything that the Republicans have suggested that would get jobs going.

And our deficit? How about two wars that were started and never funded?

It's time to face facts, people. This country has issue that need answers. Being the no party is not solving anything. It's the old train coming - either be part of the solution or get off the tracks.

I can't expect him to say anything that I would agree with, and even if he did, I wouldn't believe him.

JustThinkin...

Any proposals that have been put forth by the Republicans have been shoved into the round file before even being considered. There are plenty there... but the Democrats run the show... Hello! It's not worth going into any details because anything that they propose as an alternative gets no press and no attention. But... that's what you get when you have taken advantage of the majority... something that the Democrats do right now.

And what have the Democrats done for us lately? It's like taking the brown stuff from the other group and mixing it with the green stuff from this group. It all still smells.

OBAMA HAS EVERYTHING SO SCREWED UP??? Are you crazy - where were you for 8 years??? Here is the mess Obama inherited:

Credit is the oil that runs businesses. The banks HAD to receive the TARP (better known as the bank bailouts) to loosen up credit to give businesses cash flow.

Banks didn't want to lend because they were in deep trouble. So Bush did they right thing by bailing out the Banks. (Make sure you keep that straight that the Republicans started the bailout because the problem started ON THEIR WATCH)

Now Obama has to force the banking industry to ease up on credit - also one reason the FED has interest rates at 0.

JOBS CAN'T BE CREATED IF THERE IS NO CREDIT FROM BANKS. So for you blowhards, Obama is doing the right thing by starting with the Banking side to increase cash flow. NOW IT IS THE BANKS JOB TO START THE FLOW OF CREDIT - i.e. cash.

BUSH AND THE REPUBLICANS RAN THE COUNTRY INTO THE GROUND - GUESS WHAT, THE WHOLE IRAQ WAR WAS NOT IN THE ANNUAL BUDGET !!!!!!!!!!!!

How did they get away with that and where were you all when this was happening??

old and tired,

i agree that fireworks would probably be best. it might be hard to hold your firepower with this current administration. lol. i am so happy to find someone else who is old and tired! friend request sent.

The soaring defecit, the recession and the bank problems were all there before Obama showed up. Remember the John McCain incident where he was rushing back to Washington to fix things? The Trillion for the banks was approved before he took office. We were losing 1 Million jobs per month before he took office. These facts are not disputed by anyone Democrat or Republican. Obama took the Iraq and Afghan wars which was off the accounting books. That was 400 billion per year. I don't mind intelligent discussion, please don't distort facts. I didn't like it when people did it with George Bush, and I don't like it any more with Obama. If we get less PR and more real discussions, maybe we can get the poloticians to do whats right instead of what lines their pockets.

Of course you want him to resign. Never mind that Biden is more liberal than Obama, that's not important, is it? What's obviously important to you is that at least Joe Biden is WHITE.

What a sad world we live in.

Uhh, How about working for PEACE on the planet? Ridding ourselves of building WMD worldwide would=BILLIONS in resources,energy,etc!

The social programs pale in comparison with dollars spent. I.e., peace spending vs war spending.

War is our common enemy. The so called leaders who continually lead impressionables to war are henchmen of war.

It's time to quit it. I say, stop war for a year and see what happens. Hey, if you don't like the result you can always go back to killing and maiming.

It is nice to know I am not alone.

I get a kick out of all the posters on here who sidestep the current issues by redirecting the discussion to reiterate (and reiterate some more) just how bad things were during George W's 8 years, and how he ran this country into the ground.

What's the point? There are legions of Americans unhappy with Obama who didn't think Bush was much better (there are plenty of Tea Partiers who feel neither president has been fiscally responsible). Isn't it rather rediculous to defend Obama by continuing to deride Bush? Two wrongs don't make a right.

As to running the country into the ground, perhaps Bush started the dive, but rather than pulling out of it with aggressive spending cuts and tax cuts, Obama's policies are turning it into an out-of-control tailspin. The accelerated growth in entitlements spending, the ongoing cost of being the world's policeman, the seemingly limitless money-printing, are simply unsustainable.

And for those of you who think the answer to everything is to soak the rich, I've got news for you. The so-called "rich" have realized huge losses the last couple years. Losses are not taxable - only the AMT keeps them paying anything at all. But it's not the pot of gold so many seem to think it is. Our national debt is on track to equal $60,000 for every man, woman and child in this country. There simply isn't enough "rich" people taxable income around to cover it. No, you're going to be on the hook for it, every one of you, one way or another.

So rather than pointing fingers, rationalizing every issue to be someone else's fault, someone else's responsibility, Obama and you should step up and acknowledge your own responsibility for the current mess. It's everyone's responsibility. We all have to balance our own budgets or go bankrupt. Why hold our government to any different standard?

Yes! The best thing for him to say is "I resign, good night"!!!

Hillary is NOT in the administration making decisions. She is taking orders from him, so she is not to blame for this year. Actually, he has kept her under his thumb I think. Because I have seen him send others in her place to do what a Secretary of State should be doing.

So this mess is his and his alone folks. Just because of a pre-conceived notion we got from the media that Hillary is at fault for everything in the universe, doesn't mean it is true.

I think progress could be made if the leadership in congress and the senate resigns, both party's. The advisors from the outfit in Chicago resign, they are a corrupt crew of hyper partisans. This deathbed conversion of the party's is nothing but a flim-flam. Imagine a group of people who consider the people of the country to be their serfs suddenly (after a seismic voter revolt) really really care about what we think. Nothing could be further from the truth in my view. Both party's and their leadership are out of touch, corrupt, self serving and power hungry. Don't be fooled like so many of you were in 08.

ellie,

Wow, your argument is illogical and irrational. Consider professional help.

