Today it is confirmed that America is now a majority communist nation. Nikita Khrushchev laughs prophetically from the grave, "We will bury you." (1956) Senator Joseph McCarthy was right too; America was infiltrated in all areas of society by communists. Now, they are loud and proud. And, they have won, knowingly, decidingly electing communism as the form of government they want. America, "The last and greatest bastion of freedom" (Reagan, 1981): dead at 236 years. The Constitution of the United States of America: dead at 225 years. The full force of communism in America is now unleashed, led by a President who does not have to be diplomatic, law abiding or work in consideration of the public eye; the public eye knowingly sanctioned communism in America yesterday.

@Ray Ray Johnson, I thought red was the color for communism not blue.

That's why red used to be the color for Democrat-won states. During the Bush-Gore election cycle, it was swapped to help the Dems shed the perception that they favored communism...

Then soon I'd expect that one side would re-color to 'green'.

O so very ... Sweet !

What part of 303 or 329 Electoral votes don't you understand?

Hey, Fox News called it too. Are they drinking the "kool aide" (sic)?

that's what i asked.....how?

"He only won because of all the black people in Milwaukee... they are so stupid!!! I can't wait when we go into a depression under Obama!!!"

Wow. If you think it's okay to say something like this you are a very sad, ugly person.

Michael: Shame on you!
You forget that Madison is mostly white, and many of the blue counties are very white.
I am not happy with the results either, but it is what it is. We have to deal with it.
I certainly do not hope for a depression- that is horrible. We worry about redistribution of wealth, but a depression eliminates most wealth- except for the ultra wealthy.

@Michael: It's one of those "Sciencey" things; called statistics. TEAPublicans don't believe in those things so they continue to listen to people like Peggy Noonan and George Will's "feelings".

Pay attention to Nate Silver and you would have known what was coming. Five ThirtyEight has been correct on 50 of 51 state races and is calling Florida for Obama also.

For those who are wondering how the race in Wisconsin was called with 3% of the votes in: Statistically, Romney had only a 3% chance winning Wisconsin, and most of the other states that he lost. Don't listen to the pollsters who say it was a close race; listen to the statisticians who apply analytics to the problem, developed a statistical model, and made the prediction well in advance of the election. There are just a few national statisticians who do this type of work, and all of them predicted this result. Of course, for those who don't like evidence and don't like to make decisions based upon evidence, this is going to be a difficult pill to swallow.

Lol keep dreaming you idiot.

Yes they have a great education system. that why we wanted Obama... 4-more years 4-more years 4-more years

Yes, but Madison is to liberals what dog poop is to flies so we attract a lot of morons from Illinois.

I thought so too. We have teachers but they're not educators.

With a name like Alicia Rodriguez Silva I think if Romnuts would have been elected you may may have been put on a bus and shipped south. Thank all the stupid people for voting stupid allowing you to stay in this country.

Bucky, that's the kind of idiot notion with no basis in facts that I expect from liberals

Oh, please elaborate. I'm sure that whatever you're talking about is sane, measured and reality-based.

Does that mean you are leaving? Which Fascist country are you moving to?

Count me in AWD.

See comment above to Michael.

The call is based on exit polling. NBC and Fox News agree. The televised numbers are reported precincts. All of this made sense.

If anyone had been reading Joel Silver's Five Thirty-Eight blog, giving Obama a 90% chance of winning in the electoral college, there wouldn't be all of this disbelief.

Have we not yet learned how inaccurate exit polling is? It's far worse than phone polls, even.

Taoist Crocodile -

I think you mean Nate Silver...

Forecast Models: Nate Silver

Of all the tools for predicting elections, it seems like comprehensive models are the new (and few) kids on the block. It is important to pay attention to them, though. Many have had a recent verve for calling Election Day the most accurately. In 2008, statistician Nate Silver, who runs the New York Times' FiveThirtyEight poll aggregation blog, correctly predicted all 35 Senate races and 49 out of 50 states' presidential election results (he miscalled Indiana, by a one-percent margin).

