Cleo's Mom

July 20, 2010 2:57 PM Poll: Voters Prefer Generic Democrats Over Republicans According to a Gallup poll released yesterday, Democrats have taken a six point lead over Republicans in generic ballot preference for the upcoming midterm elections. The poll, conducted last week, shows that voters prefer Democrats over Republicans by a 49 to 43 percent margin -- the first statistically significant lead for the party since Gallup began tracking the trends weekly in March. Prior to yesterday's poll, support had been leaning in favor of Republicans, who held a four-point or higher lead in three of the polls. According to a statement by Gallup, the finding is attributable largely to a shift in the preference of independents. While Democratic and Republican support for their own parties remained steady, independent support for Democrats increased five points, from 34 percent to 39 percent. It is unclear what the cause of this shift was, but one possibility could be the passage of the mammoth financial reform bill last week. A recent CBS News poll indicated that 59 percent of independents said they supported increased government regulation of banks and financial institutions

Two different polling places. Apples and oranges. Everyone knows it's how you word the question.

Here's where you deny it and I have proven that this is a lie with my post of your quotes in which you call me a racist and hater. I want you to do the same and find the posts where I have called you a racist or hater. I don't deny what I have said about the tea party movement and I stand behind my opinions of them. Like I have said, these opinions are shared by others who have done research and polling. So I am hardly alone. You make sweeping generalizations about liberals all the time. In many of your posts. And it's more than a nice try. It's the truth. Unlike you I PROVE my points. :thumbup:

The anti-Obama, anti-democrats who are hoping to elect more republicans can look forward to the following if they become the majority: 1) tax cuts for the rich that add billions to the deficit and of course are not paid for 2) privatizing social security (can anyone say stock market bust?) or cutting it and medicare 3) continuing their cuts to the aged, they would also cut domestic spending for programs that help the poor 4) escalate war and the unfunded spending that goes with it and adds to the deficit. Maybe Iran next? 5) de-regulate wall street and business with the predicable consequences like the economic crash, BP oil spill and Massey mine deaths. 6) further interject government into your bedroom and uterus by further restricting women's and gay's rights. Why does this all look so familiar? Oh, I know!! Let me answer. These are the failed policies of bush and the republicans that got us in the mess to begin with. But you can't stop ___*____people from voting against their own economic self-interests because republicans have NEVER done one thing for the middle class in america. They just keep drinking the kool aid. * add any adjective that you think fits: stupid, ignorant, lazy, uninformed or other.

I don't care about his poll numbers as much as I care about the fact that he is addressing the tough problems: 1) he stopped the economy from crashing with the successful stimulus program 2) he passed healthcare to address insurance abuse and cover the uninsured 3) he got financial regulation passed 4) he got $20 billion from BP for those affected by the oil spill 5) his auto industry bailout is a big success and they are paying back the money and hiring thousands of workers. 6) We've had 5-6 months of positive job growth 7) The GNP is up These are the things I care about and the things that are helping the country. These are the statistics that are meaningful to me. These things are moving our country in a positive direction. And what is the republican response to all this? Vote no on everything, including the unemployment extension for those hurting. But there is one thing they want to vote yes on, let me think for a millisecond. Oh, yes. EXTEND THE TAX CUT FOR THE RICHEST AMERICANS THAT WILL CONTINUE TO ADD BILLIONS TO OUR DEFICIT. IT IS UNPAID FOR. BUT SOMEHOW THAT'S OKAY.

AP poll suggests growing support for healthcare law By Julian Pecquet - 06/17/10 09:29 AM ET The Obama administration is touting a new Associated Press-GfK poll that suggests growing support for the healthcare reform law. The poll notes that while Americans remain divided — with 45 percent in favor of the new law and 42 percent opposed — support has been growing steadily since reform was signed into law in March; just last month, opponents still outnumbered supporters 46 percent to 39. "The Obama administration has been working diligently to implement the new legislation," notes a White House official, "with the president and his team acting quickly and carefully to deliver the benefits of reform to the American people and answer their questions." In particular, The Associated Press reports, support has been growing since May among men (from 36 percent to 46 percent in favor), working-age Americans between 30 and 49 years old (from 35 percent to 49) and even Republicans (8 percent to 17).