Arthur, i think you might be the one in need of help if you can't see the anal redundancy this administration is promoting. The #1 thing on peoples most angry list, is how it has focused more on everything but the best interest of the nation. J O B S!

If your nation is unemployed what can it do for you? nothing! Yes 1 at a time, all those morons, who were cheering Obama, are tuning against his ideas and support. At this point, i can see he is without a clue as to what it takes to make this nation powerful again. Powerful, i mean in regards to it's backbone, industry.

His socialist dream, Americans did not vote for. It was his promise of JOBS! I didn't see that promise happening when he ran for office, and i havent seen it since. So...in regaurds to your "factless" comment, i think you need some help bub.

I am simply amazed at the number of people who think that business owners can pull these so called jobs out of their A$$. Jobs started leaving this country in the 1970's and have continued do so at an alarming rate since then. We have bolstered china's economy when we should have been doing so for ours. As a small business owner, I am willing to listen to any of you who has a legitimate plan for business to create the jobs you are talking about.

You mean GWB has screwed everything up. This mess is the snowball started in 2002. Now the snow ball has finally gotten to the bottom of the hill and has no where to go but up.

I'd like to see Republicans get on the air and accept responsibility and be accountable for once.

The Republicans all claim to be Christians yet continue to behave in very non-Christian ways. First they gave us Watergate, then yesterday, gave us Watergate II. The comment about the stray dogs goes directly against the teachings of Christ himself. The comment from Lardbaugh and Robertson completely left out the part about Haiti's conversion to Christianity. What a bunch of hypocrites.

Megalodon-358694 what jobs? The Republicans keep touting capitalism and the free market and the free market just keeps sending jobs overseas. When are you ever going to get that big business and their Republican friends only look out for each other, not the ordinary citizen? Republicans keep them deregulated and they help keep Republicans in office by funding their scare machine.

It's nice to hear about, "what we want to hear from him", but we all already know what we will hear in reality. "Don't blame me, it's not my fault, blame Bush, he did all of this, I am just the innocent bystander."

Give Obama a break; he simply focused on the things he thought he could truly accomplish. The stimulus, health care, transparency, etc. He had no clue how to truly fix the economy so he didn't focus on it.

How's the stimulus helping to keep employment closer to 8%?
How's the health care legislation going?
How's transparency?

He should discuss his poor ratings and leaving office next week so someone with half a brain and a genuine concern for the USA to run the country, especially since he is completely clueless.

ByOurExample, you need to do some research man. You're using every stereotype in the book. All Republicans claim to be Christian? In 2002 we were just beginning a retaliation for 9/11. The war was started by Bin Laden and had nothing to do with Bush. What exactly happened in 2002 that you are referring to? Remember, by Obama's own words, at that point in Bush's presidency, Bush "inherited" whatever problem that might have been. (yes that's a load of crap, only the son of a king can "inherit" leadership).

Give Obama a break? Are you kidding? A break like AIG got, but not home owners swimming in debt? A break like the auto makers got, but not small businesses all around this country? A break like Citibank, Bof A, Wells Fargo got, but not any of the local banks that represent local people? Right......

Did you mean that kind of break? I can think of what kind of "break" I'de give him. Better yet, he can give us a break and resign during his speach tonight.

How is it that so many people have forgotten that Bush passed TARP (bank bailout) in oct. 2008 before the election. At that time Obama was the same as McCain a candidate for POTUS. I don't hear people blaming John though? Bush also handed most of that out before he left office with no restrictions of any kind on what it was to be used for, but yea I can see how BUSH'S actions at the end of BUSH'S term would be the next guys fault. I guess if it goes down on your watch it is your fault regardless of who started it.

So who's fault was 9/11?

No, we blame Bush just like you. I was against the Bush stimulus. But despite that 1st poor showing, Obama crammed another stimulus package down our throats.

Do liberals somehow believe that pointing out a failure of Bush justifies the same failure for Obama. What is Obama doing, following the Bush lead? Can't he come up with anything on his own?

The Republicans keep touting capitalism and the free market and the free market just keeps sending jobs overseas...[blah, blah, blah, same old crap]

There hasn't been a free market in decades. Why don't you look into why jobs are being sent overseas instead of repeating rhetoric? The United States is not business-friendly--business is heavily regulated, and you're not paying attention if you believe otherwise.

You mean GWB has screwed everything up. This mess is the snowball started in 2002. Now the snow ball has finally gotten to the bottom of the hill and has no where to go but up.

I'm certainly not defending Bush--in fact, I'm sick to death of seeing people defend politicians--but the U.S. government and its policies didn't begin in 2002. You need to look farther back than that for the root of our problems. Also, don't forget B. Clinton's meddling in housing. Find the Clinton-Gore 2006 campaign page--it's out there. Clinton wasn't shy in listing all that he had done in this area and all that he planned to do.

Also, what makes you think we hit bottom? Don't answer that, because I'm sure you'll just repeat the state-approved fairy tale.

I noticed all the irrational posters are out today.

Blame Obama at any cost. He is responsible for everything. You attack and sqeal to get someone to take on the deficit and then when the President gets the meassage and starts to propose something about it , the conservatives suddenly forget who they are.

(1) Proposal to create a Deficit reduction group to come up with debt reduction strategies. 7 Sponsoring Republicans of the proposal. Then they are all against it a few months later becuse its an election year and Obama is now supporting it.

