AMNESTY: OBAMA vs BOEHNER; OBAMA WINS AGAIN; PUTS GOP IN A CHOKEHOLD FOR 2016 (OBAMA IS A GENIUS)

Even if I don't agree with all of Pres OBAMA'S decisions, the man still remains a Political Genius!

The GOP is Afraid to IMPEACH Pres OBAMA regardless of what he does because ISIS and AL QAEDA might attack the United States and Murder thousands of U.S. Troops.

Thus the GOP is darned if they Do and darned if they Don't!

OBAMA Wins Again!

Attention GOP: If you can't beat OBAMA, why not join him??

I'm just saying.





Article Sources: CNN; Daily Mail; NY Times; Wall Street Journal

****ARTICLE: "Republicans' Furious At Emperor Obama: John Boehner Warns President The House Will Stop Him; Accuses Him Of Damaging The Presidency"


**House Speaker goes on the offensive after President announced Executive Order allowing estimated five million Illegal Immigrants to stay on American Soil.

**Obama has 'turned a deaf ear to the people he was elected to serve', claims Republican House leader.

**Two Republican attorneys general promise to sue in first sign that executive order faces a guaranteed challenge in court.

House Speaker John Boehner promised on Friday that Congress would do something to stop President Barack Obama from forcing through his changes to the immigration system, though his caucus hasn't decided exactly what that will be yet.

'We will not stand idle as the President undermines the rule of law in our country,' Boehner said on Friday during a press conference, in which he accused Obama of 'damaging the presidency' and 'turning a deaf ear to the people he was elected to serve.'

'The President has taken actions that he himself has said are those of a king or an emperor, not an American president,' the GOP leader argued.

At the same time two Republican attorneys general pledged to sue the President for violating the Constitution and 'bestowing a legacy of lawlessness' on the country.

Republicans politicians are seething this week over the president's long-planned announcement that his administration will grants work permits to approximately 5 million migrants residing in the country illegally.

The president on Thursday night finally confirmed what news reports had been saying for days: parents of American citizen children and illegal immigrants brought to the U.S. before the age of 16 would be able to remain in the U.S. indefinitely as long as they meet certain conditions.

First, they must have arrived in America before January 1, 2010. They must also pay their back taxes and a fine and undergo national security and background checks.

Then, Obama told them, 'you’ll be able to apply to stay in this country temporarily, without fear of deportation.'

"You can come out of the shadows and get right with the law", he noted.

Although the president plans to sign an executive order today during a Las Vegas event making the directive official, and immigration officials will be 'immediately' instructed to stop removing qualifying migrants from the country, the mandate will not take effect until next year.

Immigrants applying for a reprieve through the president's already established Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals (DACA) program will be able to file formal paperwork with the government in 90 days.

Those with citizen children must wait six months to obtain an application for delayed deportation.

Republicans hope to foil the Obama administrations plans before that provision of the order is allowed to take effect, however. They have been strategizing ways to block executive action on immigration for weeks, with conservatives aggressively pushing their colleagues to back a plan to defund the Department of Homeland Security if Obama doesn't rethink executive action.

In that situation, core agencies within DHS would continue to function, including Customs and Border Patrol and Immigration Customs and Enforcement, as their activities are considered 'essential' to maintaining order.

Non-essential operations such as the allotment of green cards and work permits would cease until the president agreed to sign legislation counteracting his immigration order.

Republicans in the House and Senate who prefer that approach have been unable to fully convince their colleagues to sign on, though.

Asked today if his caucus come to a consensus on how to best impede Obama, Boehner indicated that they had not.

'But I will say to you, the House will in fact act,' he told reporters.

Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell said yesterday on the Senate floor that the upper chamber had not agreed on a game plan, yet, either.

'We are considering a variety of options,' he said, making it clear that he'd like his members to hold off an a major spending fight during the lame-duck session.

GOP governors and other state leaders were more sure of their plan action by the time Obama had given his national address on Thursday night.

At an annual conference this week in Boca Raton, Florida, the chief executives of both Wisconsin and Texas previewed lawsuits they may launch against Obama over immigration.

'I would go to the courts,' Wisconsin's Scott Walker said Wednesday during a panel at the annual Republican Governors Association gathering. 'This is illegal.

'I think you would be hard-pressed to find anybody -- other than a partisan Democrat -- who wouldn't say this is illegal,' Walked claimed, according to CNN.

Rick Perry, whose time as Texas governor is coming to an end, said his state may also sue Obama.

'I think that’s probably a very real possibility,' Perry, said, arguing that Obama was 'sticking his finger into the eye of the American people.'

'The cost to the people of the state of Texas is an extraordinary amount of money that this President is exacerbating with his announcement that he's going to allow for this executive order,' he said.

It costs Texas roughly $12 million a month to protect the border, he explained.

After Obama's speech on Thursday incoming Texas Governor and current Attorney General Greg Abbott followed up on Perry's threat of legal action with a guarantee that his state would haul Obama to court.

'President Obama has circumvented Congress and deliberately bypassed the will of the American people, eroding the very foundation of our nation’s Constitution and bestowing a legacy of lawlessness,' Abbott said in a statement.

'Texans have witnessed firsthand the costs and consequences caused by President Obama’s dictatorial immigration policy and now we must work together toward a solution in fixing our broken immigration system.

'Following tonight’s pronouncement, I am prepared to immediately challenge President Obama in court, securing our state’s sovereignty and guaranteeing the rule of law as it is intended under the Constitution.'

Oklahoma AG Scott Pruitt also committed to a court battle on Thursday night, even before Obama's remarks.

'It is anticipated tonight’s speech will again prove our President sees himself as above the law,' he said. 'Regardless of what the President thinks the law ought to be, our constitution dictates that Congress makes the law, it is the Presidents duty to faithfully execute those laws.

'If the President takes an executive action that violates his constitutional duty to faithfully execute the immigration laws passed by Congress, we will take action to hold him accountable.'

In his speech on Thursday evening Obama acknowledged that the group of people he was now rewarding with work permits had in fact broken the law and needed to pay their debt to society.

Still, he argued it would be better for immigration officials to focus their resources on deporting criminals than it would for them to unnecessarily tear families apart.

'Felons, not families. Criminals, not children. Gang members, not a mother who’s working hard to provide for her kids. We’ll prioritize, just like law enforcement does every day,' he said.

Boehner said on Friday that by pardoning millions of law breakers, the president was sending the wrong message to other non-citizens,

'The action by the president yesterday will only encourage more people to come here illegally, and putting their lives at risk,' Boehner said. 'We saw the humanitarian crisis at our border last summer, how horrific it was. Well, next summer it could be worse.

'And this action also punishes those who have obeyed the law and waited their turn,' he added.

The Ohio Republican said he agreed with the president that America's immigration system is broken. 'But fixing it starts with a commitment to working through the democratic process and enforcing the laws that the president is sworn faithfully to execute,' he said.

Obama is 'making it impossible to build the trust necessary to work together,' he contended.

'You can’t ask the elected representatives of the people to trust you to enforce the law if you’re constantly demonstrating that you can’t be trusted to enforce the law.

