Bianca, President Obama was mostly raised in Hawaii by his grandparents. His Grandmother was a vice president for the Bank of Hawaii. He was not raised in Chicago. He grew up in an upper-middle-class, indeed wealthy family. He has never experienced poverty. Nor has Michelle, who grew up in a middle-class family, her father being part of the Daly political machine.

He did not save the auto industry. He bailed out GM and its UAW workers at the expense of GM bond holders and parts suppliers. GM should of passed through Chapter 11 Bankruptcy. And if you think GM wasn’t strong enough to come out of Chapter 11, than is sure as hell wasn’t a good bet for billions of US tax payer dollars!
Obama is rich. He made millions selling two autobiographies about how put upon he was growing up as privileged half white/black kid attending elite colleges on the West and East Coasts in America. Apparently heavy, heavy pot and cocaine use got him through this terrible hard ship.

Like Obama, Romney is rich and has never been poor. So what? A person in poverty is not in a position to run The United States of America. That said. He gave away is inheritance and is a self-made man. That is to be admired and consider an asset in a candidate to be president.

So those are the 2 reasons you are voting for Obama? Sounds like a made up reason. Saving the auto industry does not affect the regular guy sitting at home reading the jobs section of the local newspaper. Obama did not kill Bin Laden, the MARINES did that. And everyone knows you lefties don't really give a crap about Bin Laden. Obama has never been poor in his life, a man of a privileged life. He sounds white as Harry Reid once said. Face it, it is difficult to come up with an excuse to vote for Obama but those two reasons suck.

President Obama did not save the Auto Industry in Ohio. Most of the Ohio Auto Industry is foreign. Example would be Honda and many of it's suppliers. I am in the Mfg. business and these are our customers so I know what I am talking about. He only save GM, ( they now are sorry about this and want out of the deal) because of the Union votes. The bond holders at GM and Chrysler were wiped out got nothing. So he did not help small mom and pop investors at all!
Just because Romney is a wealthy should not disqualify him and does not mean he would not make a good President. He know how to create job, Obama has never held one!

Thanks for repeating the propaganda comrade! You serve your party/union well
Let me address some of your talking points:
#1 Obama saved the auto industry? US Tax payers are on the hook for billions in losses. Secured bond holders (Mutual fund investors/retirement funds) and stock holders lost everything. Ford is doing great they didn’t take any bailouts… just a company spending less than they take in… novel concept!
Don't forget to blame Bush for starting first round of the bailouts 2008!

Who wants to Invest their savings in American companies and risk Obama/Government declare it gone after a takeover/hand over to the unions?

#2 Obama happened to be president when Osama was killed. Only thing he did was not to stop the Navy seals from killing Osama as Clinton did during his term.
Being a Nobel Peace Prize winner and constitutional lawyer I’m surprised he would go along with declaring people “enemies of the state” and having ‘em via drones and seal teams w/o due process... Yep Obama makes Bush look a wimpy liberal… Bush just locked these guys up in prisons with soccer fields.

#3... Obama's mother came from a well-to-do family... Obama went to elite private schools in Hawaii and benefited from affirmative action which allowed him to get into a handful of elite Universities. Not sure if you know... but Hawaii isn’t a cheap place to live…
#4 How many poor/middle class people have given you a full time jobs + benefits... ?

Wow Bianca, it appears you did your research. Please name me "one" thing this president has done that has led to positive job and income growth; Answer: None, by the way if you want to research it, go on the internet. Your answer to the auto industry, no he did not bail out the auto industry, the "American People" did, that means people like you and me. They did this by using our tax dollars taken from our hardworking pay. Any president/government can do this, whether it is this president or previous presidents. Bin Laden, that is easy, "Our Armed Forces" did that, not the the president, it just so happened on his watch, after previous presidents, Clinton and Bush gave the okay for our military to go after him. Is Romney the the answer, who knows, but at this point, this president was given 4 years and has made things worse. If Romney should win and after 4 years he doesn't do anything, than I would want him out. Forget about the D and the R, think about the American People!! Oh, about the money, so the guy is a millionaire, are you jealous?? Why are people put down for working hard and making a good living. Here is someone successful and did it on his own, and yet people thinks it is a bad thing. It doesn't bother me that he makes more than me. It makes me work harder, knowing that maybe I can make a good living too. It is a shame that many people in this country want a free ride. So next time Bianca, do your homework, you might be surprised what you learn!!!

Barrack Obama did not save the auto industry. A) Ford did not take money from the tax payers. B) Chrysler is foreign owned. C) Every financial analyst predicts gloom and doom for GM. The two cars that were supposed to save the company are disasters. First the Volt, GM loses more money on every vehicle than the sticker price, obviously not a good business model. Second the Malibu, reviews of the 2012 Malibu rate it lower than a used 2008 Malibu. GM's stock is valued far lower than its original offering after the tax payer cash infusion. And frankly GM still filed for bankruptcy protection after not one but two bailouts. How possibly could this be saving the auto industry?

Bianca, you can vote for whoever you like, but at least do it having all the facts... First, Obama is rich too... A millionaire like Romney is... Anyone saying different is lying to you... And Obama doesn't know what it's like to be broke and struggling... Please... BTW, Osama Bin Laden was not captured... He was shot to death... He could have been captured, but Obama chose instant death instead... Now, he may have deserved it, but how much more could we have learned had we started water boarding him? Obama is a product of the most corrupt political machine in the country - Chicago politics... And that's playing out now, as he's stonewalling on this Benghazi tragedy/disgrace/coverup... Obama may be your choice, but you really don't know him at all...

http://obamalies.net/list-of-obamas-failures

http://spectator.org/archives/2012/11/01/benghazi-obamas-core-deceit/

Paid right wing posters? Feeling a bit paranoid? I post on my own time, I don't get paid.