This is not true. I have said that ground zero for the tea party is their hatred of Pres. Obama because he is (1) a progressive democrat - and their guy lost and (2) there is now a black man in the white house. I stand by that analysis and the posts I have made by columnists who have anaylzed the statistics bear this out. This isn't just my opinion, it is the opinion of many. Many see the tea party movement as rooted in racism. Now, if the shoe fits, wear it - as the saying goes. The fact that you protest so much just means that once again I have struck a nerve and you as usual are trying to deflect. I have proven with your quotes that you have called me a hater and racist so quit saying you haven't or that it's only in response to my post. That doesn't matter. You either said it to me or you didn't. And you did. The whole "she said it first" (I didn't) childish excuse doesn't fly.

Tea Party Racism by Dean Walker April 11, 2010 Over the last week, I have been having an online debate with an activemember of the Tea Party (T.P.) Apparently, he found a previous article I hadwritten offensive because I described certain members of the T.P. movement as“teabaggers.” He claimed that I was denigrating a large number of Americans andthat he personally found it insulting. Of course, he never mentioned all thedenigrating language the T.P. movement, Fox News, and the rightwing media spinmachine use on a daily bases to describe liberals, progressives and socialists.My T.P. friend earnestly believed that I was using “hate speech” when used theterm "teabagger," but that there is nothing wrong in usingpejoratives when referring to the left. I once again pointed to the widespreadracism found at T.P. gatherings and he dismissed my examples as the work of “just a few loons,” which he claims can befound in every movement. While I agree every nationwide movement is bound to have a “few loons,” recent polling data on T.P. members show racism is represented in a solid majority and is proving to be a systemic problem within the movement. Over the last month, I have visited dozens of Tea Party websites, YouTube videos of rallies, read speeches and articles from T.P. supporters, and researched academic reports that have been released on T.P. ideology, racism and their connections to militant extremists. And while the T.P. movement is just over a year old, there is a growing mountain of data which allows us to draw some early conclusions. One conclusion that is becoming increasingly clear is that the Tea Party has a problem with racism. This week, April 7, 2010, Professor Christopher Parker of the WISER Institute, at the University of Washington, released the results of a political science poll studying racism in American politics. Here is an excerpt from the report: “America is definitely not beyond race. For instance, the Tea Party, the incipient movement that claims to be committed to reining in what they perceive as big government, appears to be motivated by more than partisanship and ideology. Approximately 45% of Whites either strongly or somewhat approve of the movement. Of those, only 35% believe Blacks to be hardworking, only 45 % believe Blacks are intelligent, and only 41% think that Blacks are trustworthy. Perceptions of Latinos aren’t much different. While 54% of White Tea Party supporters believe Latinos to be hardworking, only 44% think them intelligent, and even fewer, 42% of Tea Party supporters believe Latinos to be trustworthy …” The report reveals that Tea Party members are 36 percent more likely to be racially resentful than non-Tea Party supporters. According to Professor Parker, "While it's clear that the tea party in one sense is about limited government, it's also clear from the data that people who want limited government don't want certain services for certain kinds of people. Those services include health care."

Too late. The following are pg's posts about me: Are you black or something? Cause you certainly are coming off as an offended black person who is hanging on by a thread to your President simply because he matches your skin tone. Cause there is really no reason to admire Obama or anything he is doing to this country of ours. The way you talk, I would think that you HATE white people. This would make you a 'racist'. So, here it is in a nutshell. You are a racist. You don't like white people. YOU are the Hater!!!!!! YOU are the RACIST!!!! YOU hate white conservatives and have said just as much with your rants about how they are black haters. If anyone is racist around here, it is you. Against white people who disagree with you on politics and every issue out there. And for the record, I never denied that there was violence on the left against bush or that those people hated bush, but PG is in denial about the racism and hate on the right and tea party. She actually said the violence we claim "is all in our heads". And I am not the only one who has written about it. People who get paid to write columns have written about it and I've posted it.