What bothers many about these sites is that they tend to show an overwhelming advantage to the President's reelection campaign. As of this morning, [Oct. 30, 2012] FiveThirtyEight predicts that the President has an 85.1 percent of winning the 2012 election, with a predicted 306.9 electoral votes.

So why did Fox call it, Tom?

Because they're just as bad?

There is one outfit that does exit polling. The all use the same data. Oh how fun 2004 was

Hmm, that's refreshing. Most of your like-minded posters here seem to think that Fox is the one voice of reason, holding high the lantern of truth in the MSM's leftward squall.

Rush Limbaugh refreshed my memory of how it works today.

Tom: Historically certain areas have tendancies to vote for one party or the other. Statistically it was called because the lead was not large enough to hold off the Progressive Counties votes.
It is what it is. Tomorrow the totals will be in for 100% of precincts, and it will be obvious.

See comment from John Wilson and my comment to Michael above.

It's the 21st century and some people choose to live in it instead of always looking backward.

Hey, I can only tell you where to find good information. The fact that you don't want it is your problem,

What are you confused about?

Yes, hmmmm. Perhaps it has something to do with people just not liking the arrogant, lying, empty suit? And perhaps his snooty wife has something to do with it also?

Or his nearly 800 vetoes when he was governor of Massachusetts?

They really want a street car that goes in circles.

With the National Debt projected to reach $22 Trillion in four years, there will be no health care or social security. Obamaphones will be shut off, and we will be taught Chinese.

Would you like some bread with that whine?

Can't afford cheese?

Not Whine Taoist Crock...I am repositioning myself to capitalize on this. This is what real producers do. Makers not takers do this well. Sorry you interpret it as whine, but you are not the type to understand the concept anyway.

Craig, I was referring to MacFray's epic wailing.

But, your threat is transparently rhetorical. If you have an interest in moving manufacturing overseas, then you had it before the election, and you continue to have it. I don't buy that there was anything in Mitt Romney's proposals that would have affected your decision to manufacture domestically or overseas, because, of course, he had no proposals at all. Your threats are no different that Liberals' threats that they were moving to Canada in 2004.

Tao: I am not in manufacturing as of now, and I wasn't pointing to outsourcing.
Every rose has it's thorn, and every cloud has a silver lining. The world will not end, there will still be opportunities to thrive. I am sorry but I am bound by a confidentiality agreement so I can not get into detail. My back up plan is to learn Chinese. Better to be safe than sorry.

Right, sorry Craig - I was mis-attributing Steve's empty threat below. Best of luck in your endeavor.

Thanks Tao. If I have you pegged correctly, this would be something you would like. I'll let you know when I can in case you are interested. Good debate makes business better. ;)

This is a very sad day in the history of our United States. More dependency on the government and more votes for them it will be a cycle we cannot break. I personally witnessed a strong indication for voter fraud when a person with a Illinois license plate asked me where Nicolson Rd. was for early voting. How do you not know where your early voting place is if you live here? I think there is so much fraud in the voting system and the unions are pushing so hard, pouring so much money, we are all very much screwed. Anyone who works hard should just stop and change their whole way of thinking because that will not get anyone ahead anymore--they will just take more from you. The ignorance is astouding--there is an UNELECTED panel of people deciding whether you live or die under OBAMACARE. UNELECTED! If you are 70 years old and need a knee replacement--you really think they will grant that when they'll consider your age as being almost dead anyway--why pay for it. People should understand that in Obama's view, the poorest person in the US is still rich by global standards. All of you leaches on society who think you're going to get freebies will have a rude awakening in the next 4 years. Our founding fathers are absolutely rolling over in their graves.

Macy, I will continue to recieve my V.A. benefits.

I agree!!!!!

It is okay Frank. We will be fine. Us producers will find a way to manage. In four years, there will be high demand for certain jobs. I plan to be positioned well to take advantage of that. I am signing up to learn Chinese.