I guess the GOP was FOR debt reduction before they were AGAINST it.

(2) Recsinding the campaign finance bill. The GOP cries about special interests in Washington having too much power, so the conservative judges on the SCOTUS rule to let the special interests back in to pee in the pool.

I guess the conservatives were FOR getting rid of special interests before they were AGAINST it

(3) Obama requests a 3-year spending freeze. McCAin thought it was a good ide. So did the GOP. Any dollar saved according to te GOP is worth the effort to reduce the deficit. Suddenly 477 Billion in spending reduction 'isnt worth it' and they are out there dismissing the idea, just because Obama is proposing we do it.

Again, I guess the Republicans were FOR Debt Reduction beofre they were AGAINST it .

The GOP has obstructionism down pat, but no solutions to our economic woes. Voters arent going to let you win based on channelling anger. You have to have a plan, GOP. And get ready to explain your non-action on the items I mentioned above to the tea baggers. They will want to know why you arent walking your talk

To be clear, Obama and the democrats passed TARP 1 under Bush. It was a bi-partisan screw job.

As for Obstructionism... when you own the White House, both parties of Congress AND have a 60 vote margin in the Senate, you don't need Republicans. Nothing they have done could stop this insane administration.

Except for the little election in liberal leaning Mass. Yeah, stopped these fools dead in their tracks.

These children that call themselves democrats couldn't get their own bill out of their own negotiations with ZERO republicans in the room.

This catastrophe that is the Federal Government is 100% Obama, 100% liberal, and about 70% disaster.

The entire world hated Bush and the US.

MA didn't have to worry about healthcare since they already have virutally universal health care through the state. You read far too much into that election. As soon as they figure out who they elected, a former stripper (family values all right), he'll be voted back out.

I'll admit I found it frustrating that the Dems couldn't get something done with health care reform when they had 60 Senate Dems. However the difference between Democrats and Republicans is that Dems think for themselves and vote how they think right and the Repugs just vote straight party lines without any thinking on their own.

everytime I hear the liberals trying to blame Bush for this mess, it almost makes me laugh. Only economically ignorant people would actually believe that, and on the liberal side, their numbers are many. Since pointing out exactly what liberals did to destroy our economy doesn't seem to work, maybe one of you liberals can explain to me exactly what Bush did to bring down this economy. I know, they never can, they just say, it was on his watch.

if Bush ignored healthcare, what was that perscription drug bill that he got passed? get a clue liberals, you are full of BS and you know it!

liberals love lies... Obama voted for TARP, so you can't blame Bush for it. And more than 50% of it was left unspent when Obama came into office. Besides, no one knows what might have happened if TARP didn't pass, and there were no other ideas on the table. And it was Republicans in congress that were fighting Bush and the liberals over it. Bush supported the liberal view, and now those same liberals are blaming him... how ridiculous can they get?

9/11 was mostly Clinton's fault. Bush won in 2000 by the skin of his teeth, he had no political clout to make the changes that would have prevented it. Clinton, however, was popular and could have made changes to protect us, but he didn't.

levantase you're not paying attention. AIG, Citibank, Bof A, Wells Fargo all got their money from TARP. This wasn't 2009, it was 2008! Obama's administration has put constraints on every dollar they spend on a corporation (i.e. GM, Chrysler). Get a grip.

mattwn I'll tell you exactly how Bush created this mess. He appointed a treasury secretary and Fed chairman that kept interest rates low to keep the housing market growing. It made it look like the economy was growing as every Tom, Dick and Harry invested into housing they had no ability to pay if things went south. In the meantime, he was spending a trillion dollars a year on wars - which are not on the budget but included in the deficit.

By the time Obama took over the only party (that would be 1) consumers, 2) business or 3) government) able to spend to spur growth was the government. This isn't about socialism or liberalism...it's about digging out of an immense hole that has been growing for years.

Time to stop blaming anyone and move on.

I agree 100%. Old toads like Harry Reid and Joe Biden have to go. The only problem is that any opening this causes is filled by some left wing radical that Obama picks. Does he have any friends that aren't part of the Socialist party?!

We sure as hell didn't get change when we reelected these dumb asses!

Don't say we - I didn't vote for that leftist- radical.

Bmax, Bruce,

You guys sound like right wing-nuts. Neither Congress nor Obama have proposed anything that looks like socialism. There has been no government takeover proposed for anything. You need to go back to school and study economics.

You need to go to Cuba and study marxist-socialism.

There has been no government takeover proposed for anything.

gm

Arthur - what would you call Obama telling private industry what their salaries can or cannot be.

>There has been no government takeover proposed for anything

Arthur, pull your head out man. The entire health care plan is about governement taking over health insurance. They've already taken over AIG and GM, they tried to take over the banks but the banks paid back the money to get out from under.

Pay attention to what he does, not what he says

Arthur -

I could retort and say you sound like a left wing radical; but with you, I really do not think that is the case. See, left wing radicals recognize what Obama is trying to do and they applaud it. They relish the idea of taking the power away from the people that drive our great nation; and yes, corporations and big business are comprised of "the people". They love the idea of a large centralized government controlling the amount of success an individual can attain in life. They long to bring those who enjoy a lifestyle that is superior to their own, down to their level of misery. They look at equality as being equal despondency rather than an equal opportunity for success. You, on the other hand, do not seem to grasp what you support. Whether it is due to ignorance, gullibility or incompetence is difficult to ascertain from your single post. Judging from the name calling, it is only natural for me to assume that it is a combination of the three.