Defending himself on Thursday, Obama said his actions were 'not only lawful, they're the kinds of actions taken by every single Republican President and every single Democratic President for the past half century.'

'And to those members of Congress who question my authority to make our immigration system work better, or question the wisdom of me acting where Congress has failed, I have one answer: Pass a bill.'

If president thinks House Republicans were slow to enact the kinds of reforms he wanted to see before, there's no chance they'll take them up now, Boehner said Friday, reminding reporters of his numerous warnings to Obama that unilateral executive action would not be welcomed by the GOP.

'With this action, the president has chosen to deliberately sabotage any chance of enacting bipartisan reforms that he claims to seek. And, as I told the president yesterday, he’s damaging the presidency itself,' Boehner said.

Boehner's comments on Friday while direct were substantially more toned down than those of some of his Republican colleagues in the House who blasted Obama in a flood of statements before and after his Thursday night after speech.

One of the most colorful digs came from Texas Rep. Louie Gohmert, who denounced the president for issuing an 'oral royal decree that will be followed by a written regal decree, as any good monarch would do.'

'This president is single-handedly creating a constitutional crisis and hurting the citizens he took an oath to protect and defend.

'President Obama’s regal proclamation is literally gambling away jobs for hard-working Americans, so naturally he would go to Las Vegas, perhaps Caesar’s Palace,' he said, referencing a popular Vegas casino.

On Wednesday retiring Minnesota Rep. Michele Bachmann slammed Obama for creating 'illiterate' Democratic voters with his executive action.

'The social cost will be profound on the U.S. taxpayer – millions of unskilled, illiterate, foreign nationals coming into the United States who can’t speak the English language,' Bachmann told reporters gathered in the Capitol, the Washington Post reported.

'Even though the president says they won’t be able to vote, we all know that many, in all likelihood, will vote,' she said.

Former GOP presidential nominee and sitting Arizona Sen. John McCain encouraged his fellow Republican lawmakers on Thursday to steer clear of charged language like Bachmann's, cautioning them that it will turn Hispanic voters off to the GOP's message.

'It only takes a couple' of insensitive comments, he said, for voters to develop a negative perception of Republicans.

'That’s the trouble with having some of these new young punks around here,' he told the Post. 'They ought to listen to us old geezers.'

Paul Ryan Prepares For 2013 Budget Fight: Medicare vs Voucher System ("Path To Prosperity")

GOP budget will tackle economic challenges

The budget proposal introduced by House Republicans on Tuesday is much more than a series of numbers on a spreadsheet -- it's a vision for reforming the key pillars of the American social contract in the 21st century.

In that regard, it's very different from the vision put forward by President Obama in his budget plan from a month ago, which emphasized preserving the status quo with another round of tax hikes.

The central economic problem of coming years is how to update the nation's largest entitlement programs so that they are sustainable and available to future generations of Americans.

The Congressional Budget Office projects that spending on Social Security, Medicare and Medicaid (plus the new 2010 health care law) will increase from about 10% of the nation's total economic output this year, as measured by gross domestic product (GDP), to nearly 16% in 2035. Historically, the government has collected about 18% of GDP in revenue. Thus, if the entitlement programs remain on autopilot, there will either be nothing left in the budget beyond transfer payments, or government taxes will have to soar.

In Medicare, the GOP budget preserves today's arrangements for those in or near retirement. But for future entrants into the program, Medicare would change into a "premium support" model.

The government would provide a fixed level of premium assistance to the program's enrollees, and they would use that assistance to pick from among competing insurance options, including the traditional fee-for-service federal program.

Medicare's drug benefit is already run as a premium support program, and spending on the program over its first decade is now projected to be more than 40% below what was expected at enactment in 2003. A recent analysis produced for the American Enterprise Institute, a conservative think tank, shows that a competitive bidding approach in the full Medicare program would reduce costs by more than 5% in year one alone.

That's the way to bring costs down without undermining the quality of care provided to Medicare patients.

Obama's vision for Medicare is very different. He wants an unaccountable board of bureaucrats to cut fees to those caring for Medicare patients. But cutting fees isn't real cost control. Low reimbursement rates will just force doctors and hospitals to stop taking care of Medicare patients and thereby impair their access to care.

For Medicaid, the GOP plan would shift power and financial control to the states so that they can reform their programs in ways that best suit the needs of their residents.

In addition to mending entitlement programs, the GOP plan calls for top-to-bottom reform of the federal bureaucracy, with an emphasis on cutting programs of low or marginal value so that more money can be invested in what truly matters.

Most importantly, the plan does not adopt the deep reductions in defense spending that would cripple the military just as threats around the world are expanding and intensifying. Over the next decade, the GOP budget would cut federal spending by $5.3 trillion, compared with Obama's proposal.

The differences between the GOP and the president's plans are stark on the tax side, too. The president has proposed to increase taxes to 20% of GDP in 2022. The GOP plan would hold the line on tax hikes and keep revenue at roughly its historical norm of just above 18% of GDP.

Further, it calls for fundamental reform of both individual and corporate taxes, including the consolidation of today's complex six-rate structure for individuals into just two rates -- 10% and 25%. This is the kind of tax reform that some tax experts believe would promote job creation in the American economy.

The American people now have before them two clear and very different approaches for how to address the nation's fundamental economic challenges.

One vision would preserve the status quo, with growing entitlement commitments, steady hikes in tax rates and more centralized control of the economy from the government.

The other vision would bolster a vibrant private sector with sensible taxes; reform of entitlements and other programs that emphasize limited but effective government; protection of the most vulnerable among us; and the power of free markets to promote prosperity. These competing plans give voters a real choice when they go the polls in November. And whatever they decide, the consequences will be lasting.



View Larger Map


Sources: Agenda Project, CNN, Youtube, Google Maps

Paul Ryan Unveils Risky 2013 GOP Budget; Medicare Targeted, Major Revisions To U.S. Tax Code.

Congressman Paul Ryan's Risky 2013 Budget Blueprint Targets Medicare, Medicaid, Welfare Reform, Social Security, the U.S. Tax Code & Defunds Pres. Obama's Health Care Law i.e., Repeals it.





House G.O.P. Lays Down Marker With New Budget Plan

House Republicans, believing that worries over the deficit will trump affection for Medicare and other popular programs, unveiled a federal budget blueprint Tuesday morning that would cut deeply into domestic spending, transform the tax code and balance the budget by 2040.

Because tax revenues would remain unchanged, the deficit under the plan would be almost as deep as the red ink under President Obama’s feet in the fiscal year that begins in October. But by mid-decade it would drop precipitously, and over decades, significant changes to Medicaid and Medicare, the federal health care plans for the poor and the elderly, would help bring the budget into balance.

“We are here to offer Americans the chance to choose which future they want,” Representative Paul D. Ryan of Wisconsin, the chairman of the House Budget Committee, said, positing a choice between “a path to renew prosperity” and “the president’s path of debt and decline.”

Ultimately, the House budget is a political document, since the Senate has no intention of passing a budget of its own.