You've called me a racist at least 4 times and a hater, said I "don't get anything spiritual" and am blind as a bat spiritually, asked if I were black or something, and said I must have been a terrible teacher, just to name a few. So don't you dare try to come across as some goody two shoes. That's hypocrisy and THAT'S a conservative tactic!!! The proof is in the pudding, so to speak, and I have posted enough pictures and examples of posts from the right wing to prove my point that much of what they believe starts from a position of hate or racism. Too bad if that too strikes a nerve. Deny all you want. Facts don't lie and Don't kill the messenger, that won't work either. Thinking people can see right through it.

cheney didn't start talking until after he left the White House. And then it was all Obama bashing, all the time, as if his administration got anything right. At least now that he has other (health) issues, like a lack of pulse to contend with, we can be greatful he has shut up. with bush's mentality it was impossible to talk down to anyone. Well, maybe a kindergarten student. Mostly we the people were ignored in place of all the wheeling and dealing with the oil industry writing our energy policy, wall street writing the financial regulations and no bid contracts going to cheney's friends to run the wars. Yes, Obama is a refreshing change. It's great to have brains back in the White House. We don't have to worry about him saying "Awesome speech, your holiness" (to the pope).

This Modern World: A conservative media provocateur on parallel Earth Saturday, July 31, 2010 There are some on here who I think live in an a parallel universe where "liberals are the real racists."

Another Obama success that the party of no, that hates success, opposed: Obama touts auto bailout to workers Saturday, July 31, 2010 By Michael D. Shear and Peter Whoriskey, The Washington Post DETROIT -- The government's bailout of the U.S. auto industry last year sparked political hand-wringing about the end of capitalism and allegations that President Barack Obama aspired to be CEO of what critics dubbed "Government Motors." But a year and a half later, many critics have retreated from their sharpest attacks, as the auto industry again turns a profit and begins adding jobs in communities such as Detroit, which desperately need them. Mr. Obama's visit Friday to a Chrysler plant in Detroit was designed as a victory rally -- an "I told you so" event aimed at his Republican critics who had attacked the auto bailouts as government takeovers. A feisty Mr. Obama was welcomed with loud applause by about 1,500 auto workers inside the plant that makes the Jeep Grand Cherokee, a vehicle he said was the first new car he ever owned. If his critics had won, he said, the plant would have been shuttered and dark. There's no satisfying some, like radio host Rush Limbaugh, who this week referred to General Motors as Obama Motors. And the auto turnaround is not enough to fix Detroit, where 30 percent unemployment has ravaged the city like few others. When it comes to critics who continue to condemn the bailout, the White House is not forgiving. Press Secretary Robert Gibbs said Thursday critics such as Mr. Limbaugh were willing to forsake auto workers at the time they needed help the most. The White House is eager to tell a success story ahead of the congressional midterm elections this fall. The president's Friday visit and another to a Ford plant outside Chicago next week are intended to tell that story more widely to potential voters. The president started at Chrysler's Jefferson North plant, where the Grand Cherokees are built, then toured a plant that will produce GM's first electric car, the Volt. Both are churning out cars, adding shifts of workers and helping to keep suppliers in business across the Rust Belt. "In the year before these bankruptcies, these companies lost almost 340,000 jobs," said Ron Bloom, the administration's top auto official. "In the year since then, 55,000 jobs have been added to these companies. If we hadn't stepped in ... most observers believe at least a million jobs would have been lost." Mr. Obama made clear Friday that he will use the auto turnaround to focus the argument that his economic policies have created an economic recovery. "Don't bet against the American worker," he said, his voice rising over audience cheers. "It's going to take some time to get back to where we want to be, but I have confidence in the American worker," he said. "... I have confidence in this economy. We are coming back." In the cavernous assembly plant, many workers described a welcome morale turnaround from a year or two ago, when scared workers took buyouts out of fear that the end was near. "The morale is different now," said Erik Williams, 38, a plant worker since 1994. "When you know you are on the brink, and you come back from that, it puts it in a different perspective." Several plant workers said Mr. Obama deserves much credit for believing in the industry and its employees. "I've been here 16 years, and last year was the worst year of my life; it was terrible," said James Tiedt, 39. He said he almost lost his house to foreclosure last year but was saved by federal housing programs. Of Mr. Obama, he said: "He's the man." In the first quarter of 2010, GM earned a quarterly profit of $865 million, its first since 2007. Chrysler reported an operating profit of $143 million over the same period. Preliminary figures suggest that auto industry employment in the United States may reverse a decade of decline. The auto industry financing program, which began under the Bush administration, (does that make bush a socialist? Hmmm) extended about $85 billion to General Motors, Chrysler, GMAC and Chrysler Financial. Those investments were justified by the Obama administration as a means of saving an estimated million jobs or more. Today, most of the government money is expected to be repaid. In March, the administration estimated the program's ultimate cost to be $24.6 billion. Administration officials predict that the expected loss will fall as companies in which the U.S. has a stake grow in value.