Do you really know what a "socialist" is, or stands for? There are few socialistic governments on earth today. It has become a word to frighten people, and unfortunately uneducated people use the term far too loosely. The agendas of the far right and the far left are what has a strangle hold on this country. Clinton figured this out and began governing from the middle in his second term. I would submit GWB figured this out with only months left in office. If Obama has figured it out in only one year in office, we might have a chance, if not. . . . . we are screwed for another 3 to 8 years. Change needs to happen in the two houses to get things back on track.

John,

There are not a few socialist governments in the world today. Almost every single European government is a Socialist government. Heck even OUR government is semi-Socialist in nature. Look at all of the government programs and the TOTAL taxation on the population. By total taxation, I mean income tax, gas tax, social security tax, medicare tax, corporate tax, cigarette tax, tariffs, etc. Also, look at all the laws designed to "protect us from ourselves" like gun control. Those are Socialist laws.

John -

Socialism is not a difficult term to understand. It is a political theory or economic system based on state ownership of industry and capital. It has now become a trite argument of the left to make the claim that the people of the US just do not understand the proper definition of socialism. Their view seems to be that since every industry in the US is not socialized, it is impossible to make the argument that we are heading in the direction of socialism. It's as if they believe that the only way we could possibly become socialist nation would be for the president to wake up one morning and make a decree that as of a specific date every business in our country will belong to the government. Even a child can see the fallacy of this argument. Socialism is not necessarily constrained to the 'specific form of government' definition. It is a political theory that we are seeing exercised in our country with ever more frequency. You cannot step in and take over GM, AIG and the banks and claim that it isn't a form or manifestation socialism. Unless you are choosing to be blissfully blind, you cannot claim that limiting salaries on executives does not wreak of a communist ideology. How does the Marxist saying go... From each according to their ability, to each according to their need. Your claim that those who believe this is socialism are misinformed about the definition of the word, is a baseless defense mechanism and a true demonstration of your own ignorance.

I resign, Good night America

So you want Joe Biden for President.

Aint gonna happen........Obama is not Sara Palin.

JQ: Definition of socialism---political system of communal ownership: a political theory or system in which the means of production and distribution are controlled by the people and operated according to equity and fairness rather than market principles.

Obama is most certainly not Sarah Palin--on his best day and her worst he couldnt carry her bag to the gym.

That gal can run circles around that back alley Chicago hood.

As simple as Joe Biden is,at least he is an America loving citizen,not a Socialist @!$%# who never worked a real job in his whole,pathetic life. Obama is the epitomy of the entitlement crowd, "I want a grant for school,I want a grant for living quarters,I want a grant for food,books,clothing,travel expenses,etc."

The jerk wont even take his wife to a show without charging everything to the US taxpayer. And this is who you turn to for meaningful change you can believe in?

This pathetic excuse for a man ("it wasnt me Mommy,it was Georgie") is the hero you have been waiting for to lead you out of the darkness? Hillary is ten times the man Obama would like to be.

G-d,please have mercy on America.

They want to limit the salaries in those companies that took T.A.R.P dollars. Which is fine by me. The company that i work for didn't take any T.A.R.P money and the govt. has not bothered us at all. So your theory that the govt wants to get involved in limiting everyones salary is flawed. Also it was the free market theory of deregulation that allowed the financial industry to make the high risk investments that caused this meltdown. They didnt want the govt involved in their businesses but came with their hands out looking for tax payer dollars. I know if i was lending money to a troubled firm i would want a say in the running of the company to ensure that my investment was secure. Any of you who would say different are clueless because it is your money and there should be oversight not going into the pockets of glorified gamblers with tailored suits. This problem was caused by both parties and their lobbyist friends, lets not be naive and think that the political parties have the peoples interest in mind. They are playing the people like puppets. They give you ideologyand partisanship to your face while taking payouts behind your back.

mendy, the banks paid back so they could go back to paying their exorbitant bonuses, not for any good business reason.

Skaggs: here are some other definitions with references to check out:

http://wordnetweb.princeton.edu/perl/webwn?s=socialism S: (n) socialism (a political theory advocating state ownership of industry) S: (n) socialism, socialist economy (an economic system based on state ownership of capital)

http://countrystudies.us/united-states/economy-12.htm Socialism: An economic system in which the basic means of production are primarily owned and controlled collectively, usually by government under some system of central planning.

http://www.facsnet.org/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=190:journalists-guide-to-economic-terms-04-02&catid=75:archives

Socialism: The view that the government should own and control major industries using the dollars earned to provide benefits to citizens.

http://www2.truman.edu/~marc/resources/terms.html

Reference: Rius, Marx for Beginners (New York: Pantheon Books, 1976), 152. Socialism - An "economic, social and political doctrine which expresses the struggle for the equal distribution of wealth by eliminating private property and the exploitative ruling class. In practice, such a distribution of wealth is achieved by social ownership of the means of production, exchange and diffusion."

That sounds rosy. Not sure where you got that definition but it sounds like a great form of government if you live in a tiny village deep in the jungles of Burkina-Faso. However, when you live in large, industrialized nation such as ours, equity and fairness equates to the whims of whatever party is in charge at a given time. Unfortunately, that favors whichever party provides more sustenance, not the party that would provide more liberties. Market principles are not always fair, sort of like life in general; however, everyone has the opportunity to make choices. They can choose to invest in education, so that they can get a greater return for their labor. People can choose to make risky investments, with the potential of making or breaking them. They can choose to make more conservative investments, providing themselves a certain amount of secutiry. The point is, they have a choice. Socialism restricts that choice, it limits the freedoms that characterize our country and sets limits on what we can accomplish as individuals. The fact that we have been largely unrestricted throughout the history of our country, has translated into more technological advances in the last two hundred years than in the previous five thousand years. Even the poorest in our country have an opportunity to advance themselves. We have a unprecedented quality of life in our country, much to the disgust of many on the left. We are only restricted by our own choices. We are only restricted by our own ineptitudes; which in most cases can be overcome with hard work. Voluntarily exchanging liberty for security is concentrated stupidity. Envy and jealousy from the laft could ultimately spell doom for this great nation.