The plan amounts to a political bet, with high stakes wagered by both parties.

“This isn’t just matter of the House battling with the Senate or arm-wrestling with the president,” said J. D. Foster, a fiscal policy expert at the conservative Heritage Foundation. “For better or for worse, what they produce is going to be the standard for conservatives and Republicans going into this election season.”

Republicans believe voters will reward them for what one what member of the House Budget Committee, Jason Chaffetz of Utah, called a “bold and realistic” effort to transform and shrink government. Democrats are equally certain that because the plan fundamentally changes Medicare without raising taxes on the rich, they can pummel vulnerable Republicans.

On Monday, the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee began a “Millionaires over Medicare” campaign against 41 House Republicans who Democratic officials believe are vulnerable to the line of attack. “Under the leadership of Budget Committee Chairman Paul Ryan and Speaker John Boehner, House Republicans are again proposing a budget that ends the Medicare guarantee while protecting millionaires,” a memo from the group said. “It’s not only bad politics, it’s very bad policy.”

The budget plan embraces a Medicare plan similar to the one put forward by Mr. Ryan and Senator Ron Wyden, Democrat of Oregon, which would change the health plan from a guaranteed, fee-for-service government insurance program to a menu of private insurance plans subsidized by the government. Older Americans would be able to buy into the existing fee-for-service program, although annual expenditures would be capped.

The other flashpoint will be total spending on programs under Congress’s annual discretion. The budget will cap that spending at $1.028 trillion, the same level set by last year’s budget but $19 billion below the cap set in July after protracted negotiations to raise the nation’s statutory borrowing limit.

Democrats argue that the level in the new budget amounts to a broken promise that will lead to more strife as the House and Senate forge 12 spending bills this summer that will add up to two different totals. The House will aim for the $1.028 trillion cap in the new House budget while the Senate will aim for $1.047 trillion, the summer Budget Control Act cap.

“Ignoring the B.C.A. represents a breach of faith that will make it more difficult to negotiate future agreements,” two senior Democratic senators said Monday in a letter to Mr. Boehner and Representative Eric Cantor of Virginia, the House majority leader.

“Rather than trying to tear down the B.C.A., we should be holding it up as an example of what can be accomplished if we are willing to set aside our differences and work hard to find bipartisan solutions to our nation’s challenges,” said the letter from Kent Conrad of North Dakota, chairman of the Senate Budget Committee, and Daniel K. Inouye of Hawaii, chairman of the Senate Appropriations Committee.

House Republicans argue that additional cuts to both discretionary and entitlement spending are needed now to head off an automatic $110 billion in across-the-board cuts to defense and domestic programs in 2013. Even with the lower total, the House would still be above the $950 billion that domestic programs would reach if the across-the-board cuts take effect.

Under the House plan, the current $1.18 trillion deficit would fall to $797 billion in the coming fiscal year, compared with $977 billion under Mr. Obama’s plan. By 2016, the deficit would fall to $241 billion by Republican estimates. The Congressional Budget Office estimated last week that Mr. Obama’s budget would still have a $529 billion deficit in 2016.

The Ryan plan would accumulate $3.1 trillion in additional debt through 2022. The president’s would add $6.4 trillion, more than twice that total. The Republican budget cuts spending by $5 trillion more than the president’s plan, mandates the repeal of Mr. Obama’s health care law and assumes the elimination of the government-backed mortgage giants Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac.

The tax code would be simplified to just two tax rates, 10 percent and 25 percent, with the closure of tax credits and deductions. The 35 percent corporate income tax would be lowered to 25 percent and the existing, worldwide system of taxing corporate profits would be changed to a territorial system in which only domestic profits were subject to United States corporate taxation. But the budget assumes revenues would stay consistent with revenues under the current individual and corporate tax codes.

Medicare would be turned into something like Mr. Obama’s health care plan for the uninsured, a subsidized set of private insurance plans, while Medicaid would be converted to fixed block grants to the states.

Bipartisan talks continue over a so-called grand bargain on deficit reduction that would combine tax increases, spending cuts and changes to entitlement programs such as Medicare and Social Security. But hopes are dimming as both parties frame the election around their vision of deficit reduction.

“The idea of a grand bargain in 2012 is very hard to find credible,” Mr. Foster said. “To a large extent this election is about deciding what the grand bargain is supposed to look like.”


View Larger Map


Sources: CBS News, Fox News, NY Times, Google Maps

Paul Ryan Introduces Tax Code Reform Proposal: Eliminating The AMT (Alternative Minimum Tax)

House GOP budget chief aims at tax code


In a year when political stalemate is expected to block any real progress on fiscal reforms, House Republicans will take a swing at tax reform in their fiscal year 2013 budget proposal due out on Tuesday morning.

House Budget Chairman Paul Ryan, the lead writer on the budget, and his caucus will call for a reduction in individual tax rates and brackets.

Instead of today's six brackets, with rates from 10% to 35%, they are calling for just two -- 10% and 25%. It's not clear how much income would fall under each bracket. (Washington's $5 trillion interest bill)

The Republican proposal would also eliminate the Alternative Minimum Tax altogether.
Although originally intended to ensure that the very wealthy pay taxes, the AMT was never structured to keep pace with inflation.

So on paper the AMT is scheduled to bring in trillions of dollars in revenue over the coming years because it would capture more and more taxpayers who are not wealthy.

But every year Congress passes costly "patches" to protect the middle class from having to pay the AMT, and adds the cost of those patches to the deficit.

Quiz: What the rich really pay in taxes

It was not immediately clear whether the House GOP plans to replace that forecasted revenue, but it seems unlikely since it is proposing to keep revenues as a share of the economy on par with the 40-year average of 18.1% of the economy's GDP.

Since the financial crisis in 2008, revenues as a share of GDP have hit 60-year lows, coming in at around 15%. And going forward, independent budget experts have said the country may need to bring in more revenue than the historical average to meet entitlement benefit promises and adequately fund programs without slashing too deeply in any one area of the budget.

On the corporate tax side, the House GOP would lower the top tax rate to 25% from 35% and switch the United States to territorial system of taxation, meaning that U.S. multinational companies would only owe tax on foreign-made profits to the government of the country in which the profits were made.

Ryan's new manifesto on health care

Currently, a U.S. company owes U.S. taxes on foreign profits once the money is brought home, and they can subtract from their Washington tax bill taxes they have already paid to the country where the profits were made. Some estimate that U.S. companies may be parking as much as $1 trillion abroad.

The House GOP proposal on corporate taxes differs from President Obama's. He would lower the corporate tax rate to 28% and impose a minimum tax on foreign-made profits the year they were made to discourage companies from parking money abroad.

And as they have at every turn, House Republicans will reject outright most of Obama's tax proposals for individuals, particularly those on the wealthy, including his proposed Buffett Rule to ensure millionaires pay at least 30% of their income in federal tax.

The emphasis on tax reform in advance of the formal release of the House Republican budget may indicate the GOP's desire to turn the conversation away from their anticipated and polarizing proposals to reform Medicare and to cap discretionary spending at levels lower than the top cap agreed to by both parties last summer.
Democrats have expressed opposition to both prospects.