Don't buy anything until I check this out. If you want to PM me with the name of your business, I can check it out. Because if people say they saw you on Angie's List (and you have to be a paying member to sign on and view the list) then you are already on it so why should you pay? They put out a montly magazine that they send to all members and places of business advertise there and some offer coupons, etc.. so maybe that's what they meant - that they wanted you to advertise in their magazine.

As a member I can write a report (good or bad, and I've done both) about someone who has done work for me. They review it to verify it and then post it. When I search the list for an area it is listed by an A grade to F grade, but you can also switch it and have it go from closest to farthest, and a few other ways it can be ranked. Plus you can go on each one and read the reports. Some don't have reports yet. But if people are finding you from the list then you're on it. Congrats on getting good grades.

Go take a xanax, PG. Anyone with two brain cells who has been reading my posts know that this is just the rantings of an irrational person. I think the lady doth protest too much. Obviously touched another nerve. Again, answser the question as to why Social Security recipients didn't get a cost of living increase this year for the first time if the cost of living has risen. You can't. You will just digress and go off into another direction.

The republicans always try to paint themselves as the rah, rah, patriotic party, blah, blah, blah but when it's time to put their votes where their mouths are, well they vote NO on the 9/11 responder bill. You must watch this video. Rep. Anthony Weiner is GREAT. Boy, do we need more like him. Daily Kos: Anthony Weiner for moderately influential place in government.. It should be very clear that the republicans don't care about helping America or Americans - they just want to cause Obama to fail and take the country down with them.

You don't have to apologize, but thanks. BTW, I belong to Angieslist and I couldn't find you. Do you have a lot of reports from people?