Apply all the definiions you desire. We are not heading for socialism. If we don't want government health care, let us first stop all MEDICARE. We've had this program since 1965. I guess we don' need that either. I've had government health care with the VA and it is better than most of the private health care I received when I could afford insurance.

Tonight he will say: I have not been up to the task running America at all. Therefore my administration and I have been $hit out into the diaper of America, we stink terribly so that we can hardly stand it ourselves. We will now wipe ourselves clean from the a$$ of this country and resign in disgrace! Yep! .....that's what he'll say.

John Skaggs

Apply all the definiions you desire. We are not heading for socialism. If we don't want government health care, let us first stop all MEDICARE.

Ah. The good old fallback argument. Let's talk about one we already have to promote why it wouldn't be bad for this one and leave out the point that it's FAILING. You want something like Social Security or Medicare that's on life support to be your lifeline in the emergency room? I don't! I don't even depend on any of them being there in 20 yrs when I retire so I'm doing my own retirement plan.

(sigh...) ok John, Whatever gets you through the day.

Allen: So, what's your solution. If you have a plausible one, I'm sure it could make you a wealthy individual. According to you, no one in washington has a clue. When people can't afford insurance (me included) because the companies have raised the premiums 30 to 40% over las year, what is the solution? The illegals get free care and we go without. Exactly how do we fix that?

corporations and big business are comprised of "the people". They love the idea of a large centralized government controlling the amount of success an individual can attain in life.

--------------------------

So you would rather be guided by the almighty Corporation? Please dont be a corporate shil. Are you really saying that corporations lookm out for the best interests of the people? Really?

Which megacorporation would you like to nominate to lead the country, then? I can hear it now...

'This democracy is brought to you by the Rand Corporation, looking out for your bottom line since 1954"

If corporations are smart they'll look out for the best interest of their stockholders. Since in essence, the stockholders are the owners of the company this holds true. Stockholders are "the people", they are you and they are me. If you have a 401k you are most likely to some degree a stockholder. If you have individual investments then you very well could own stock in a company. Stockholder=owner of stock in a company= part owner of a company (however miniscule). If the stockholders do not like the direction the corporation is headed then they have the option of pulling out of their investments or replacing the board of directors, in most cases. We have a right as individuals to private property, which includes investments. so corporations are"the people". Coming to the conclusion that my support for capitalism and private property somehow insinuates that I believe our country should be ran by a corporation is an idiotic gesture. My point was that the government should not dictate a limit on the heights of any single individuals success. That is what America great. There is no glass ceiling for those who are willing to put in the work and use intelligence to guide their choices. If you had your way it would be:

Welcome to the United States of Mediocrity, where you're only as successful as the laziest and most incompetent among you.

Its much better to let a circle jerk of buddies set their own salaries at the expense of the customers and shareholders and employees isn't it?

If corporations are smart they'll look out for the best interest of their stockholders.

I bet that sounds great in a classroom, problem is instead we see them voting each other 500x what the employees get and pillaging the company, and shareholders have no voice unless they own half the company or all 10 million of them unite.

You do have a voice. You either vote them out or you disconnect yourself from that particular business completely. Nobody is forcing you to stay with a company that you find reprehensible, whether in consumption, employment or investment. What it really comes down to is that you people need to stop pissing and moaning about what other people have and do something for yourself. It has gotten past the point of pathetic. Nobody likes a cry baby and nobody likes an adult who whines like a petulant child because somebody has nicer things than they do.

I agree it's time for term limits. If our Congress had to worry about health care once they're no longer in office; if they had to worry about jobs when they're no longer in office; if they faced the worries the rest of us face when jobs are not a certainty, I think they'd vote wiser and less along party lines - Republicans and Democrats.

What it really comes down to is that you people need to stop pissing and moaning about what other people have and do something for yourself.

No what it comes down to is the middle class can't continue to bail out large corporations with billions of dollars just to see them turn around and give themselves huge bonuses. The public is paying for several of these directly, the rest indirectly in lost jobs and wages, and lost taxes. Corporations used to pay a much higher tax that is currently either not payed or payed by the public, in return we also got 30 years of declining wages. I don't do business with these companies yet I am still paying for them and it is republicans not democrats supporting this corporate welfare.

DING DING DING, WE HAVE A WINNER!. Look at when the decifits went south, when then democrats took over congress.

Voting them all out won't solve the problem, because the problem is the two corruption and greed infested political parties. You will just be replacing one bad apple with another. Until Independent party candidates are taken seriously and people start voting for them we will never solve this problem.

This is the most intelligent comment I have read hear all morning. I am soooo sick of hearing the blame him/no blame Him b.s. Congress and corperate greed are the root cause of all of our current problems

Problem with an independant is that he would have two parties fighting him/her, not just one. And, yes, there are moderate liberals in Congress, but they all fall in line when the big dogs bark.

Teen pregnancies started rising as Democrats started taking Congress back. What's the connection?