Hey, Overdue Bill, I wish I got paid for supporting Romney... Unfortunately, I do not... I'm just a concerned citizen, and have had my fill of Obama's incompetence on our economy, his lies about saving the auto industry, and this Benghazi coverup disgrace... Enough is enough already... This country is going nowhere but down with Obama in charge... We need new ideas, a new direction, and a fresh start...

Romney/Ryan 2012

you ask us to fact check but don't tell us where,
give us your source.

Bill, I do not "hate" Gov. Romney. He is a man of many accomplishments. He is also a man I do not want leading this great nation. It has nothing to do with his wealth, it has to do with his lack of conviction.

I don't think anyone hates Romney. Many folks, including myself, just think he is incompetent. He has been running for president for nearly 7 years now and still can't get out of his own way. So much for all that management experience. Anyone who says 47% of the American people are "victims" "dependent" on the government who should learn "self-reliance" or tells students to borrow money from their parents as a way to pay for college or says that "Corporations are people my friends" is train wreck of a candidate. Romney makes President Bush actually look like a "compassionate conservative." I now know why he had trouble beating such lightweights like Santorum and Gingrich. Other GOP candidates are distancing themselves from him, including Governor Kasich. If he can't run a political campaign how do you suppose he can run this country? It's looking more like rather large electoral victory for the president. Perhaps many of you should move past the denial phase and start accepting the fact that President Obama will be at the helm another 4 years.

Lots of sound bites there, Mr Ickes. The truth hurts, doesn't it? What Mr Romney said might be politically incorrect, but in reality for the most part he's right. Mr Obama wants to move "Forward" but so far I think he's run over his own toes.

You're right Jim! Hope all is well at WWK!

Very well said Sue! I'm sure these polls are making a lot of Repubs nervous.

Sue, I’ll stipulate that President Obama for the sake of this post, understands the blight of average Americans more than Romney. But what has it gotten the average working family?

-Under Obama we’ve have chronic high unemployment, 8+% for 43 months in a row, with a shrinking work force, now at 1980s levels but with 40 million fewer people!

-Almost 50 million Americans now on Food stamps.

-Gas prices have more then doubled under Obama. Sue, do you think this might affect average families? Obama has opposed oil, gas, and coal expansion at every turn.

-Obama is the father of our record national debt, 16 trillion dollars. Five trillion of which is his alone. Another record! This must be paid back and the average American will be the one to do it at the expense of their living standards and their children unless we have strong economic growth.

-Economic growth after three years under Obama’s economic policies; 1.9% maybe 2.1% in 2012. This is crushing to the middle class. Who would vote for more of this?

-Entitlements, SS and Medicare, are un-sustainable and on track to “reform themselves” into insolvency, unless we, as American update them. These programs are very important to average Americans. Yet, President Obama is silent on their plight. He offers no serious solutions, hardly acknowledges their dire situation. Worst of all he attacks anyone who steps forward to tackle the problem.

Sue, your conviction and argument is very underwhelming..."I will vote for President Obama. He has been an excellent leader." You are a sheep being led to the slaughter. Obama could care less about you. Wait till obamacare kicks in and you are paying 3 times what you pay now. If he's such an excellent leader why do we have to infuse the economy again with printed money from the Feds (QE3)? If he's such a great leader why is the Middle East a cluster? If he's such a great leader why is unemployment (the real number) close to 20%?
Oh wait I know, you like him because he is on the view and on Dave Letterman and cracks a few cool jokes. Get a clue....

Yea, Sue, we now how Obama handles a foreign policy crisis:

He lets good Americans die in a six hour firefight, when help was only an hour or so away...

Every voter needs to read this excellent article... Very well worth your time...

http://spectator.org/archives/2012/11/01/benghazi-obamas-core-deceit/

These are pretty good as well:

http://www.canadafreepress.com/index.php/article/50657

http://www.breitbart.com/Big-Journalism/2012/10/25/CBS-Busts-Obama--and-Itself-Hidden-60-Minutes-Clip-Proves-White-House-Lied-About-Benghazi

Romney/Ryan 2012

I don't care if he's a christian or muslim, as long as governs as neither!

I love posts like yours because it reinforces the polls for Obama, who i believe is the leader who would best represent all Americans rich or poor. Both candidates support the rich but only Obama cares about the rest.

Here is the major difference, but this requires you to come out of the Republican bubble for a moment. Brian would be correct if our country was in perfect shape up until Obama was sworn into office in January of 2009. If that were true, then yes, get rid of him! However, most sensible people remember how we were on the brink of disaster during the second half of 2008, which is why a lot of Americans are willing to give him more time to fix the mess.

@Dan Marol....per Obambi's words, "if I can't turn this around in 4 years I don't deserve another term." So you want to give him 4 more years of throwing good money after bad money Dan? No thanks....It's a common sense bubble Dan. He himself said he doesn't deserve a second term. Blame him. That would be novel.

Dan--"We were on the brink of disaster". We still are. For what is on the horizon,
the economic disaster will fade into the sunset(or should I say sunrise since it will be toward the East) of nuclear blasts in Israel and Iran. No diplomacy will solve that problem. Sooner or later it will come to that frightening evolvement. Israel, at the implorement of the US, has restrained itself from a preemptive strike against a nation that has vowed to wipe it off the map. Iran isn't talking about bulldozers when it makes that threat. The next President of the United States of America undoubtedly will have to deal with that and there will literally be Hell to pay for whatever decisions he has to make. So what I'm saying is, the economy if left alone, will eventually heal itself. The Israel-Iran oncoming disaster never will.