This is the kind of thoughtful analysis that keeps me coming back to the Patch. Frank, either take a chill pill, or go hang yourself.

I will be forced to move manufacturing over to China :(

Frank, really. Your attitude is part of the problem. Just go to bed now.

That is a typical response from someone like you...

@ Steve
Go to China, we don't need you...

John - I said manufacturing, not my company. I'm not going anywhere. Just becoming one of those political ads where jobs gets shipped overseas. Obama did build that

Steve ® -

That's okay; no one has bought any of your hemlock for decades...

It's sanguine. Romney is not conceding Ohio.

That interest rate issue is a real threat. With Debt to GDP ratio over 100%, super inflation will drop that %. Imagine if prices double, wages double, and GDP doubles...Then the debt is effectively cut in half compared to GDP.
Of course we could also be taken over by a Country capable to paying our debts to SS.
Learn Chinese.

Well there won't be any shortage of failures so....yeah, very likely. Wait 'til the full cluster effect of ACA hits. They'll snap their backs bending and twisting in the process of doing so, but they'll figure a way to make it Bush's fault.

I really didn't want to go on a state exchange to afford health care, which as a producer I pay for 100%. Damn you Bush!

You got it.

HAHAHAH! Hello bestie :) SO TRUE!!!!!!! It's fine. An illegal immigrant is going to take my college education and slap it in my face when they get already free schooling and my future jobs!

I think he said something about not being done yet and moving forward. So, technically, moving forward into the abyss would qualify as promises kept.

@dennis... thats exactly what is going to happen.... and then they are all going to be standing there shaking there heads saying "how come no one told us?"

When that happens, can I get an ObamaPhone?

Japan's national debt is 225% of GDP and nobody is worried about that. The debt "crisis" was ginned by by the House Regressives under the leadership of Eric Cantor who will be the next Speaker of the House.

Well then don't we all feel better now that Capn Crunch tells us the debt is not a problem. Maybe we should give Obama 8 more years to hit that debt ceiling.
Then again, our economy is shrinking..

@greendale dad... youve spent too much time in the bubble. where are all of the jobs? when did the economy start growing?

Worst enemy of huge growth in the market......hyperinflation.
Be prepared for it.
Regardless of the POTUS, hyperinflation is coming.
This is the ONLY answer to continued spending beyond our means, and growing National Debt.
Obama's big win is immediately crushed by the GOP retaining controll.
This means no one wins- but the politicians. We are screwed.

hey bubbleboy.... how is your 401k doing today?

Yeah, we're having a late night meeting to see where we line up for the free stuff.

The makers will start to leave the US - then what will the takers do?

gimme gimmie gimme!!!
working is fo sukkas!!!

@john wilson .... you only need to look in the mirror to see a racist.

Yes, John continually brings up race so he can call others racist.

He also seems to ignore the anti-Mormon bigots on the Left that helped Obama get re-elected...

Dennis, are you part of the mythical "war on Christas" that O'Reilly rants about every year? I'm guessing that nobody really gives a rat's ass whether you spend any money this Christmas as all of the major retailers are expecting a great season and are hiring more temps to handle it.

Your self importance is showing.

Is it ever over?

What's over? Nothing's changed. We've still got the same arrangement we had yesterday.

Unfortunately, a very dark cloud for you...

Yep Walker can continue his reforms . All RED in the state house so atleast Wisconsin can try to stay open for business. Unfortunately, the country opportunity for growth disappeared tonite as most business will be frozen or cutting jobs as costly regulations kill growth in america. I suspect more jobs will be exported now as it makes good business sense to do build it else where when you are penalized for trying to grow here. Common sense isnt so common as Obama has 4 more years of EPIC FAIL!

Boffa -

Yeah, but you would need eyes to see those silver linings; besides, Schultz (R) likes to vote INDEPENDENTLY [i.e. no Lemming].

Go figure. Wisconsin votes in Walker & turns around & votes in Obama & Baldwin? Wow. On Wisconsin!