The problem is the Senate, which grants equal votes to Nebraska and Texas and all the other states. Further the 60 votes rule makes it even worse. We have sparsely populated, rural states running a 21st century country. Now wonder we have huge tax subsidies to make useless ethanol for cars, just to lower gas mileage and send tax dollars to corporate corn farms.

Well that's the way it is-would you rather have California decide what's best for America? - are you a communist?

Bravo Catch22!, I couldn't have said it better myself. It is time to clean house, throw away the trash and not let it sit for so long next time so that it stinks everything up!!!!

People, until you realize that policy in this country is set forth by Corporate America (Corporations are not individuals) and "not" the American people the problem will continue. Our President is fighting an uphill battle, Elected officials are greety bottom line, special interest goups control their thoughts, their actions (just look at what the party of "No" is doing)

I'd like to see some of the individuals who commented attempt to take on the role of the President, it is very easy to comment on issues and voice your opinions on something the majority of this country has never experienced (Socialism, Communism) or knows nothing about...if you know anything about our constitution you would realize that the President does not have complete control, our issue stems from the lack of recycling in Congress, we need to rethink the terms these individuals are serving, in order to effectively give back control to the people.

Then and only then can we perhaps once again say that our country was founded on the principals of "For the People, By the People" not "for the Corporations, by the Corporations"...if this problem is not addressed we will not have to worry about deficits, healthcare, or jobs, our middle class be forever gone and we will most likely be speaking Chinese!

MLH in OK. . . . . Wrong, Wrong, Wrong, GWB came into office with a surplus and the GOP had all three branches. Even McCain said the GOP "spent like drunken sailors". The issue is as Catch 22 stated. The problem is the agendas of the Right and the Left, and the pay checks the members (and their spouses) of the house get from big business, religious groups, and other countries, that sway votes against what we need, only looking toward what THEY need. The spending spree continues and will not stop until we can make certain the politicians are no longer on the take. Did something just freeze over? Nope.

These idiots in the House and Senate should all be subject to term limits and must all go! This is the number one problem in this country, to many career politicians. They are not public servants any more, they are in it solely for themselves. That's why we need the Tea Party to wake these drones up. The Republican and Democratic parties are interested in nothing but self preservation, NOT THE PEOPLE that elected them.

Addendum to 'John -418546' . . .

. . . and the recent Supreme Court decision allowing corporations to directly fund political ads did not help the situation . . .

MLHinOK: DING! DING! DING! When Clinton left office we had a surplus, pubs took over and we have a deficit. Who's fault did you say it was??

Bill-857242

Teen pregnancies started rising as Democrats started taking Congress back. What's the connection?

How ironic that your first name is Bill and the first smart-!@#$ answer I could come up with was that Clinton was home alone with the wife working 24/7.

LOL! I did not have sexual relations with that woman... I was overseas!

I am more curious about what seemed to be a public ideological shift to liberalism in the 2005 that was being reflected in the polls, voting habits, irresponsible relations leading to teen pregnancies (not that conservative can't have irresponsible relations leading to teen pregnancies).

John -418546 ...Wrong, Wrong, Wrong, GWB came into office with a surplus

False, false, false ... Clinton / Republican Congress did not have a surplus any year. The National Debt went up every year Clinton was in office, therefore there was no surplus.

Check out http://www.treasurydirect.gov/NP/BPDLogin?application=np The government's fiscal year ends at the end of September. Clinton's last budget started October 2000 and ended September 2001.

National Debt end of September 2000 was $5.67 trillion; end of September 2001 was $5.80 trillion.

This increase in National Debt is also called a budget deficit. If the difference was $ zero, that would be called a balanced budget and if the National Debt was less at the end of September 2001, Clinton / Republicans could claim a surplus. A true surplus never happened during Clinton's last term.

"Both Democrats and Republicans are all running this year and next and saying surplus, surplus. Look what we have done. It is false. The actual figures show that from the beginning of the fiscal year until now we had to borrow $127,800,000,000." - Democratic Senator Ernest Hollings, October 28, 1999

http://www.craigsteiner.us/articles/16

Just a quick addendum to above. THere has not been a balanced budget or surplus in any year at least since Carter...not one; the National Debt has risen every year.

However, Clinton / Republican Congress could claim the closest with only a $17.9 budget deficit in CLinton's next to last budget year.

No matter how Washington twists the accounting to make it look better than it really is or not as bad as it really is, if they spend more than they earn, then they are running a deficit.

i am sooo sick of people blaming "corporate greed"???? what the hell is that anyway? corporations doing what they are supposed to do, make money so they can hire people and make more money. the corporate greed excuse has got to be the lamest excuse I've ever heard.

Well put. Bring the jobs back home and it creates a domino effect. Working Americans will buy the unsold homes, spend money in our economy, and pay taxes rather than collecting welfare. Cut taxes on any company using 90+% American workers and tax any company that outsources to foreign countries. Treat them as if they are an imported product. Once the job market is stabilized we can begin to look at auxiliary programs such as health care. By doing this first we strain the employers with new costs that prevent them from hiring. My 9 year old son could tell you this. Why can't Washington see it?

Because they are buying votes with their handout programs. That is the Democrat way. It keeps them in power, which is the bottom line.

reply to wats-1 I agree that jobs are important and company exec's are horribly overpaid. I ask you a question. Are American people ready to pay more for products manufactured in US? Take the auto industry for example. The big 3 are at a disadvantage because of all the benefits (retirement, medical etc) that are being paid out. Are people willing to pay more for a car just because it is made in US? At the present time many are just hand to mouth. Sounds good to manufacture in USA but $$$ normally dictate what we have to spend.