Sue, that kool aide must be really good your drinking. THE STIMULUS WAS A COMPLETE BUST! I repeat...THE STIMULUS WAS A COMPLETE BUST. You just wrote a response that sounds like MSNBC or CBS or CNN talking heads would spout. No substance and no facts to back it up. Mitt Romney paid his fair share of taxes and more PLUS he donated 30% of his income to charity. I doubt you knew that because those channels only tell you what they want you to believe.
FYI...the polls you see where Obama is leading are sampled heavily on the Democrat side. They can't even poll honestly....

Hey joe...in what alternate universe do you reside? 14.1% of $12 Million doesn't sound like a fair share of taxes. And who cares that he gave 30% of his income to charity...most likely his church? All that likely did was lower his taxes even more. You talk about honesty. Did you not listen to Paul Ryan's speech at the convention? Even Fox News called him out for all the lies. Finally, you state positions but provide no facts to back them up. If you want anyone to believe you, you have to back up your opinions with facts...not more opinions.

Joe is in that Republican bubble that I mentioned.

It appears that Joe believes Fox New's mantra that if you repeat a lie enough times, people will believe it. Just go downtown Kent and you can see evidence (900 temporary construction jobs leading to 700 permanent jobs) that the Stimulus worked.

Neil, where are those 700 permanent jobs located at. Just because a bridge got replaced 700 permanent jobs were created. You mean those 700 jobs couldn't have gone a mile down the road to cross the other bridge to get to work? If the politicians in the county, state and federal government weren't robbing us blind, the money was already available to fix that bridge. It called the gas tax. Thats what that money is for, Kent did not need the stimulas to fix it.

All you wrong wingers spout the same nonsense. Reagan started with a $1 Trillion debt and made it $4 Trillion. Dubya took a $5 Trillion debt and made it $10 Trillion. He also stuck us with 2 unpaid for wars and a Medicare drug benefit that also wasn't paid for, plus an economy circling the drain. Most of the debt that accumulated since Dubya left the scene was spent trying to fix his mess and put the wars on the books. Romney has already said that he will give more tax cuts to people like him, but he's vague about how he will pay for them, because the figures are nonsense. He's bought into the Ryan plan, but that won't actually deal with the debt until 2040. So much for stopping the trainwreck that THEY CREATED. You can fool all of the people some of the time, but only wrong wingers can fool themselves ALL of the time. Now you can go back to listening to Rush. But stop channeling him.

No Obama hasn't spent the trillions! he is trying to fix what Bush Sr & Jr got us into. And he has done hell of job trying to fix, can't fix anything when you have 99% republicans in congress voting everything down. Bush's messed up the country!!!!!!

AMEN to that! how can fix anything with 99% of congress and the house are Republicans who vote everything down!!!!!!!!!!

99% of congress isn't republican. The senate still has a democrat majority. The republicans won the majority of the house in 2010.

I agree that the Fed helped create the conditions for abuse by keeping interest rates artificially low but to absolve the bad actors on Wall Street on the grounds that they were tempted by the Fed won't fly with me. For a 10-15 year period American society from top to bottom participated in a phony economy. Wall Streets thirst for mortgages led to greedy lenders as well as greedy borrowers. This phony stimulus led to ridiculous home prices. People used the equity in their homes as piggy banks. When this house of cards came tumbling down our real problems were left naked for all to see. We have to totally rebuild this economy and that will take time. It is naive to think a lone individual in an oval office has the ability to wave a magic wand and wipe away 15 years of economic sin. Reality doesn't give a damn about American society's thirst for instant gratification.

Bernanke admitted in 2008 that the Federal Reserve caused the Great Depression, and here we go again. In today's episode, the Fed raised the borrowing interest rates so high and so fast that it caused the real estate, auto, and banking industries to go into a funk from which they've yet to recover. The Fed realized what a horrible situation they created, as evidenced by them lowering the rates now to the lowest in history. That's great for people who have a job and can qualify for a loan, but it does nothing for the jobless who would like to take advantage of the low rates, but can't.
And for those who have substantial savings, the interest earned amounts to about enough to buy a Big Mac. You would think "Once burned, twice shy", but the Fed has ignored that adage--at the expense of all of us.

you actually think that any president can dismantle the Federal Reserve??? That takes an actof congress....will never happen....

Thats right, it's all Bush's fault and the Bush before him and the Reagan before him.

You read what you wanted to read Ed. I was answering a post that claimed it was all Obama's fault. My point was that our society as a whole put us in this position. The 2008 meltdown was one of generational magnitude. There will be no quick remedy.

Murphy, what are you talking about? I was responding to Shiesha.

The answer is the redistribution of wealth. Take from the rich and give to the poor. Create and perpetuate a society of zombies who will be forever grateful for a government handout. Make them dependent on something other than their own resourcefulness and make it clear that if you work hard and make a more than average income, it will be taken away from you. There are government programs that help folks and give them a leg up when they need and deserve it. Keep those programs, and also leave the folks alone who have a chance to excel at what they do.

Apparently you don't deal with facts...just opinions. Where's your proof? In another post you dragged out the old saying, "The definition of insanity is doing the same thing over and over expecting different results." Just what do you think Rmoney is proposing? Let's see: 1) tax cuts for the rich (check); 2) cutting regulations on everything (check); 3) eliminating the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (check); 4) trickle down economics (check): etc., etc., etc. I don't see how your statement fits Obama, but it sure as Hell fits Rmoney.

You give this President another term and you will be sorry. The definition of insanity is doing the same thing over and over expecting different results. He and his Czars are socialists and he's admitted such. Socialism is a failed concept.

Bonnie, I'm 50 now and throughout my whole adult life I've heard this Reupublican argument that the Democrats are redistributing the wealth. Now, 30 years into my adulthood, what do we find? We find that the gap between the top 10% and the bottom 90% is wider than at any other time in our history. This could only lead a reasonable person to conclude that this argument doesn't hold water. When the government builds a bridge, offers subsidies to the oil and farm industry's you have a redistribution. Taxation is in and of itself is a redistribution system. When these ridiculous Super Pacs receive tax exempt status that is not available to you and me, that a redistribution. Trust me Bonny, the wealthy have been doing just fine, they bribe our government officials to ensure this.