House Republicans are expected to propose a spending level that is about $20 billion less than that specified by the Budget Control Act, the deal that ended the bitter fight over the debt ceiling in August. If that's the case, that could set off a battle with the Democratic-controlled Senate on federal spending just weeks before the November election.

Meanwhile, the most conservative factions in the House have been pushing for the GOP to propose spending levels lower than those likely to be proposed on Tuesday.


Sources: CNN, Fox News, Youtube

Democrats In Congress Being Outspent By GOP Candidates (Super PACS)

Post-Citizens United Money May Swamp Congressional Candidates

Political spending by deep-pocketed donors and cash-rich corporations threatens to sow chaos in this year's congressional races, political consultants warn.

A billionaire or corporation writing a check for $1 million -- or even $10 million -- isn't enough to swing a presidential election. But when it comes to congressional campaigns, it could be plenty.

“You can work for months and years to develop a fundraising advantage over your opponent of $2 million, $5 million or $10 million. And all that can be wiped out in seconds by a few people giving to a super PAC," said Democratic pollster Mark Mellman.

While Republican and Democratic candidates are, in theory, equally susceptible to that kind of unlimited outside money, it’s the Democrats who sound much more alarmed.

"No one is safe, and everyone's got to protect themselves," said Democratic strategist Hank Sheinkopf. "Super PACs can strike at any time they want."

"There's sort of no way to fend it off because it's so much," said progressive strategist Mike Lux. "It's just so much money that even when you know it's coming, it's hard to deal with."

Lux said his biggest worry is the last-minute ad blitz -- a staple of elections dating back to the '90s. Now with the rise in outside money, election-eve ads can hit "at an even more massive level,” he said. The result: candidates who "can't compete with an overwhelming mass of money at the end that swamps the close races."

The Supreme Court's 2010 Citizens United decision, along with a subsequent lower court ruling, struck down post-Watergate caps on political contributions by corporations and individuals. As a result, super PACs fueled mostly by contributions of $500,000 or more have already pumped $78 million into the Republican presidential primary, outspending everyone else and flooding the airwaves with negative ads.

Successful congressional candidates in 2008 spent an average of $1.4 million to win a House seat and $7.4 million to get elected to the Senate, according to the Campaign Finance Institute. Potential spending from super PACs -- and their secretive 501(c)(4) cousins -- dwarfs those amounts.

One super PAC, whose wealthy donors are targeting incumbents from both parties, has already spent nearly $1 million in just eight congressional primaries. But that's widely considered to be just a minor foreshadowing of what is to come in congressional races in the general election.

And while most outside money will likely be targeted for maximum ideological payoff, in some cases it could also be personal.

"If somebody is pissed off at a particular member for a piece of legislation -- even a line of questioning at a committee hearing -- I absolutely see that kind of revenge giving," Lux said.

Sheinkopf said he imagines there will be districts where people with money "hate the incumbent or the challenger" and can now pull out their checkbook and underwrite a deluge of negative ads. The result, Sheinkopf argued, is that "personal pique will substitute for democratic reasoning." Even candidates who are feeling confident are likely to hoard money they might otherwise have sent to their party committees or to members of their party in closer races, Sheinkopf predicted.

"It will mean the continued breakdown of both parties, because it's now every man and woman for themselves," Sheinkopf said.

With all that money sloshing around outside the official campaigns, said Gary Kalman, federal legislative office director for the U.S. PIRG consumer group, "there's going to be certain people that are going to be little bitty players in their own elections."

Meanwhile, competition for voter eyeballs grows more ferocious. "What's different is you used to be an only child or in a well-behaved family. Now you're in a family of eight, and if you don't eat your food quickly, it's going to disappear," said Democratic media consultant Will Robinson.

Federal Election Commission rules still require that broadcast stations give candidates for federal office "reasonable access" to the airwaves at the lowest cost available. So super PACs can't actually push candidates who have already bought ads out of the way.

"But what they can do is come in and buy every available piece of air around them," Robinson said. Some media markets will sell out, as Florida, Indiana, Ohio, Pennsylvania and Virginia mostly did in the 2008 general election. "Things are very Darwinian right now," Robinson said.

Robinson predicted that advertising scarcity will also extend to prime online ad space. In key swing states, "online is beginning to disappear already," he said.

Another feature of the post-Citizens United world is that while super PACs have to disclose their donors -- not in real time, but eventually -- donors who don't want anyone to know they're behind a given ad campaign are allowed to launder unlimited political contributions through tax-exempt groups, known as 501(c)(4) and 501(c)(6) organizations for the Internal Revenue Code regulations that cover them.

Those ad campaigns make it impossible for the public to know for sure where the money is coming from -- but, Lux contended, not necessarily that hard to guess. "It'll be coming from the banks, number one, because everybody hates them so badly," he said. "Certainly oil companies will want to hide their dollars. Some of the big telecom companies."

Not everyone is unhappy with the new order, of course. "I'm more optimistic about the current system than I was prior to Citizens United," said Republican strategist Keith Appell. "Both sides can raise plenty of money," he added. "My feeling is as long as the playing field is level, then that’s the best of all worlds. In the end, it nets out fine."

Democratic political strategist James Carville said that the ability to spend unlimited sums endows big donors with so much power that they don't even have to use it.

"You can threaten," he said. "The real impact of this is, let's say you want something -- there's a bill that you really care about -- you go to someone kind of on the fence, and usually you would say, 'I'll do a fundraiser for you.' Now you say, 'If you don't vote for this, I'm going to dump a million dollars on you.'" Or, he continued, "'If you don't vote to give me a pollution exemption, I'm going to croak you.'"

"The potential for mischief here is pretty good," Carville said.

Las Vegas casino owner Sheldon Adelson and his family have kept Republican presidential candidate Newt Gingrich alive in the primaries, with at least $10 million in contributions to the pro-Gingrich super PAC.

But Adelson's ability to spend unlimited sums will also make him hugely influential the next time he wants something from Congress, noted Carville. "He could say, 'Anybody votes against this? I'm worth $23 billion.'"

Indeed, all the moguls need is few examples of "croaking" people who crossed them, Carville said, "and you establish the principle."


Sources: Brookings Institution, Hoover Institution, Huffington Post, Youtube

Tea Party Led House Reject Reid's Bill! Childish Deficit Reduction Gimmicks!

Angry House Kills Reid Plan

Okay, now we’re even. Nah nah nah.

That may sound like a schoolyard taunt, but it also captures what is going down in Washington as the clock ticks inexorably toward a self-imposed crisis—a government default in three days.

Rather than muting the partisanship and hammering out a compromise so the wealthiest country on earth can keep paying its bills, the two sides seem farther apart than a week ago. It’s getting harder to envision an agreement by the midnight Tuesday deadline, but like an unsupervised schoolyard game, the players can always change the rules and stop the clock for a couple of days if a deal is at hand.

The House got its latest licks in on Saturday, voting down a debt measure sponsored by Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, 246 to 173, in a nose-thumbing exercise by John Boehner’s Republican troops. The debate was marked by boos and catcalls. And yet there was no reason for the House to vote because Reid hasn’t even been able to get his bill through the Senate, where it remains stalled by a filibuster threat.