Health care will create jobs because it will reduce operating costs for companies and encourage them to stay here. And according to the CBO (yes the same CBO which says we are running huge deficits), the Senate health care plan will reduce the deficit by 100 billion over the next 10 years.

BTW, the premiums for my one employee are going up 60% on 3/1. That is with a $5000 deductible. Why? He is getting older. I told him he was going to have to assume the additional costs because the company couldn't afford it. He is now mad as hell. Not at me. Not at my company. Not even at the insurance companies. He is mad as hell at those that are trying to stall health care reform. Did I mention he is right of Limbaugh?

The manufacturing jobs are not coming back to the US in the next few decades unless we have a currency devaluation or US workers accept substantially lower wages. If companies had to pay 10 times more per hour for basic manufactured goods (like they would if the did all of their manufacturing here), the cost of those goods would skyrocket. That TV that costs $500 now would cost $5,000. But, non-US companies would still be selling for $500...

As it stands now, America has priced itself out of the manufacturing job market. With the dollar crashing it's made some manufacturing jobs here more viable, but workers here are still incredibly expensive compared to similarly skilled workers in much of the world.

All that happens when we put restrictions on US companies is they either move oversees completely, or they go out of business because their goods are too expensive relative to the international competition.

Like it or not, it is a global economy now and we have to figure out how to survive in it. The US does not have the clout to dictate to the rest of the world how to run their economies, so we have to adapt.

maybe so. But, it is within the Federal Governments power to limit imports. It is within their power to charge import fees like a lot of the other countries do. It is within their power to limit the visas, secure the border and all of this to protect and grow our beautiful nation. Other countries do it.

I know our work force pricetag is higher. But, that was fine since it was within our economic growth. The outsourcing STARTED the sense of overpaid American workers. Not the American economy. You can make anything cheaper in these underdeveloped nations. That is why you DON'T bring so much in to kill your own country's economy !!!

As for the "better car at a cheaper price" idea, those workers aren't paying income-sales-real estate-city taxes, auto-home-life-health insurance, and all the stuff we as a more enjoyable country pay for.

Sounds good but there goes Walmart. How do you think they are able to have such low prices? A lot of companies in the U.S. have gone offshore for manufacturing simply because they cannot produce products at a low enough cost to be stocked in Walmart and stay in business. Other retailers struggle to compete.

We're in a global economy. What kind of manufacturing jobs will we need now and in the future?

Cheaper is not better. I'm getting sick of all the Made in China crap that ends up in my trash can. I've gone through 5 DVD drives and 3 power supplies in 2 years that are Chinese. The new $20 one vs the old $100 one has still ended up costing me $100 or more.

I agree, wats.1.

This is not about being a Democrat or Republican. This is about JOBS! As a country NOT DIVIDED but working together to see that every hard working person has the ability to work and support themselves and their families!!!

The emphasis needs to focus on bigger and better manufacturing companies ON OUR AMERICAN SOIL! Think of all of the construction workers that would go back to work and off of the unemployment rosters if there were industries and manufacturing companies expanding ON OUR AMERICAN SOIL!!!!

As long as we are pointing fingers at each other and badmouthing our government the world sees America as a pitiful division of a crumbling people.

Let us all put down our negative voices and rise up together, working towards a common goal: JOBS STIMULATING OUR ECONOMY IN AMERICA!

The main focus should be a plan to create jobs in America and not overseas! Corporations need to spend their big bucks in AMERICA or tax them heavily if they go overseas to profit and line their already bulging pockets!

Wow, all the far, far right talking points in two sentences. You might want to email that to Beck so he can use it. Oh wait, he already has. . . . . . nice try Ben, no cigar, just the majority of readers of this site shaking the heads.

Finally, a completely rational and relevant comment based on unassailable facts. You must be Sarah Palin. Or Glenn Beck?

Obama cannot be a muslim. They would never put their hand on the Bible or swear allegiance to our Flag. That theory has been shot to hell, it's time to get off it. His birth certificate from Hawaii has been posted on line for some time now if you would bother to check.

The conspiracists will say"it's a fake".

Of Course!!!

Even if Obama was a muslim, according to the Qur'an, he should still obey Isa, surah al-Imran 3:42-55, which would lead him to the Injil and the Taurat, and probably Proverbs and Psalms. All of which are included in the Bible.

I don't know if I agree with that. Let Biden finish out his term; I really do not want Nancy Pelosi as president. As much as I think Biden is an incompetent boob, Pelosi is exponentially more so.

Interesting that everyone says both that Obama has ruined the country and simultaneously done nothing. Everyone wants him to retire which would put Joe Biden in office. A man whom most people know absolutely nothing about. Except that he's white. Obama has been in office all of a year. His appointments and hanger's on from the previous admin. have turned this country away from an all out depression, put together a plan to get us out of Afghanistan, helped restore our tarnished credibility with a majority of nations in the world, and is starting a infrastructure restoration project that is looooonnng overdue. You can't argue with the facts so go ahead and call names. I'm sure many of you out there could do a better job than Obama given the chance. Jeesh!

HEY! STEVE! Do you even have a clue what is go`in on here?

He did NOT propose an across-the-board budget freeze.

I wouldn't say that he hadn't kept any promises...

http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/promises/

It is more accurate to say he hasn't kept all of his promises.

I have to agree with Watts. I am not a big Democrat fan. This current administration fiasco is a good example of why. Big dreams without regard to the cost, no follow through, high spending, increased national debt, more government control and higher unemployment. I have just defined the Democratic Party. However, Democrats were idiots. They had several excellent candidates to choose from; including Hillary Clinton. If she had been a man with her excellent political career, Barack Obama wouldn't have stood a chance. All of you want to put racism aside, isn't it time you did the same for sexism?