Mr. Drapcho, Romney will lose in November because, despite the hundreds of millions of dollars the Super Pacs have propped him up with, Romney has failed to make the case to the American people. I know you would like to think that you're brilliiant enough to see through the talking heads on t.v. while the rest of us are duped. This speaks to your own ego and I can't answer for that.

Murphy, with all due respect...The election is 6 weeks away and you have already crowned the messiah the messiah again. Well, you and the media...Gallup just released a poll that shows America’s distrust of media is at an all time high. 60% of those surveyed said that they have little or no trust in the media to report news fully, accurately and fairly.....and not surprisingly, those most trusting of the media are identified as democrats.
Why should I believe a talking head? I can do my own thinking for myself. I'm not sure why you are bragging that you let others think for yourself and influence your decisions... you seem to fit the sheeple mold.

ps/ speaking of Super Pacs, you can't notice Obama is being pimped by them as well? Or were you just duped by the talking heads into thinking it's just those nasty Republicans?

Talk about cherry picking...the article you site was written by a self-confessed "outside adviser to the Romney campaign." Of course he's going to find a way to back up Romney's number two. Steve Forbes and Mitt Romney may as well have been twins. Certainly they both made it on their own by having wealthy fathers. We should all be so lucky. Forbes Magazine may indeed have some clout. Whether they have veracity is a matter of opinion...just like the author of this article admits his statements are. Guess you didn't read that part.

Why do you find it necessary to label people all the time Drapcho? I never said I was a prophet. I merely said that, in my opinion, Romney will not win in November. If you feel differently, fine. You were trying to say that the mosaic emerging of Romney as a guy out of touch with the people is nothing more than a machination of the liberal media. You failed to address my point that prominent Republicans are on the record as being critical of Romney's performance. The liberal media didn't force those folks to be critical of the Romney campaign. He hasn't even convinced his own party that he's a viable candidate. That's not opinion, that's a fact

Joe, you say you're stating facts, and then you give us opinion. Which talking heads do you look to? I'm guessing Hannity and Chris Wallace and all the other "fair and balanced" folks at Fox. Did you know that a survey of media viewers' understanding of the issues found that Fox News viewers least understood or had the right answers to a series of questions, while NPR listeners had the most right answers? The point wasn't to challenge the intelligence of any group, but to illustrate that Fox didn't do a very good job of broadcasting the facts. You don't have to take my word for it. Here's a link to an article in Forbes:

http://www.forbes.com/sites/kenrapoza/2011/11/21/fox-news-viewers-uninformed-npr-listeners-not-poll-suggests/

So if Fox is your usual news source, maybe you should be watching the Daily Show instead...or nothing at all. BTW, you also should stop reading Kevin O'Brien in the PD. He's clearly lost his mind.

Drapcho, you have issues. Millions of Americans have an opinion on who will win or lose this fall. You argue nothingness.

Only time will tell Joe.

Sue....Quoted from a recent article-simple facts....."In February 2009, when Obama signed the stimulus, unemployment spiked to 8.3 percent. Since then, it has never dropped below 8.0 percent.
We are now into the second quarter of 2012, the year Obama's council of economic advisers predicted unemployment would be drop below 6 percent. It now stands at 8.1 percent.
In February, the Congressional Budget Office published its latest report on the "estimated impact" of the stimulus. Although it had originally estimated the stimulus would cost $787 billion, CBO now says it will cost $831 billion.
In the second quarter of 2012, CBO estimates, somewhere between 200,000 to 1.2 million people have jobs they otherwise would not have were it not for the stimulus. Assuming, optimistically, that the number is 1.2 million, that means each of those jobs cost taxpayers $692,500."

While you're thrilled at the progress Kent made, it's been an ineffective and financial debacle. Our children and grandchildren pay AGAIN. So who wins? If it was so fantastic, why isn't obama using it in his speeches?

Romeny is definitely NOT the answer. If he gets in office the country will go back to where it was before Obama and where Bush SR & JR landed us in the war and broke!!!!!!!!

source(s) please. and faux news doesn't count !!

LOL paul like the huff and puff post and CBS polls are fair and unbiased

why on earth are you reading NPR ??? but wow nice link

@James: when did middle class = rural? not saying that rural isn't part of the middle class. but, i think the poll's focus was on rural (non-metropolitan) and NOT "middle class" as stated by Kim. the percentage doesn't really equate to a huge difference in votes because rural areas don't have a large concentration of votes as compared to urban/metropolitan areas. that's why it's interesting to look at an electoral map. it can appear that a candidate (typically republican) can carry what looks like 75% of the country but still lose the vote because of the density (or lack thereof) of the population in those states as compared to the east / west coast areas and the Great Lakes region.

Paul thank you for pointing out that the rural/suburban middle classes vote will be dwarfed by the urban/metropolitan voters, who are dependant on the government and my paycheck so they can sit at home all day smoking and eating cheetoes

Keith, All the "head in the sand" liberals still think Obama cares about this Country, and that he is really cool, and funny when he appears on the view and Leno. How dare you speak badly of the community organizer who has NEVER built a damn thing in his life. None have looked at his past and his upbringing. They will say it's all BS but they never looked into the past. The media has given this community organizer a pass. They know what he is but they don't care....They will say we are judging him too harshly but when it's all said and done, the damage will have already been done. There are muslim brotherhood members in the State Dept and the Dept of Defense....but nobody wants to believe it...can't be true...nope...we're all conspiracy theorists. They all just want their 'free' healthcare. Don't bother them with insignificant things like this, just give them the 'free' healthcare.

dan 4-5 are already covered by obama ...and what are you smoking (obama is a multi-millionaire)

Seriously Dan?...Mighty wide gap here huh? The 44th president of the United States, author and the most popular person in the world, Barack Hussein Obama II, has a net worth between $2,801,012 and $11,830,000, according to analysis of his 2012 financial disclosure forms.

