Cleo's Mom

And remember that those democrats in congress didn't see the same intelligence that bush did. I mean, come on, bush's own people (Richard Clarke, O'Neill) said going into Iraq was a goal from day one. All they needed was to convince the american people. And then 9/11 happened.....

The fact that you can vote, that you can apply for any job or join the military, the fact that your workplace has safety rules, and your water, food and medications safe to take - have been brought to you by democrats (liberals). The fact that your money in your bank is insured is brought to you by democrats and liberals. The fact that your car has airbags and seatbelts to protect you are from liberals and democrats. The fact that the crib and car seat in which you placed your children were safe - came from liberals. The fact that you are required to protect your child with a car seat came from liberals. The fact that paint can no longer have lead, which harms children, is thanks to liberals. The fact that the lawnmower that you used to cut your grass had safety features came from liberals. The list can go on and on... but my point is that you do not take care of yourself totally without help and are dependent on the things the liberals and democrats have worked on to improve life for the middle class regardless of whether or not you admit it.

You shouldn't have to drive a truck to make $60,000 but we don't value those who care for others - like teachers, child care workers, nurses, police officers, social workers, etc.. We value corporate america, sports figures and the entertainment industry. Oh, and yes, those idiots on conservative tv and radio who are buffoons but have bigger buffoons who listen to them. :thumbup:

I was referring to your statement that teachers work half the number of days private employees work. And I asked you to show me the math.

Well, I'm a liberal and I'm as moral as you. And most liberals that I know are moral people, too. We care about people and the planet we have been given to care for. And the only republicans who know that they did wrong -ARE THE ONES WHO GOT CAUGHT. :tt2: :thumbup:

Well, the republicans have been in control for much of the last 50 years, why didn't they cut these programs? Sure it might have been unpopular but you keep yapping for it to get done, so why do you suppose it hasn't? After all, with all the power the republicans can do anything. Right? Isn't that what the teabagger candidates are pledging? Smaller government, fewer taxes, cutting programs, etc.. So if they believe it's possible, why hasn't it been done by the republicans when they had all the power? Do you really think it will just take DIFFERENT republicans to do it? LOL :thumbup:

Yes, all the bizzare, ridiculous, silly, and just plain wrong things she has said that you agree with.

Anything good that has happened for the middle class in this country has come about because of (liberal) democrats. I have asked for anyone to name one program that has helped the middle class that has come from the republicans.

You work or worked in a nursing home. Do you think you should have worked for half pay because you cared so much about the patients? And I'm still waiting for the math that shows private sector employees work twice as many days as teachers. I hope I don't have to wait as long as I did for you to name your source for your erroneous health care costs.

Do you not understand how our government works? How many times do I need to explain it to you? You just keep repeating these stupid posts: We pay federal taxes. We each have a congressman and 2 senators. They try to bring those federal taxes back to their district/state. Plus the federal taxes are used to pay for various government programs. Now, if you don't like those programs, then call your representatives. But quit call the paying of taxes "stealing" or being robin hood. This is how our federal government works under all presidents. It has nothing to do with liberals. So quit saying that. It just makes you sound more uninformed than you already do. Actually, bush gave tax cuts to millionaires who didn't ask for them and didn't need them and he did this after starting two wars that he couldn't pay for. How about not giving those tax breaks to the millionaires and instead tax them higher to pay for his wars? Hmmm. I would love to hear a neocon say that!!!

Were you laughing when you typed this because I was laughing when I read it. :thumbup: The republicans more moral? Have you not been paying attention? Does "rent a boy" ring a bell. The difference between democrats and republicans is that the democrats are the party for the people and republicans are the party of corporate america and the rich.

Why am I not surprised. Yeah, good head on her shoulders. :thumbup: . <LI class=bf_dom rel:bf_bucket="track">2. <LI class=bf_dom rel:bf_bucket="track">3. <LI class=bf_dom rel:bf_bucket="track">4. <LI class=bf_dom rel:bf_bucket="track">5. <LI class=bf_dom rel:bf_bucket="track">6. <LI class=bf_dom rel:bf_bucket="track">7. <LI class=bf_dom rel:bf_bucket="track">8. <LI class=bf_dom rel:bf_bucket="track">9. <LI class=bf_dom rel:bf_bucket="track">10.