The GOP Plot to Screw the Economy and the Middle Class We're only three months away from the midterm election when a shockingly large number of American voters will inexplicably vote for Republican candidates. I have no idea if this will mean a Republican takeover of the House or Senate or both, but there will definitely be enough voter support for Republicans to significantly reduce the Democratic majorities in the House and Senate. Why? Because too many voters tend to be low-information, knee-jerk Springfield-from-The-Simpsons types, and the Republicans have lashed their crazy trains to this new wave of inchoate roid-rage to help sweep them into more congressional seats. Here are a few of the ongoing economic conditions facing a vast majority of Americans, many of whom are all revved up to vote Republican in November. According to Michael Snyder of the Business Insider: • 61 percent of Americans "always or usually" live paycheck to paycheck, which was up from 49 percent in 2008 and 43 percent in 2007. • 66 percent of the income growth between 2001 and 2007 went to the top 1 percent of all Americans. • Over 1.4 million Americans filed for personal bankruptcy in 2009, which represented a 32 percent increase over 2008. • The bottom 50 percent of income earners in the United States now collectively own less than 1 percent of the nation's wealth. • In America today, the average time needed to find a job has risen to a record 35.2 weeks. • More than 40 percent of Americans who actually are employed are now working in service jobs, which are often very low paying. • Despite the financial crisis, the number of millionaires in the United States rose a whopping 16 percent to 7.8 million in 2009. All of this (above) was brought to you by the failed economic policies of bush and the republicans Oh, and the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities reported that wages for the highest 20 percent of earners rose by nearly 300 percent since 1979, while wages for the bottom and middle 20 percent increased only by 41 percent -- combined.The rich get richer and the poor and middle class get poorer. That is the republican economic plan. Plotted on a graph, middle and working class wages have flatlined for 30 years. Roll all of these tragic figures into a slow growth recovery and here we are. Most of us in the middle class are screwed. And thanks to an alliance between the Republicans (which includes the tea party), the increasingly dominant far-right media, a traditional "old media" that panders to the far-right, and right-of-center "conservadems" who pander to the Republicans, too many voters have decided that the Republican Party might be better suited to turn all of this around. The big lie here is that if Congress stops spending, cuts the deficit and makes permanent the Bush tax cuts, especially the tax cuts for the wealthiest Americans, our problems will be solved -- even though these concepts are in direct conflict with each other. Not surprising given the ever-lengthening Republican syllabus of contradictions. Here's how this new batch of contradictions plays out. According to Republicans and their conservadem enablers, we have to cut the deficit and pay for every program Congress passes or else we're all doomed. We're stealing from our children, they say. This has manifested itself in Republican filibusters of both unemployment benefits ($34 billion) and a new jobs bill ($33 billion over ten years). A Republican filibuster killed the jobs bill, and, after many failed cloture votes, the filibuster of the unemployment benefits was finally defeated and the Senate Democrats passed the extensions. Throughout the past year and a half, it's been the same story. Any effort made by the Democrats to stimulate the economy has been filibustered by the Republicans. They say it's because of the deficit and debt. And yet they want to make the Bush tax cuts permanent, which would add $678 billion dollars to the deficit -- and that's just the cost of the tax cuts going to the top two percent of earners. In other words, the Republicans want to spend $678 billion in further giveaways for the wealthiest two percent, and they don't care whether it increases the deficit. Why would anyone on these boards support this? Is anyone on these boards in the top 2% of wage earners? Why would you vote for this? By the way, the Republicans also recently voted against and defeated an amendment to strip Big Oil of its $35 billion in subsidies. Just thought I'd pass that along. Put another way, $678 billion in tax cuts for the wealthy? No problem. Deficit-shmeficit! But $34 billion in unemployment benefits for an out-of-work middle class at a time when companies aren't hiring (say nothing of the aforementioned bullet-points)? Evil! This is the hypocrisy to which I am always referring. Instead, the Republicans want to give $35 billion to Big Oil in the form of corporate welfare during the worst oil spill in American history while telling unemployed middle class families to piss off. Do we have a clear picture in terms of who and what the Republicans care about? It surely isn't fiscal discipline or the deficit. And it surely isn't the middle class. The Bush tax cuts, if extended, would add $2 trillion to debt, so it's not that either. Throw in another policy started by the Republicans -- the war spending (more of which was passed yesterday without any worries about CBO scoring or making sure it's deficit neutral) -- and there's the vast majority of your deficit and debt for the next ten years. Not the stimulus or the bailouts. Read this previous passage if nothing else!! The long term budget impact of the wars and the Bush tax cuts literally dwarf the stimulus. Here's the CBPP evidence in colorful graph form: That big blue chunk represents the Bush tax cut portion of the deficit. The yellow represents the wars. The light blue is the tax revenue lost to the recession. And those really narrow tan and red strata are TARP and the stimulus. Clearly we need to elect more Republicans so they can make permanent the big thick deficit hogs and kill that thin section for the stimulus. Now, if you're a Republican, you might be clinging to the idea that extending the Bush tax cuts would have a stimulative effect on the economy (somehow) even though this hasn't been the case for the last ten years other than for the wealthiest Americans who have once again disproved the trickle-down theories at the heart of Reaganomics by pocketing their share of the trickle instead of reinvesting in jobs and wages for the middle class. The Bush tax cuts will not stimulate the economy. According to Moody's Analytics (hardly a left-wing apparatchik), for every dollar of government money spent on extending the Bush tax cuts, there's only a 32-cent return on investment in terms of economic stimulus. Not a solid investment. How about cutting the corporate tax rate? Also a 32-cent return in economic stimulus. Capital gains tax cuts? 37-cents. And, lumped together, there's your Republican plan for growing the economy. Dumb investments. Goldman Sachs would short these policies. I'm not sure they haven't, actually. But what about the Democratic spending? For every dollar spent on unemployment benefits, there's a $1.61 return in economic stimulus. Good investment! How about infrastructure spending? $1.57 return. Aid to the states? $1.41. Temporary increase in food stamps? $1.74. Even the Obama tax credits for the middle class, $288 billion of the Recovery Act, account for up to $1.30. Meanwhile, the Obama administration is working with a deficit commission which will focus on trimming the deficit after (we hope) the economy and jobs are back on track. The Republicans, of course, voted against forming a deficit commission. Given the choice between deficit spending that significantly stimulates economic growth or deficit spending that barely makes a dent, which choice are the Republicans trying to sell? The really stupid deficit spending for the wealthy that barely makes a dent in the recovery. That's the Republican plan. Also, contrary to popular far-right myths, it's worth noting that the Democrats and the White House have no intention of allowing the tax cuts for families earning less than $250,000 to expire. Those tax cuts will be renewed this year. As for the top tax brackets, you find me a multi-millionaire who pays the actual marginal rate every April and I'll show you a very rich moron. Most of these guys, after deductions and loopholes, pay an effective tax rate that's much lower than the middle class tax brackets. So don't tell me that millionaire Glenn Beck and millionaire Paris Hilton will be financially burdened by a 2.6 percent bump in their margin tax rate next year. Sorry, no. They won't be. And why do middle class Republican voters give a rip about Paris Hilton's tax rate? Because they believe they'll be as wealthy as Paris some day. But read those bullet-points again. It's not happening. Unless there's some sort of mass epiphany, or unless the Democrats actually speak up and take the discourse by the horns and fight, middle class American voters in November will augment the number of Republicans (and conservadems) in Congress mostly because they've been suckered into endorsing these insane Republican economic policies. Subsequently, the Republicans will balloon the deficit and undermine the economic recovery in order to give more handouts to the super rich. And the middle class will continue to be an accomplice in its own slow-roasted homicide.