Then again, this may have been payback for the Senate’s move in voting down Boehner’s budget bill Friday night shortly after the House speaker had muscled it through his chamber.

“We need Republicans to work with us,” Reid said as the House vote was winding down. “But I haven’t heard anything from the Republican leaders…We’ve done a lot that they wanted.”

Each legislative body has now demonstrated that it can blow up the other’s preferred alternative. What neither has shown is the ability to craft a bill that could actually gain enough support from both parties to break the gridlock.

Ladies and gentlemen, your democracy in action.

The result is that soldiers in Afghanistan told Joints Chiefs chairman Adm. Mike Mullen on Saturday that they’re worried about getting paid. The stock markets, after six straight losing sessions, are getting rattled. China’s state-run news agency is lecturing the U.S. for “irresponsible” behavior.



The working assumption until this weekend has been that this was typical Beltway gamesmanship and that the two sides would agree to a last-minute deal because the alternative was unthinkable. Now that’s far from certain. The sheer mechanics of getting complex legislation through both chambers, a House-Senate conference committee and to the president’s desk mean that time is running exceedingly short.

Reid had envisioned his measure as a last-train-leaving-the-station compromise—and to be sure, it goes a considerable distance toward meeting Republican demands. The bill would reduce the deficit by $2.4 trillion—or slightly less, depending on budgetary assumptions—without raising taxes. Three months ago, that would have been seen as a total capitulation to the GOP. Even such conservative stalwarts as the Wall Street Journal editorial page are urging the Republicans to declare victory and make a deal. So what exactly are they fighting over?

Reid’s budget-cutting sword would fall twice, slicing $1.2 trillion in spending each time. But rather than relying on an unpleasant “trigger” to push Congress to raise the debt limit a second time, Reid borrows a technique from his Republican counterpart, Mitch McConnell. The Nevada Democrat would largely give President Obama unilateral power to boost the debt ceiling. Congress could block the move only by passing a resolution of disapproval. The Boehner bill, by contrast, would force a second vote on the debt limit during the 2012 campaign.

If the Senate operated by majority rule, the Reid measure would already have passed. But the Democrats need to get 60 votes to avoid having the bill talked to death, and McConnell has sent Reid a letter with 43 of the chamber’s 47 Republicans vowing to vote no. (The exceptions are Scott Brown, Lisa Murkowski, Susan Collins, and Olympia Snowe.)

Everyone knows Washington is a laughingstock right now. Many lawmakers, including the leaders of both parties, want desperately to resolve the crisis before a default rocks the fragile economy. But the two sides are dug into their respective trenches, with Boehner squeezed by his hell-no Tea Party faction and Reid limited by the Senate’s sclerotic rules. Obama, who according to the polls has public opinion on his side, has seemingly been unable to move any votes, asking the public instead to email and tweet its displeasure.

In the end, some ugly compromise will be reached, though it may come after significant damage has been done to the economy. But that will pale compared to the damaged reputations of members of Congress who, even at this late hour, seem more interested in scoring political points than in legislating.


View Larger Map

Sources: CNN, Daily Beast, Youtube, Google Maps

GOP Plans Cap & Cut Vote; Stalls Infrastructure Jobs Bank Vote

Folks Isn't It Amazing How House GOP Leaders Are Focusing ALL Of Their Energy & Wasting Taxpayers' Money By Passing Stupid Bills Such As: Cut, Cap & Balance, Light Bulb Act Repeal, Defunding The EPA, etc., While Completely Ignoring Our Nation's High Unemployment Rate?

Excuse Me But Didn't Boehner, Cantor & Tea Party Candidates Run On JOBS! JOBS! JOBS! Back In November 2010??

However Instead Of Passing Useful Legislation To Help The American Electorate Recover Financially, Ex: Pres. Obama's Infrastructure Jobs Bank Bill Of Which Is Currently Sitting In Congress, Boehner & His Sidekick Cantor Are Filibustering It For The Sole Purpose Of Slowing Down Economic Growth On Pres. Obama's Watch.

Passage Of The Infrastructure Jobs Bank Bill Would Immediately Put More Than 2 Million Construction Workers Back On The Job.

What A Shame GOP Leaders Seem To Care More About Protecting Billionaires & Millionaires Than They Do Mainstreet!

How MEAN & SELFISH Can GOP Leaders Be??

Don't They Care Anything At All About The American Electorate??

So Boehner, Cantor & Those Radical, Extremely Selfish Tea Party Congress Members Were Sent To Capitol Hill To Slow Down The American Economy Just To Get Rid Of Pres. Obama Versus Passing Legislation To Help Create JOBS???

BULL!!!

I Say Its Time To Send Boehner, Cantor & Those Radical, Extremely Selfish Tea Party Congress Members Home For Good!!

They Need To Be Replaced With Democrats & Independent Congress Members Who Actually CARE About The Well Being Of Their Constituents!!

VOTE OBAMA & REHIRE PELOSI IN 2012!!!!








House Republicans Plan Vote on Deficit

With budget negotiations with the White House stalled, Speaker John A. Boehner of Ohio said Friday that the House would vote next week on a three-part plan to cut the deficit, cap federal spending as a share of the economy and amend the Constitution to require a balanced budget.

The plan, which has a companion in the Senate, would represent the House position in the final stages of the debate as the federal government nears the limit of its borrowing power. While it would not appear to have a chance of passing the Democrat-controlled Senate, and President Obama is opposed, it could provide a legislative avenue to increasing the debt limit as it makes it way through Congress.

The House Republican leader, Representative Eric Cantor of Virginia, said the House would move on its own because the president’s deficit-reduction proposals fell far short of what was needed.

In the budget blueprint passed by the House this year, Mr. Cantor said, “We sought $6.2 trillion in cuts over 10 years.’’ By contrast, he said, in debt negotiations at the White House this week, “the president and Democrats have offered perhaps $1.5 trillion of savings.’’

Mr. Cantor pushed back against Democratic complaints that the Republicans had not offered any concessions, but he said the Republicans would not permit federal spending to continue on its current trajectory.

“We are not going to allow this kind of spending to continue,’’ Mr. Cantor said. “We don’t have the money.’’

Mr. Boehner left the door open to the compromise plan floated by the Senate Republican leader, Mitch McConnell of Kentucky, who has described his proposal as a last-ditch option. It would call for Congress to vote on whether or not to disapprove a debt limit increase, an approach that could avoid a government default by allowing Republicans to register their disapproval of the increase but still allowing it to pass.

“We are far from the time for a last-ditch effort,’’ Mr. Boehner said, signaling that Congress still had many days and perhaps weeks of work to do on the debt.






View Larger Map

Sources: CNN, Fox News, NY Times, White House, Youtube, Google Maps

Obama Hopes For Grand Debt Ceiling Deal; House GOP Balks

During Today's Press Conference Pres. Obama Made It Crystal Clear To House GOP Leaders If They Allow Our Country's Debt Ceiling To Default For The FIRST Time In History, He Vowed To Remind Voters Which Party Is Responsible.