Many teachers, especially elementary, spend a lot of their own money on classroom supplies that the school doesn't supply. So the teachers in your state want a raise and you are angry. Why don't you ever direct your anger at the CEO's and their big bonuses? Because you don't think you are paying for their bonuses. Think again. We all are. Anyone who has money in a bank is paying for it. There's no getting around it. But no, pattygreen, you say you're against CEO bonuses or corporate welfare but all your yapping is about the poor single mom or the teachers or some other group just trying to get by. Why aren't you screaming about the CEO of BP who "just wants his life back". Oh, that's right, you're too busy implicating the environmentalist in the oil spill. I just want everyone on this board to know that I am working very hard to keep the people who pattygreen would support from getting elected. That's what we all need to do.

Because that's not what the tea party movement is about. It's an anti-Obama movement disguised as something else. Period. They want to advance their extreme right wing agenda which is pro-corporation, pro-their religion, pro-gun, anti-union, anti-environment, anti-gays, anti-abortion. They say follow the money. Do you think the CEO of Massey mines (whose safety violations contributed to the deaths of all those miners) and who contributes to the tea party does so because he wants MORE corporate regulations? Just follow the money of the teabaggers and you'll see the same old, same old, big money & big business well represented.

You still don't get it do you? :Dancing_biggrin: Just these three areas that came under bush need CONTINUED funding today and everyday. The funding didn't stop when Pres. Obama got elected. Do you think that our deficit isn't rising because of funding the two wars? Do you think it's not rising to pay for medicare part D? Do you think it's not rising due to lost revenue because of the 2 tax cuts to the rich? And what kind of idiot president (bush!) enacts two tax cuts for the rich after starting two (unfunded) wars? Even the conservative economist didn't support this. Plus, due to the fact that the republicans drove this economy into the ditch and Pres. Obama had to rescue it - we now have more people unemployed and eligible for federal aid. This aid eligibility didn't start under Pres. Obama - but since more people are eligible because of the economy Obama inherited from bush, that also adds to the spending. Look at the amount the stimulus contributes to the total deficit. Then look at how much Pres. Obama's agenda contributes to the deficit. NOW - look at how much bush's policies contribute. What don't you get?

Let's be clear as to whom this quote came from: Yes, folks, none other than that wacko michelle bachman In other topics, Bachmann thoroughly rejected the idea of a social guarantee of health care, saying that the rights guaranteed in America's founding ideals affirm "your right to own property, not necessarily the right or a guarantee to a specific item, to a specific service, like health care, or a to a specific piece of land. Rather, the underlying principle and the ideal is that if we choose, when we choose, we can choose to strive for as little or as much as we want, and once we acquire that property, nobody can take it away from us. That's a radical idea, that what I provide belongs to me, not to the king, but it belongs to me. " This nut job has zero credibility. Beyond the gullible, stupid or just plain anti-Obama zealots, does anyone take this woman seriously? :Dancing_biggrin:

This guy gets it and I know he's not sorry he voted for Obama and neither am I: One man with a sign Lenny Kates, 69, is a retired social worker from Pittsfield, Massachusetts. Over the last couple of months, once a week, Kates goes to a busy traffic circle in the center of his hometown, and he stands there for hours, holding a sign that reads: "Be Grateful for President Obama". "The amount of disrespect being shown to Barack Obama is beyond belief. I had been increasingly upset with people attacking him, and found myself thinking that Americans aren’t grateful for the effort he’s been putting forth. The word ‘grateful’ made sense to me. It’s an empathic, non-toxic word, but at the same time it reflects my worries about the country and my concern about the stress and strain the president may be under." On April 15, Tax Day, Kates spent three hours standing near a small gathering of teabaggers. He recalls being anxious as to how he’d be received by the assembled protestors, one of whom displayed an ‘Obama as Hitler’ sign. "I got hardly any direct response," begins Kates. "People [from the Tea Party] looked at me and rolled their eyes. And two individuals came over and asked if I was being ironic," he says matter-of-factly. Since that day, Kates has continued his one-man support group every week. Despite the fact that a Tea Party served as his inspiration, Kates’ message is primarily aimed at liberals and centrists, who, he says, ought to be realistic about how much change Obama can deliver is just a year or two. "Obama walked into a situation where our economy was close to totally failin. It’s tough for him to do much more than work to save the economy, and also to restore democratic ways of thinking. Don’t get caught up in talking about what you wish Obama would do, talk about what he is doing and point out why, in the present political climate, it’s hard for him to be doing what one would wish he’d do." As for those considering voting for conservatives in the 2010 midterm elections, Kates says, "Don’t forget that the problems we’re facing—what happened to our economy and our standing in the world—were caused by Republicans, the people who were in charge for the prior eight years. It doesn’t make sense to blame the president and everybody in Washington, because the problems were caused beforehand. We can’t go back to the former ways of handling the economy," he emphasizes. Still, it’s the way the far-right treats Obama that most motivates Kates and he says that while he would be happy to have others join him, he’s willing to continue going it alone. Especially since he's worried that Obama will decide not to run for re-election. "I try to put myself in his place. And if people said, ‘We’re going to destroy you’—and people have said that—well, I wouldn’t want to put myself in his place." dailykos