More peole out of work now then when he took office, the middle-east on fire with an ambassador murdered and Obama thinks it's more important to go on Letterman and The View. you mentor res are delusional if you think he is doing a good job.

Romney/ Ryan are NOT Bush!!!!!!!!!!!! They have solutions to fix what Obama can't. What makes you think someone that spent most of their FIRST TERM as Us Senator running for another office qualified to get us out of this mess?

Obama himself said if he can't fix things by the end of his first term, "it's a one-term proposition." Are you calling Obama a liar?

You hit the nail right on the head mentor res. Bush and the Republicans put two wars and the 4th largest entitlement on the credit card then turned to Wall Street and told them do as you wish and then turn to the Dems and blame the hole mess on them. They don't have the slightest clue.

Ed, I remember when Bush got his two big tax cuts through the congress. At the time, I wasn't too thrilled about the idea (even though I benefited), as we were in the middle of two wars which were not included in the budget, and then came the huge prescription benefit program, which also wasn't paid for. However, all the Republicans were saying how great these tax cuts were going to be for the economy, and that it would make things really boom. Therefore, I decided to give them the benefit of the doubt, and thought to myself that maybe they will be right. Well, as we all know, look where it got us at the end of the Bush term....a complete financial meltdown and very flat job growth over his 8 year term. Now you guys want us to believe we just need to do more of the same???? Really????

Dan, Yes I do rember that, I also was not too thrilled about things that Bush did. I voted for him twice, looking back, I think he did a horrible job - the guy spent like a drunken sailor, but better than what gore or kerry would have done - just my opinion. I think Obama is doing a worse job. More US soldiers have been killed in the past 3.5 yrs than the previous 8 before him. And this guy got the nobel peace prize.

Drastic changes need to be made in this country to the tax code and the debt and just 1 or 2 things are not going to get it done. There needs to be 20 things done over the course of 20-30 yrs to get this country out of debt. It cannot and will not happen sooner than that. Find a way to END social Security and Medicare, Limit welfare, reduce spending by 50% over 5 yrs and bring home every US military personell who is not currently on US soil. people say isolationism is bad, i don't. Lets deal with our propblems first before we try and help others with theirs.

I do think that there should be a one time only, retail sales tax on everything (except cars and housing) to pay for the yearly budget. no more reporting to the IRS for ordinary citizens. and then tax other things to pay down the national debt - like a scaled up income tax for those making over $500,000 and tax housing and cars at a differrent rate. .

Someone has to come up with solutions rather than keep kicking the can down the road.

saw that poll today I am amazed the dems on here (just dont see it) or comment on it

joe just go print up 150,000.00 worth of new money to use on your new bills

OK, Joe, so are you saying that Trickle-down economics has worked??? Haven't we tried tax cuts and deregulation already? Why would we do that again? That's pretty much what Romney/Ryan are proposing.

Dan i guess you don't like that money your earn because you seem content to throw it in the huge government trough for everyone to feed from. What is happening now is screwing the country royally. When more dollars get printed you end up with worthless money. Obama, is selling this country down the drain by not forcing the senate and house to develop balanced budgets.The US dollar has gone to trash. But instead of taking our money how about we keep it, invest it and get our Country building again. Your president has taken us from a AAA rating to a AA rating. Yep QE3 along with Keynesian economics will crush us. Damn right I'll take tax breaks and reinvest it in my business and others.

Ok Sue, I'll bite. What limitations should be put on the government? If a big government is good, is a huge government great? Do you honestly believe that a faceless bureaucrat operating in Washington is better poised to make decisions for you and your family? Does it make sense to send tax dollars to Washington for local education funding?

I will concede that there are many things that government can provide best. I do not believe that the government is the solution to every issue that faces this once great nation. I do not believe that more government control is better, it is not. Infrastructure projects don’t limit your freedoms. Defense protects your freedoms. Most other things the federal government entangles itself in limit your freedoms. You may enjoy being controlled, I don’t.

Sue, if I had to guess who the Phd was in this debate you would have received my vote. Your positions are clearly researched and well thought out. The point I wish to make about infrastructure spending is that this is an investment we'll be forced to make anyway. Not only will it stimulate the economy but it will also allow us to maintain a competitive footing globally. Corporate tax breaks and relaxed regulations will not create significant demand. As you know, infrastructure entails more than roads and bridges. Forty percent of the electricity our plants generate is lost into the ethos during the transmission process. Our electrical grid is outdated. Our sewer and water delivery systems are ancient. The Army Corps of Engineers give our infrastructure a grade of D. I must agree with Robert though. Your efforts here will be ignored by those who will reject anything that conflicts with their preconceived ideologies. I appreciate and enjoy reading your offerings. You're a smart lady.

Sue-

I agree...your postings are very well thought out and researched. I can tell that they make everyone think, when the only response from the right is "....well, ok, if you say a bigger government is good, then how about an enormous government...wouldn't that be better?". I get the point you are making...not everything the government does is right, but you are stating that the majority of the people do rely on the government in some form or another, just like my Tea Party brother-in-law, who received his medical degree thanks to federally backed student loans!

You just love your labels don't you Drapcho. You're a guy who speaks a lot but says very little.

Sue, Do you really think the founders intended the federal government to be as big as it is? Or, do you think our country was set up to give each individual state the ability to govern itself? The most basic function of the Federal Government is to protect the Union. I do not think anyone would disagree with that. The federal governement was never intended to have programs like social security and medicare and welfare. These programs cost 100 times more than originally anticipated and there are more people on welfare now, based on percentage of the population than ever before. These types of programs do not work.