He's Also Reminding Voters Which Party Is Filibustering Several Jobs Programs Bills Currently Sitting In The House.

Ex: Pres. Obama's Infrastructure Jobs Bank Bill Which Would Put More Than 2 Million Construction Workers Back On The Job Immediately.

What A Shame GOP Leaders Seem To Care More About Protecting Billionaires & Millionaires Than They Do Mainstreet!

VOTE OBAMA IN 2012!






Obama Reiterates Desire for Comprehensive Budget Package

President Obama on Friday reiterated his desire to reach a grand bargain that would deal with the nation’s long-term debt problems even as leaders in Washington take action to avoid a financial default by the government.

Mr. Obama said that he was encouraged by comments from lawmakers in both parties signaling an understanding of the need to increase the nation’s debt ceiling in the next two weeks.

“The American people expect more than that. They expect that we try to solve our problem,” Mr. Obama said. “We have a chance to stabilize America’s finances for a decade, for 15 years or 20 years, if we are willing to seize the moment.”

Asked whether he continues to have hope for a broader deal that could raise the debt ceiling and deal meaningfully with the nation’s burgeoning debt, Mr. Obama smiled broadly.

“I always have hope. Don’t you remember my campaign?” he said. “Even after two-and-a-half years, I continue to have hope.”

The 35-minute news conference gave Mr. Obama an opportunity to summarize his position after a week of news accounts of his sometimes contentious closed-door meetings with Republican lawmakers.

The president said those reports were overblown, suggesting they were part of a “reality TV” obsession with whose feelings get hurt during high-stakes political negotiations.

“This notion that things got ugly is just not true,” he said. “We have had very constructive conversations.”

But Mr. Obama did not appear to view the news conference as a fresh opportunity to persuade Republican lawmakers to agree to a specific deal.

Rather, the president appeared to be preparing for the ongoing debate on the issues of the debt, spending and taxes in next year’s presidential election.

“What the American people are paying attention to is who seems to be trying to get something done,” he told reporters.

That message is certain to be a key part of Mr. Obama’s re-election campaign as he presents himself as the adult in a room full of squabbling children. Aides hope his efforts to reach a deal during the debt debate — even if unsuccessful — will reinforce that image.

“There may be some movement, some possibility, some interest, to just get something more than just the bare minimum,” Mr. Obama said. “We have enough time to do a big deal. But in order to do that, we have got to get started now.”

Even before Mr. Obama’s news conference, Republican House leaders told reporters that they planned a vote next week on a plan that would increase the debt ceiling in exchange for $2.4 trillion in spending cuts over 10 years and the passage of a balanced budget amendment.

After gathering privately with his Republican members, House Speaker John A. Boehner reiterated his belief that no plan that includes any tax increase could pass the House.

Mr. Obama dismissed the House Republican plan, saying cuts of that magnitude would adversely affect needed programs for the middle class and would be unfair without asking millionaires to pay more in higher taxes.

“I have not seen a credible plan that would allow you to get to $2.4 trillion without really hurting ordinary folks,” he said. “That doesn’t seem like a serious plan to me.”

Mr. Obama also said a balanced budget amendment was not necessary if “we do our jobs.”

“We don’t need a constitutional amendment to do our jobs,” he said. “The Constitution already tells us to do our jobs.”

The president insisted that the public supports efforts to cut spending and raise taxes on wealthy individuals and corporate interests. And he blamed Republican lawmakers for refusing to bend.

“You have 80 percent of the American people who support a balanced approach,” he said. “The problem is members of Congress are dug in ideologically. They boxed themselves in with previous statements.”

Mr. Obama told lawmakers Thursday night that it was time for the talking to end and urged Congress to formalize a plan that could avert the first default on the nation’s obligations.

Senators from both parties are beginning to do just that as they begin closed-door debate on the details of a plan first suggested by Senator Mitch McConnell of Kentucky, the Republican leader.

Under the broad outlines of the plan, Congress would cede its authority over the debt ceiling to Mr. Obama, but would require that he increase it in several increments. The plan also would reportedly include a new commission to deal with broader tax reform.

Senator Harry Reid of Nevada, the majority leader, is working with Mr. McConnell to turn the idea into legislation. But it remains unclear whether the plan could win the support of conservatives in the House, who have demanded trillions of dollars in spending cuts.


View Larger Map

Sources: CNN, NY Times, Youtube, Google Maps

Hochul's Win Fueled By GOP's "Kill Medicare" Agenda: Decision 2012

If Democrat Congressional Candidate Kathleen C. Hocul's Recent Win In New York's Formerly Staunch Republican 26th District Doesn't Send A Message To The Republican Party About Class Warfare, I Don't Know What Else To Tell Them.

That's Right!

Last Night Kathleen C. Hocul Beat The Pants Off Of Her GOP Opponent Jane Corwin After Corwin Endorsed Republican Congressman & Future GOP Star Paul Ryan's "Kill Medicare" Budget.

Can You Say; A Referendum On GOP's "Kill Medicare" Budget?

I Guess Corwin's Dirty Politics Scheme Of Barring The Certified Winner Via An Court Order Didn't Work!

FYI: Considering NY-26 Is A District That Has Elected ONLY Three Democrat Candidates Since 1857, I'd Say This Win Could Be Considered A Political Miracle!

Such Political Victories Against GOP Leaders' Class Warfare Agenda (Haves Vs Have Nots) Just Might Be The ONLY Way For Democrats To Win Back The U.S. House & Spur Democrat Congressional Leaders Into Taking Their Jobs Much More Seriously Next Time Around.

As It Relates To Paul Ryan's "Kill Medicare" Budget, Hardworking Americans, Including Our Nation's Very Valuable Senior Citizen Voters, Are Tired Of Congressional & State Lawmakers Balancing Our Nation's Budget On The Backs Of Middle Class, Senior Citizens, Veterans & Low Income People.

What About The Super Wealthy?

How Is It That Billionaires & Millionaires Are Legally Allowed (Due To Our Corrupt U.S. Tax Code) NOT To Pay Taxes?

Even Worse, How Is It Billionaires & Millionaires Are Legally Allowed To Send American Jobs Overseas (For Cheap Labor) & Still NOT Have To Pay Taxes, While Tax Bills For Middle Class, Senior Citizens, Veterans & Low Income Citizens Continue To Increase Annually?

Don't You Think Something Is Very, Very Wrong With This Picture?

And Now GOP Congressional Leaders Want To Kill Medicare Too?

Come On!

If GOP & Tea Party Leaders Are Truly Serious About Reducing The Deficit & Balancing The Budget Why Not Kill Subsidies & Tax Breaks To Oil Companies?

Why NOT Make The Super Rich Pay Taxes Too?

Why NOT Revise The U.S. Tax Code So That Its Fair For ALL American Citizens?

(NO CORRUPT FLAT TAX RATE PLEASE!)

i.e., EVERYONE Will Have To Begin Paying Taxes!