We were "out of the hole" AND had a surplus under democrat Clinton. Let me think for a millisecond whose policies took that surplus and turned it into a deficit. Oh, I know, that would be republican bush. So, you see, when you don't give tax cuts to the rich and start two wars, it can be done. And like I told you before, most of the spending we are doing now is for the wars, tax cuts and programs that bush enacted. Which one of them do you want to eliminate?: 1) tax cuts for the rich (results in reduced revenue) 2) medicare part D (one trillion over 10 years - unfunded) 3) two wars (nearly a trillion) Keep in mind that stopping them now won't change the debt they have caused us so far, it would just stop the CONTINUED spending on them. You know, the spending you keep complaining about.

We are just against all the lies, misrepresentations, half-truths and most of all hypocrisy from the republicans and neocons. And as for becoming energy efficient. It will take an investment now to reap the benefits in the future. If you install solar panels, it costs you money up front, but will eventually save you money on your energy bills, not to mention help our planet. That's what our government would be doing helping people to invest in energy efficient things for their homes. It will pay off in the future.

What do you want to bet the assistance is income dependent and for energy efficient improvements? Now, if we want to become more energy efficient (which means use less of it) then we have to make an investment. One way to start it to help homeowners upgrade their home's energy efficiency. Nothing wrong with that. New energy windows, maybe solar panels, etc.. There has to be an incentive, either assistance or tax write offs to get people to do this. Because these things are costly, but in the end they help the nation become more energy efficient - and that takes an investment - and that takes money.

C'mon pattygreen, did ya really think we wouldn't check? Duh!! Retrofit, Energy License Not Required The House of Representatives passed H.R. 2454, the American Clean Energy and Security Act in June 2009. A chain e-mail that has been forwarded to us repeatedly in recent days says that the bill would require homeowners to retrofit their houses to meet new energy standards, and obtain a license from the Environmental Protection Agency before they could sell a home. Don’t believe it. The claims are false. In fact, we said last summer that claims that the bill requires such things were false in... Click to Read the Full Post factcheck.org Are you really that gullible or just another neocon who likes to spread lies and cause trouble?

Thanks, BJean. You get an A+. Very interesting reading. I don't live in the town where I was born. I am in the next county over so I really don't run into people from my childhood. I think my grade school teachers would all be dead by now anyway. I live in the Pgh. area but not in its county and that makes a world of difference politically. My county is very redneck and despite a 2-1 democratic registration advantage votes republican. Being the president of the democratic club is a challenge, as well as a county committewoman. I have to travel into the Pgh. area and county to see another Obama bumper sticker. That is where my daughter and her husband (and new baby -yeah) live. And I always kid her about that. We go shopping and I will see cars with Obama bumper stickers. If I see one where I live I assume they are lost or visiting. LOL. But the whole state of PA has been summed up this way: Pgh. in the west, Philly in the east and Arkansas in the middle. A conservative state to be sure, but it did go blue in 2008. Pittsburgh is a city with a small town mentality. Not very progressive. A liberal woman who had a talk radio show here for a while, who came from Milwaukee, said she had cultural shock when she came here - where were all the women in power positions she wanted to know, etc.. My husband and I went on a vacation to Colorado in 2000. Fort Collins. I loved it. I committed a major breach of Pgh. vacationing rules that says you must go to the beach each summer. I hate the beach. I loved their weather, blue skies, hot but not humid, like it is in Pgh. And you do NOT come to Pgh. for the weather. Grey, rainy, grey, snowy, grey everything. And that includes a huge aging population - one of the nation's largest. Anyway, thanks for the interesting read. Why do you move so often? Jobs?

BJean: I like what the president said about corporate America. Let's just wait and see if it causes any improvement. I have my doubts but I hope and pray that I am wrong. I like what he said about the republicans turning a surplus into a deficit and how they only have two solutions to every problems: (1) more tax cuts for the rich (2) fewer regulations for corporations