Sue, this country is 16 trillion dollars in debt and has an additional 80 trillion dollars in unfunded liabilities. Does that not concern you?

This is not a democrat or republican problem, its an american problem that these two parties caused. Hard choices are going to have to be made, soon, or this country is doomed.

Sue the Founding Fathers did not intend to have a Federal Government on Steroids. It's out of control. Hamiltonian or Jeffersonian, we are on a course for disaster. Both parties are to blame. I do appreciate the passion of those who commented here, and if I come off as condescending, my sincere apologies because it is more out of frustration than anything.
We just can't sustain a debt that is 101% of our GDP and growing. Sue you should know that is a recipe for disaster.
We can't have a President who approves of a Fed who initiates QE3 that will devalue the dollar which will usher in inflation. The middle class will NOT be able to take that kind of hit.
We can't take Obamacare crushing the small businesses and corporations with mandated coverages that financially cripple them and stunts growth for more jobs. If you think there is no growth now, wait till the full effects of this albatross.
Economists say there are trillions of dollars sitting on the sidelines from corporations and the wealthy not being infused into our economy. Mainly because there is no confidence that these spend thrifts in office have the intelligence to get us out.
I don't blame them one bit. Everything Obama and this Senate has done to this point proves it.

Sue, there has never been a country in the history of the world who has racked up so much debt as the United States. This issue needs to be addressed now, not later and not after even more government deficit spending. The time to cut government spending is now - not raise it, the time to cut the size of the government is now - not increase it.

While your taking your daughter to see the annointed one, you may want to explain to her why she'll be paying 90% of her pay in the future to pay off the debt Obama has racked up in the past 3.5 yrs or 8 if he gets elected. Or you can explain it to her when she is 45 and still living with you because she cant find a job.

Or just maybe you want her to live the life of Julia. Here is the link if you never heard of it. http://www.barackobama.com/life-of-julia/

Sue-
I think you left Joe and Ed speechless! Maybe not....

@ Dan, no not speechless, I'm making a living...Now that you have to work thru May just to pay your taxes, I need to make the most of the next 7 months.

Hey Ed, I know what you mean about the "anointed one" comment. The presstitutes and the talking heads in the media have anointed Obama from day one as the messiah. He can do no wrong. He is so perfect and funny and sooo cool and just a regular guy who earned a nobel peace prize his first week in office for doing nothing. The anointed one.....

Joe, Its funny how President Obama got the nobel peace prize, yet he killed bin ladin(ok, that was a good one), has a death list w/americans on it, authorizes drone attacks on civilian targets and in the past 3.5 yrs, more US Soldiers have been killed under his presidency than in the 8 total years of the Bush Administration. It's sad that as soon as President Obama was elected, the media stopped talking about the death totals in Iraq and Afganistan. During Bush, it was the leading story every day. Now, nothing.

Ed-
OK, let's assume that when Obama came into office, he slashed the budget left and right, cut education, medicare, foreign aid, you name it...all to reduce the deficit. Would you vote for him today? Keep in mind, that he would have gone against every economist who says you need to increase government spending in a time of economic downtown. So, by doing this, we know unemployment would be much higher than today, since there would also have been no auto loans, and no stimulus at all. Would you be happy that unemployemnt would probably be around 15% or so? YOU need to use common sense and understand why Obama needed to spend what he did to prevent us from further collapse.

Dan, thats an interesting scenario. Since we are now in fantasy land, i'll play along. Since the debt and deficit are my top issues, if Obama were to have done that, then yes, I would be an Obama supporter. However, I do not think the rest of your scenario would be accurate. Your saying that by cutting spending, that would have been the opposite of all of the experts advise, well, look at where we are at now after having taken their advise. We are 16 trillion in debt. Since I do not believe any of the main stream media when it comes to the unemployment numbers, They all say that the actual number of unemployed is around 12% ( not far from your 15%) because the new math of Obama does not count the people who stopped looking for work and are still unemployed. I believe in an absolute free market. GM got a bailout, stills owes taxpayers 50 billion, they still make a shitty car that nobody wants and eventually they will go under. So, our tax payer dollars only delayed the inevitable.

Dan, there is no expert that can say for sure what to do. why, no country has ever been in this much debt. But, it only makes sense to stop spending money that you do not have.

one last thing. ever since i have been paying attention to politics, which has been about 25 yrs now. whenever a city, or state wants to bring development into an area, what do they do? they give tax breaks and or tax abatements to developers to spur growth. it happens every time and it works.

Whatever little bit of credibility you had with me has been completely lost. First, you don't address how you would feel with much higher unemployment today (whatever number that would be) if Obama had slashed the budget like you would have liked him to, and second, which is the big one for me, your uninformed comments about GM. Your hatred of GM makes you ignore the truth. They are building world competitive cars now, and that is a complete fact. They are also making record profits since the bailout, and HIRING left and right. When you can take something that is so obviously positive like that, and turn it into complete utter negativity, then you are so brainwashed that it isn't worth debating. Debt is certainly important, and needs to be addressed very soon, but what good is a country if it's debt is under control, but the economy has collapsed and we're in another depression? Good luck in November...you should be nervous.

Dan, I don't hate GM, of the 22 cars i've driven and owned since i was 16, 12 were GM. 4 fords & 3 dodge's, I should have been more specific about the shitty car comment, meaning the Volt. Its cost GM $80,000 to produce, yet there selling for a loss. How do you make a profit when your selling a car at a loss. I do not know where your getting your info about Gm but here is what I found (no records profits) recent data:

08/02/2012 - General Motors earnings fall 41 percent in second quarter - CLEVELAND, Ohio -- Big losses in Europe and slower earnings in North America pushed General Motors' second quarter earnings down 41 percent to $1.49 billion. http://www.cleveland.com/business/index.ssf/2012/08/general_motors_earnings_fall_4.html -

I did not address how I feel about high unemployment in your situation, because in reality, we have really high unemployment now. How do I feel about that, I think something needs to be done - Do something that will give the businesses in this country long term confidence and stability for them to start hiring again and let loose the trillions of dollars that their sitting on.