Barack Obama is keeping Hillary Clinton "close to the pocket"; even letting lesser aides handle her tasks. Why? Fear... The worst thing Barack Obama can do is let Hillary Clinton Shine! It would only drive home the moronic mistake the Democratic Party made in 2008. That downside is everyone else's upside. Why? Because voters are waking up fast to the stupidity of this administration. This will open the door to more qualified candidates in 2012.

You can keep that smooth talking, all smoke and no substance, Barack Obama. The only "Change to Believe In" this administration is creating is bankrupting the nation and more government control. Every Obama supporter out there needs their behinds kicked! You don't vote for a president because he has a dream; you vote for a president because he or she, has a dream and actually knows what he or she is doing.

You know Barack Obama is not Jesus Christ; nor is Barack Obama your savior! Wake up and smell the coffee, people!

It wasn't an across the board one, but the word "domestic" involved in who he's going to cut the funds for bothers me. How is that not going to cut the funds for some people that get their paycheck from those funds?

Yep! you are a liberal.

I think this may have been sarcasm.

Thanks JQ sarcasm is often lost on certain minds.

pretty good !

I agree to a point, but you overlook the obvious. The people that aren't working are creating an additional strain on the economy and are a part of the out of control spending. If people work, they pay taxes. If they do not, they collect welfare, medicaid, and other social programs.

BMAX: People collecting unemployment pay federal taxes, one way or the other. They can elect to have 10% taken out of each payment, or when tax time comes around, pay unpaid federal taxes at that time. Some states also have unemployed people pay state taxes as well ( in PA where I live, state and local wage taxes are exempt from unemployment). Additional strain on the economy depends on where you are looking at. Unemployed people put back into the economy through spending for goods, services, and pay their bills also. 16-17 million people putting money back into the economy through unemployment isn't as bad of a strain as it would be if that were to stop.

andrew you still dont have a job?

Andrew-288829

BMAX: People collecting unemployment pay federal taxes, one way or the other. They can elect to have 10% taken out of each payment

Yeah but that's just $30-36 per week. When we have government throwing 10-40 X the cost of 2 wars at banks and health care, there's a spending problem.

BMAX is right..... no jobs = poor economy and deeper defecit!

Jobs will cure the mortgage problem, as well. Less people living on welfare and homeless!

Without an adequate job market we will be living like a 3rd world country in no time!!! Palaces for the rich and cardboard boxes under bridges for the homeless.... sound familiar?

I agree we need jobs, and lots of them. I don't like still being unemployed almost a year now. The longest I've ever been out of work is 4 weeks. Unemployment is 1/2 pay of what my last job was. I could sure use the other 1/2. I've looked under every rock, been to every local job fair, even signed up for a couple of job agencies hoping to perhaps temp somewhere. No dice. Even the classifieds in the Sunday paper has more car and house ads than help wanted ads. I know unemployment can't go on forever, but this job market is the damndest thing I've ever seen.

1) He will say that the SOTU is not about him but it will be all about him
2) He will continue to blame Bush.
3) He will continue to be in deliberate denial about his agenda being rejected.

i don't believe the health care bill will create jobs but I do believe the health care reform should be towards the top of priority lists.

When my premiums are more then my mortgage, and I have to choose between them, something has to give. And no, I'm not living in a McMansion. My premiums are 36% of my gross. If I didn't have to have health insurance, we wouldn't be on the verge of losing everything since DH got laid off.

Larry, although I am not an economist, I respectfully disagree. Although I don't know whether or not it will create more jobs, healthcare reform, if done properly, will result in lower costs to the consumer and lower costs of care overall. Healthcare professionals would be salaried, rather than being paid according to how many tests they perform, and they would be evaluated on outcome (i.e., patient improvement, taking into account prognosis). Healthcare costs would go down for consumers; however, lest people cavalierly skip appointments because of taking the low costs for granted, substantial penalties must be imposed for missed appointments.

As far as the banks are concerned, more regulation is necessary. The problem there was rollback of regulations that had previously existed; these regulations must be restored in order to prevent another crisis. Banks that are "too big to fail" need to be split into more than one bank. Also, tie bonuses of bank executives to performance; executives of bailed-out banks should not be entitled to any bonuses at all.

The rich should NOT be taxed more. Just because they work harder, longer, more, does not mean they should penalized.

What's wrong with this country - people feel they are entitled to things - - free health care, etc.

I say make people on welfare clean the streets, dig a hole and then refill it - whatever, but NOTHING should be for free.

I say make businesses who say they are "American" yet outsource their call centers, etc.., pay more taxes. Yes - I'm talking you DELL. Yes I'm talking you banks. Yes, I'm talking you airlines. I

When has taxing anyone ever created jobs?

It's the rich people that create jobs, not the government moron.

Look up the irs figures on their own site on what % of the taxes are paid by the top income earners. Even WITH Bush cuts, the top 1% paid 40.42% of the total taxes, the top 5% paid 60.63% of the taxes. Only 2.89% is paid by the bottom 50%. If you REALLY wanna see what's scary, look at your last tax return where it says the national average and just how much someone who is counted in the bottom of that top 50% makes. Take the millionaires out of the median and the bottom 50% are well below 2% of the tax income.

The top 1% have paid more of it each year with the exception being in 2001. Source: http://www.ntu.org/main/page.php?PageID=6