Why NOT Make The Super Rich Corporate Titans Bring Back American Jobs From Overseas & Pay American Workers REAL Wages For Their Labor, Instead Of Paying 50 Cents An Hour To Some Third World Country Sweat Factory Employee?

And....

Instead Of Proposing To Kill Medicare, Medicaid & Social Security Why Not Just Stop All Of The Fraud & Waste By NOT Allowing State Governors To Use Medicare, Medicaid & Social Security Funds To Balance Their State Budgets?

ALL Governors SHOULD Know How To Properly Balance A State Budget Without Robbing Their State's Most Vulnerable Citizens Or They Should NOT Be A Governor!

So With These Issues In Mind I Hope, Pray & Trust That Pres. Obama, Democrats, Independents And Union Leaders Will Rise Up, Mobilize, Keep The White House And...

Take Back The U.S. House In 2012!

Its Time For A New America!

America That's Fairly Opportunistic For EVERYONE!

NOT Just Wealthy White Citizens.

Congrats Are In Order To Kathy Hocul Of NY-26!

VOTE OBAMA IN 2012!








Democrat Kathy Hochul wins House seat in New York special election

Democrat Kathy Hochul swept to victory Tuesday night in a closely watched Congressional election in New York state, which turned into a proxy battle on a House Republican proposal on Medicare.

The race in New York's 26th Congressional district was to fill the seat of former Republican Congressman Chris Lee, who resigned over pictures and e-mails of him trying to find a date on Craigslist.

The seat had been considered safe for Republicans, who had held the district for more than four decades.

Democrats claimed the victory "had far reaching consequences around the country" over Medicare, while a top Republican warned trying to "predict the future based on the results of this unusual race is naive and risky."

With nearly 90 percent of precincts reporting, Hochul has 48 percent of the vote, Republican Jane Corwin 42 percent, self-proclaimed Tea Party candidate Jack Davis nine percent, and Green Party candidate Ian Murphy one percent.

The crowd chanted "Medicare, Medicare" during Hochul's victory speech in Buffalo, after the issue became the center of the once-little talked about race.

Hochul and Corwin attacked each other over it, with both campaigns, parties and outside groups flooding the airwaves with television commercials. Many of the ads spotlighted the political battle over House Budget Chairman Paul Ryan's plan to drastically cut federal spending by reforming Medicare.

Hochul told supporters in her speech voters "looked beyond party labels ... for a message they believed in."

The Eric County clerk vowed to help balance the budget "the right way, not on backs of our seniors."

During the campaign, she highlighted the national fight, telling CNN before the election, "Corwin has 100% embraced the Paul Ryan budget. Even when Republicans in Washington walk away from it, she's been asked again and again, and she continues to support it."

Corwin called Hochul's message "scare tactics," and had argued, "she's trying to put out the idea that I'm trying to end Medicare. There's nothing further from the truth, I'm working to protect Medicare.

Minutes after the results were announced, both parties sought to paint far different implications of the race.

Democratic National Committee chairwoman Debbie Wasserman Schultz said, "Tonight's result has far-reaching consequences beyond New York."

Schultz said "it demonstrates that Republicans and Independent voters, along with Democrats, will reject extreme policies like ending Medicare that even Newt Gingrich called radical."

She said that she hopes the GOP will listen to voters.

"With this election in the rear-view mirror, it is my hope that Republicans will accept the message being sent by voters in this race, in the polls and at town hall meetings across the country and work with Democrats to get our fiscal house in order while protecting Medicare and other initiatives vital to our economic recovery," she said.

Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee chairman Steve Israel said, "We served notice to the Republicans that we will fight them anywhere in America when it comes to defending and strengthening Medicare."

But National Republican Congressional Committee Chairman Pete Sessions said the race does not have national implications.

"Obviously, each side would rather win a special election than lose," he said. "But to predict the future based on the results of this unusual race is naive and risky. History shows one important fact: the results of competitive special elections from Hawaii to New York are poor indicators of broader trends or future general election outcomes. If special elections were an early warning system, they sure failed to alert the Democrats of the political tsunami that flooded their ranks in 2010."

Republican National Committee Chairman Reince Priebus argued the presence of a third party candidate was a factor in the race.

"Corwin ran a strong campaign in spite of facing a Democrat and a Democrat posed as a Tea Party candidate, both of whom sought to distract from the central issues in the minds of voters: restoring our economy and creating jobs," he said in a statement. "If we have learned anything from these results, it is that Democrats will stop at nothing to preserve the status quo in Washington, which is propelling our country towards bankruptcy."

Looking to the race for the seat next fall, Priebus said, "there is no question Kathy Hochul will have a tough time holding onto this seat in 2012 with Barack Obama and his failed economic leadership weighing heavily on the minds of western New York voters when they return to the polls."

Both parties have brought in some of their big guns to stump for their party's candidates.

House Speaker John Boehner and Cantor made recent trips to the district to campaign for Corwin.

For the Democrats, Sen. Charles Schumer of New York, one of the Senate Democratic leaders, went to the district recently to campaign for Hochul, as did the state's other Democratic Sen. Kirsten Gillibrand.

Visit msnbc.com for breaking news, world news, and news about the economy

I Can Hear GOP Leaders On Capitol Hill Biting Their Nails Over This Race As We Speak.

This Afternoon Republican Candidate For The NY-26 Special Election Jane Corwin, Obtained A Court Order Barring Any Certified Winner In Today's Election Results.

A Clear Case Of Fear & Super Dirty Politics Wouldn't You Agree?

How Can A Candidate Block A Certified Winner Before The Actual Votes Are Counted?

I Really Hope Corwin's Democrat Opponent Kathleen C. Hochul Pulls This One Off Because New Blood Is Most Definitely Needed In This Stuffy Congressional District Of NY.

Stay Tuned.

Visit msnbc.com for breaking news, world news, and news about http://www.blogger.com/img/blank.gifthe economy

Corwin granted court order barring certification of winner

Jane L. Corwin this afternoon obtained a court order from State Supreme Court Justice Russell P. Buscaglia barring a certification of a winner in the special 26th Congressional District race pending a show-cause hearing before him later this week.

The Buffalo News obtained a copy of the show-cause order Buscaglia signed this morning based on a petition the Republican candidate filed Monday.

Under the judge's 11-page order, attorneys for Corwin have until Wednesday to serve copies of the court order on the election boards of Erie, Niagara, Genesee, Orleans, Wyoming, Livingston and Monroe counties, their sheriff's offices, the state Board of Elections and her three opponents.

Pending court proceedings before Buscaglia on Thursday at the earliest, the judge also impounded all voting equipment and enjoined the canvass of paper ballots "except as directed by this court" and "temporarily enjoined and restrained from certifying" the winner pending that court hearing.

Chris Grant, a spokesman for the Corwin campaign, said the court action "is very typical" in such close elections.

"We recognize the closeness of the race and we want to make sure that every legal vote is counted fairly and accurately," Grant said.

Paul B. Wojtaszek, Buscaglia's law clerk, said such prospective court actions are permissible under the state's Election Law when a close vote is borne out by pre-voting polling.