While i have not read all post from beginning to end, has anyone posed this question and given an honest answer.

Are you better off now than you were four years ago.

My answer - is yes. way better. i am in an industry that has benfited from Obama's policies - But, I earned my money, hard work. - no bailout here.

But, since I cannot control what they do in Washington, I still know that in the end, its bad for the country and I would like for us to get going in the right direction.

Call me crazy, and even though I am better off now than before, I'm voting for someone other than President Obama.

Your totally right Dan. A guy like Ed represents what is wrong with the Republican Party. A mosaic has emerged of the average Republican. Their coming off as mean spirited, scared white men who fear that their world is being unjustly taken from them. They are not interested in expanding their party to include minorities. They would rather change the voting laws to exclude as many from voting as possible. That is a strategy w/o a future. They're more interested in demonizing than problem-solving. They use bitter terms like "the anointed one" and "the messiah". This behavior might turn on the far right but the far right is going to vote for them anyway. They must have the middle to win yet they turn the middle off with their vitriol. For you see Dan, they're motivated by fear and the middle can sense that. In the years ahead, as the white population becomes the minority, the Republican Party will only become weaker. The irony is that the Republicans themselves are their own worst enemy and not the target of their hate - President Obama.

Murphy, Unless your reading other posts and thinking it's me, what are you talking about. Dan did not mention one thing I've said on these posts and you think he's refering to what i've said.

First, I am not a republican. I am an Independent, meaning I have the ability to listen to all points of view and try and pick who I think I can trust with my vote. Not some party line candidate who will do whatever the puppet master wants him to do. It seems to me that you've hit most the of talking points of the left in one paragraph.

Yes, I am afraid, that if Obama gets re-elected, we are ALL going to be in a world of hurt.

You may think i'm voting for one of the two front running candidates, think again. Have you seen one post with me mentioning the republican candiate? idtoi

Ed, you claim to be an independent, but by now everyone should recognize that there are independents who lean Democratic and independents who lean Republican and few who are truly right in the middle. You sound like a Republican, because you've pitched all the standard Republican talking points. If you are not one, I'm sure Murphy would apologize for calling you one.

The other thing everyone should recognize by now is that independents are a big part of the problem. An independent in Ohio doesn't get to choose who appears on the ballot for the general election in either party. Therefore, we have the most extreme partisans picking the candidates. In the case of the Republican Party, those candidates are moving farther to the political right than ever before. So we now have these self-styled Tea Party "patriots" picking Republican standard bearers. No such group exists on the left, so the Democratic Party remains much as was described by Will Rogers when he famously said, "I don't belong to any organized political party. I'm a Democrat."

Once again this ridiculous format cut short my post. Here's the ending:

Meanwhile, the Republicans have picked a candidate who has flipflopped on every major policy point from the time not so long ago when he was governor of Massachusetts. Is he severely conservative, as he claimed? I honestly can't follow all the flopping, but I know that some of what he's said in the way of specifics indicate that a Rmoney presidency would most assuredly not be about freedom. It would be about sanctifying the absurd notion that corporations are people. THAT should scare you.

Robert, i freely admit i am right leaning when it comes to the budget, the deficit, taxes and some social programs. If those are the only 4 things that make up a republican, than i guess i am guilty as charged. however, i would say that i am more libertarian than republican. there are allot of issues that i disagree with the republicans as well as the democrats. but there are some democrat issues i agree with and yet their are different points of view that neither the republicans nor the democrats subscribe too. i do not come on this site to bash people for what they believe or say its wrong, its a discussion between people who are obviously passionate about politics.

Robert, there are serious problems in this country, my opinions of which ones are more serious than others may vary from your opinions. but at least we can try to discuss them without someone being labeled. read my post, i dont ask anyone who they are, i dont care. i would just like to have an honest, no talking points discussion.

Sue, there has been a question as to how much support the President has with young voters versus the last election. What were your observations on that issue?

Sue, if I may ask, what is it about President Obama that makes you want to support and vote for him. What has he done in the past 3.5 yrs, that would make you want to vote for him again?

I am just curious, I won't bash anything you say. I promise.

Ah MZ, then you must be opposed to all the money flooding in from outside of Ohio to influence state elections.

Sure I would MZ. I think the Citizens United decision has seriously hurt this democracy. I don't see this new world of extreme funding as being free speech. I don't see a corporation as an individual. Justice Breyer, to his credit, suggested that full disclosure would act as a check and balance to unlimited corporate donations. If a corporation gave huge money to support a particular issue, then customers could take their business elsewhere. The problem with that line of thinking is that the Republicans refused to allow a vote on full disclosure legislation. If unlimited corporate donations is a freedom of speech right, then why do those speakers want to be kept secret from the public?

I would imagine that they want it to be kept secret the same way that I wouldn't want people to know if I made a donation and who I made it to. It is none of your business where I spend my money, what causes I support, what I do with my time. It is my decision what I share with the world.

The Chic-fil-a episode is a recent example. The mistake Mr. Cathy made (if any) was sharing his personal beliefs. His beliefs in no way impact the quality or service his company provides. A tremendous amount of hate was thrown in his direction over what he thinks. Agree or disagree with this thoughts, but hate a man and try to ruin a business because of his beliefs is frightening to me.

Both sides of the isle need a severe sanity check. I can imagine what would happen if liberals found out that the owner of Whole Foods was a conservative. I can picture how conservatives would react if they found out John Deere made donations to re-elect Obama. Neither has anything to do with the quality of the product or services but protests, boy-cots, etc… would occur.