Very refreshing for someone to admit that they regretted voting for bush either time and saw the "light" about Hannity, Beck and the rest. Thank you for your honesty. Maybe now we can sing kumbaya.

I saw President Obama on The View today and I was very proud to have voted for him. Oops! I said proud. :eek: The pride police on these boards will be after me. When right winger Elizabeth Hassleback asked him about his saying that the stimulus saved X number of jobs she said that term had never been used before and wondered how it could be important. He said: "It's important if you're the person whose job was saved". Big applause. :thumbup: Yeah, I was proud of him. He did a great job. I find his humility refreshing, especially in light of bush's inability to come up with even one example of a mistake he made. In 8 years. :huh2: Wow, what arrogance. Whole books have been written about his mistakes.

New Poll Shows Comprehensive Immigration Reform has Broad Support The headline of a recent Washington Post-ABC News poll reads, "Most Americans Back New Immigration Law," while this is true it only tells half the story. While most Americans support the Arizona law they equally support a pathway to citizenship. It is true that there is support for SB1070, lets look at the cross tabs: 31. A new law in Arizona would give police the power to ask people they've stopped to verify their residency status. (Supporters say this will help crack down on illegal immigration.) (Opponents say it could violate civil rights and lead to racial profiling.) On balance, do you support or oppose this law? Do you feel that way strongly or somewhat? -------- Support -------- -------- Oppose --------- No NET Strongly Somewhat NET Somewhat Strongly opinion 6/6/10 58 42 16 41 12 29 2 58% of Americans strongly support the Arizona law, however there is almost equal support for a pathway to citizenship. 30. Would you support or oppose a program giving ILLEGAL immigrants now living in the United States the right to live here LEGALLY if they pay a fine and meet other requirements? Support Oppose No opinion 6/6/10 57 40 3 4/24/09 61 35 3 12/19/07 49 46 5 11/1/07 51 44 4 6/1/07 52 44 4 57% of Americans support a pathway to citizenship provided the immigrants pay back taxes and meet other requirements. It is important that that political pundits and legislators recognize, that while SB1070 is popular,fixing our broken immigration system is equally popular. Not only does the polling data shows that Americans want something done on comprehensive immigration reform, but it shows consistent support for immigration reform going back three years. Also of note within this poll there is broad support for federal enforcement of immigration law vs. state only enforcement. The question in the poll reads: In general do you think states should be allowed to make and enforce their own immigration laws or should they be left to federal jurisdiction. 53% of the respondents said that the federal government should be responsible for making and enforcing immigration laws. It is significant, that the general public recognizes that the federal government should be responsible for passing and enforcing immigration laws. This statistic is another indicator that the public would rather have federal comprehensive legislation then allow states to create their own laws. When the term "most Americans" is used it usually refers to polls and they don't include children so one half of the population is not relevant for this purpose.

I certainly hope you're not including me as a bush supporter. I never supported him for one day. Ever.