Buscaglia has scheduled a hearing in the election case for 10:30 a.m. Thursday in his second-floor courtroom at 25 Delaware Ave. But the entire matter could be "moot" if the winning margin is sufficient to eliminate any need for court action, Wojtaszek said.

Corwin is battling Democrat Kathleen C. Hochul, Tea Party candidate Jack Davis and Green Party candidate Ian Murphy in today's election.

A copy of the court order was filed in the Erie County Clerk's Office at 11:01 a.m. today. Hochul is Erie County clerk.


View Larger Map

Sources: Buffalo News, CNN, MSNBC, TPM, Google Maps

Gingrich Slams Obama As "Food Stamp President"; 2012 Racist Mudslinging!

Is Anyone Surprised That Former U.S. House Speaker & 2012 Presidential Candidate Newt Gingrich (R) Recently Labeled Pres. Obama The "Food Stamp President"?

I'm NOT Because Such Divisive Political Mudslinging Is Newt's M.O.

Now What If Pres. Obama Chose To Conduct Himself In The Same Childish Way By Calling Attention To Newt's Adulterous, Cheating Behavior?

Thank God Pres. Obama Has Instead Chosen To Stand On The Issues & By Pointing To His Political Victories, One Being His Administration's Killing Of Osama Bin Laden.

Isn't It Amazing How Soon One Forgets?

I Guess Newt Forgot How Many People He Sent Back To The Welfare Rolls Via His Failed, Racist "Welfare Reform"/ "Contract With America" Policies.

Yes! The Same Racist Welfare Reform Programs He Intentionally Underfunded Thus Sending Those Same Welfare Recipients Back To An Underprivileged Life Of Existing On Government-Assisted Programs Versus Becoming Self-Sufficient.

I Also Presume Mr. Gingrich Wasn't Aware That Historically More White People Have Used Food Stamps Than Minorities Could Ever Imagine.

Gingrich Has Consistently Been Paraded As The GOP's "Idea Guru".

Nothing Wrong With Having Comprehensive Ideas Unless Those Ideas Are Targeted At Oppressing Black & Hispanic Citizens.

I Say Its Time To Give Newt Gingrich The Title He So Rightfully Deserves: "GOP Political Guru Of Dirty Politics!"

See You At The Polls Folks!

VOTE OBAMA IN 2012!!!











Gingrich: 2012 election biggest since Lincoln in 1860


Republican Newt Gingrich told a Georgia audience on Friday evening that the 2012 presidential election is the most consequential since the 1860 race that elected Abraham Lincoln to the White House and was soon followed by the Civil War.

Addressing the Georgia Republican Party's convention, Gingrich said the nation is at a crossroads and that the re-election of Democratic President Barack Obama would lead to four more years of "radical left-wing values" that would drive the nation to ruin.

Gingrich also blasted Obama as "the most successful food stamp president in modern American history."

The former House speaker gave his speech at the end of a day of campaigning that took him from a gathering of economic conservatives in Washington to an old-style restaurant in Georgia and then the evening gathering of the party faithful.

Gingrich received a warm welcome at the GOP dinner. He represented Georgia in Congress for two decades and is stressing his ties anew after having lived in northern Virginia for more than a decade.

"I am glad to be home," Gingrich said Friday evening.

On economic issues, the 67-year-old Gingrich said his program would lead to more paychecks.

He outlined a jobs plan that would eliminate the estate and capital gains taxes and lower the corporate tax rate, which he said would infuse the nation's sputtering economy with new investment.

He said the United States needs to reexamine its relationship with Pakistan after revelations that Osama bin Laden had been hiding out there for years as America poured billions of dollars in aid into the country.

"I was trying to figure out what the word ally meant," Gingrich said. "I know what the word sucker meant. How stupid do you think we are?"

Many dissatisfied with GOP field

Some 45 percent of Republicans now say they're dissatisfied with the GOP candidates who have declared or are thought to be serious about running, up from 33 percent two months ago, according to an Associated Press-GfK poll. Just 41 percent are satisfied with the likely Republican field, down from 52 percent.

Plenty are holding out for somebody else.

In North Carolina, retiree Robert Osborne is hoping New Jersey Gov. Chris Christie will decide to run. In Indiana, farmer Brent Smith wishes Mississippi Gov. Haley Barbour hadn't backed away. In Georgia, stock clerk Susan Demarest would love to see somebody more like Ronald Reagan.

Ohio's William Johnson just wants somebody who's not a "cold fish."

"I don't expect them to get up there and start doing karaoke, but we need somebody with a little more spunk," says the Columbus steelworker.

While the Republican roster of candidates is growing almost by the day — Ron Paul declared on Friday, and Mike Huckabee says he'll make an important announcement this weekend — satisfaction with the field appears to be shrinking.

The poll was conducted May 5-9 by GfK Roper Public Affairs and Corporate Communications. It involved landline and cellphone interviews with 1,001 adults nationwide and had a margin of sampling error of plus or minus 4.2 percentage points. The survey included 378 Republicans, and that subset had a larger, 6.9 percentage point margin of error.

Former Arkansas Gov. Huckabee, who is viewed favorably by 72 percent of Republicans, has the highest rating of the lot.

Former Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin, who was the GOP vice presidential nominee in 2008, is viewed favorably by two-thirds of Republicans, as is Romney, who made a strong bid for the presidential nomination last time. Romney has all but announced this time; Palin is more of a question mark.

Gingrich quite popular

The only other major Republican with a favorability rating above 50 percent in the poll was Gingrich, who didn't enter the presidential race until the week after the poll was conducted. His favorability rating was 61 percent.

Forty-five percent viewed businessman and TV celebrity Donald Trump, another potential candidate, favorably compared to 50 percent who rated him unfavorably.

GOP favorability ratings for lesser-known Republicans asked about in the poll: former Texas Rep. Paul, 49 percent; Rep. Michele Bachmann of Minnesota , 41 percent; former Sen. Rick Santorum of Pennsylvania, 36 percent; former Minnesota Gov. Tim Pawlenty, 33 percent; Indiana Gov. Mitch Daniels, 30 percent; former Utah Gov. and Ambassador to China Jon Huntsman, 20 percent.

In an interview with The Associated Press earlier Friday Gingrich said he's grown more mature since his days as House speaker, and before that, when he was often described as a bomb-throwing insurgent member of the House Republican minority.

He said it took him two years after taking the reins in Congress to learn that he had to re-calibrate his style and change his message.

And by then, he said, "the damage had been done."

"There are the things you want to say and what you need to say," Gingrich told The AP.

Some have questioned whether Gingrich — known for his combative style and what some consider over-the-top rhetoric — has the temperament and discipline to be president.

Last year, he suggested U.S. Supreme Court nominee Sonia Sotomayor was a racist, said Obama is best understood by his "Kenyan, anti-colonial behavior," and argued that placing a mosque near ground zero in New York City was akin to placing a Nazi sign next to the Holocaust Museum.


View Larger Map


Sources: CNN, CSPAN, Freaking News, MSNBC, NY Times, Southern Studies, TIME, Think Progress, Youtube, Google Maps