In summation, if you want to tell everyone who you vote for, who you donate money to, go ahead. If you don’t, then don’t. I don’t think your viewpoints should be broadcast to the world unless you choose that they should be.

The government cannot give that which it first does not take.

An example: The government takes $10 dollars from you in taxes, funnels those dollars through any number of bureaucrats (that all have salaries, pensions, overhead, etc...) then spends a fraction of that original $10 to "stimulate" the economy. Makes sense to me!

Sue, you are clearly both intelligent and well-informed. I understand that, as an educator, you want to reach some of these people. I also wonder how long it will be before their simplistic and biased responses have you tearing your hair out. Frankly, I think most of these guys should have been sent to the office. Remedial math, economics, history, and probably science, seem to be indicated. Keep logic and truth coming. Just don't expect to get through to a closed mind. BTW, glad you got to see Obama. I'd have liked that. I heard Sherrod Brown last Friday when he opened his office near Shaker Square. It was inspiring to hear him talk about what he's doing, and will continue to do, for the middle class. Clearly that isn't part of his opponent's agenda, nor that of Rmoney's.

Robert, is it safe to assume your post was referring at lease partially to my post? If so please explain where I am wrong. If not please disregard. Thank you.

MZ, my comment here wasn't addressed to you here. However I have to question your prior comment that "...if you want to tell everyone who you vote for, who you donate money to, go ahead....I don’t think your viewpoints should be broadcast to the world unless you choose that they should be." Nobody, individual or corporation, should be able to make secret donations to a party, a campaign, or a phony educational non-profit corporation like Crossroads Grassroots Policy Strategies (Crossroads GPS), Karl Rove's 501(c)(4) nonprofit corporation.

As a 501(c)(4) nonprofit, Crossroads GPS claims its primary purpose is the advancement of social welfare including public policy advocacy, but it is permitted to engage in political spending as well. But they have crossed the line into all-out political ads. Witness the millions of dollars spent just to tell us we shouldn't vote for Sherrod Brown. If they tell us not to vote for one candidate, you're straining credulity to suggest that isn't an offhand endorsement of his only opponent. It wouldn't be unreasonable for the IRS to remove the non-profit status for such a scurrilous flaunting of the regulations.

Crossroads GPS is required to report what it spends but is not required to publicly disclose any donor information...no matter how many millions. If you or I donate 5 bucks, we have to file a disclosure statement. Ridiculous...just like the Citizens United decision by the Republican majority on the Supreme Court. And unfair.

Not all corporations are publicly traded. Many that are publicly traded self-report. If a corporation (public or private) wants to donate and/or lobby a public servant to vote a certain way, isn’t it up to the public servant to vote their conscience? Do you really care why they voted how they voted if you agree or disagree with the vote?

Example, let’s say you are for ObamaCare and found out that an insurance company donated millions to the Obama campaign in 2008. ObamaCare gets written and passed. You are happy. Let’s say that a private hospital donated millions to a different congressman to fight against ObamaCare, he voted against it but the bill still passed. Are you not still happy?

Let’s say that you are all hot for some Cap and Trade and George Soros donates millions and starts several not-for-profits to support Cap and Trade legislation. Many congress people then write a bill and that bill doesn’t pass. Are you not unhappy? At the same time, Big Coal donates to other congress people and they vote against the bill. You are still unhappy correct?

Under either scenario mentioned above, what is more important to you, who donated, or how the public servants voted. If they received no donations and voted for or against your desired outcome, would it change your mind about how you would vote, or who you would support? Would it surprise you that McDonalds didn’t approve of ObamaCare and therefore lobbied for an exemption (as did hundreds of other companies)? Does that impact your decision to eat at or not to eat at McDonalds?

Lastly, if a company, public or private, donates to losing causes often enough, they won’t be around very long. If a company, public or private, donates to winning causes that hurt the public, those laws and that company won’t last very long either.

Fair enough. I would still think that your decision to support or not to support any candidate or public servant is based on their performance and how they vote, not on who donated to them. But to each his own. The back and forth has been a pleasure.

Murphy, speaking of sunlight and disinfectant...how do you feel about George Soros giving Obama's super PAC a nice cool million? Do you think George is trying to buy influence again? Just curious.

Murphy, any issues with the following?

According to the Washington Examiner, “a taxpayer watchdog group conducted a nine-month investigation” and uncovered “thousands of cases of credit card solicitations and donations” to the Obama campaign. Many of those donations have allegedly come from overseas and may be in violation of federal election laws.

National outlets are preparing stories on the matter, and the Obama campaign has been trying to block those stories from being published.

The Wall Street Journal, citing “people familiar with the totals,” reported the Obama campaign’s September fundraising haul on Thursday, which shattered the campaign’s August record of $114 million for the most money raised in a month during the 2012 election cycle.

Up to the same old tricks again, same as in 2008. Money flooding the system from overseas on untraceable pre-paid credit cards to avoid disclosure rules and hide the foreign interests attempting to buy this presidency. But yeah, PACs sure are evil.

Dear MZster, may I call MZster? I don't view this as an either/or proposition. I view the will of the American people to be of paramount importance and therefore should be maximized to the greatest extent possible. The thought of foreign influence on our electoral process troubles me greatly. I would be in favor of a law banning foreign financing (both direct and indirect) sponsored by either party but I wouldn't hold your breath if I were you. Both parties benefit from this distasteful practice. I cannot remember a time when the Israeli government and related lobbying groups have been so omnipresent as I've witnessed in this election cycle. Therefore, I agree with your premise but still bemoan the influence that Super Pacs have had on the electoral processes on the federal and state levels.

Jodi,

So is the revolution started by voting for an Obama second term? Just so I understand you clearly, you want a revolution of regulations correct?

Do you want to remove all special interests or just the ones you don't agree with?

Last question, what or who are "big money?"