@Walker -- That has more to do with the redistricting than Wisconsin's love for the GOP. We are split right down the middle, but our Governor might want to bear in mind how well those conservative social issue worked for Mitt Romney.

@lyin' John Wilson -

When the state legislature reconvenes in January, the Republican majority in the Senate will stand at 18 seats vs the Democrats 15 seats - the Republicans don't need the RINO Schultz.

But nice try, and thanks for wasting millions in the frivolous recall elections.

Boffa -

I do not believe that Schultz (R) is the only Republican in the Senate that actually has the capacity to think and act for himself, without blindly following the party orthodoxy. Then too, I would have to believe that Walker – optimistic and hopeful here – just might have learned something during his term as Governor and will not be as heavy handed with power as he has been in the past…

Time will tell…

@Lyin' John Wilson -

Funny, the same could be said about Obama, but Hoffa seriously doubts that he'll learn anything from failing to work together with House and Senate Republicans, who maintained their power in the federal legislature in this election.

Walker and the state GOP was once again given a green light and a clear mandate by the people of Wisconsin - big difference here!

Boffa –

The exit polls on the Walker recall pretty much dispelled the myth that the electorate of Wisconsin was very enamored with either the Republican Party or Walker. The number ONE reason given for voting for Walker, during the recall, was that the large majority of Wisconsinites thought that Walker was elected for a 4-year term and he ought to be allowed to finish that 4-year term. In their words, they did NOT like the concept of a recall, even though it is a part of our state constitution.

Walker, his special interest groups and sycophants framed the entire issue as being about RECALL. Strategically that was a great way to go, rather than frame it on his record. The electorate ate it up, reelected Walker, because they did not think the RECALL was fair. This does not mean they love Walker…

Additionally, these same exit interviews revealed that most of these folks supported Obama.

President Obama with 303 electoral votes, 332 if Florida ends up swinging his way, plus several million+ in the popular vote clearly received a mandate and a rejection of whatever it was that Willard/Lyin' Ryan and the Republican Party were selling.

There was a big difference here; you just have it backwards…

@Lyin' John Wilson -

If what you claim is true about Obama receiving a mandate to push liberal/socialist policies on the nation, then how come the US House of Representatives isn't majority controlled by Democrats the way the Wisconsin Assembly is majority controlled by the GOP? In fact, the GOP actually picked up some seats in the House, if Hoffa isn't mistaken. And the Democrats failed to gain a filibuster proof majority in the US Senate, unlike the Wisconsin Senate, which is solidly controlled by the GOP.

After all, Obama and the Democratic Party has been blaming alleged GOP obstructionism for the administration's failures over the last 4 years, thus if the people really were awarding Obama with a mandate, wouldn't they have changed the composition of the US House and provided the Dems with a filibuster proof majority in the US Senate - they certainly had the opportunity to do so in this election, didn't they?

To the contrary, it would appear that America once again voted for a deeply divided federal government.

Meanwhile, the people of Wisconsin once again awarded complete control of state government back to the GOP after millions of dollars were needlessly wasted on the frivolous recalls that were resultant of your side's 2 year long temper tantrum in this state.

If the people of Wisconsin merely disagreed with the concept of the recalls, as you assert, then why didn't they allow the Dems to maintain the Senate majority that they fought so hard to earn in the recalls? And do you honestly believe that people who adamantly disagree with and dislike Walker and would have actually preferred Barrett instead never-the-less voted for Walker anyway just because they disagree with the concept of a recall? COME ON!!!

To the objective observer, it's clearly Walker and the state GOP that have been awarded a mandate, and not Obama and the national Dems! But by all means, keep on drinking the kool-aid, as Hoffa knows you will!

Boffa –

Redistricting by Republican state governors is part of the answer you seem to be searching for, however, I suspect you know that. Further, the entire House and Senate were not all up for reelection, but you know that too.

America, within the limits imposed upon it by our Constitution, did as best they could to rectify this insanity. If a consensus of compromise does not develop within congress in the next 2-years, I think you just may see something like the election of 2010 repeat itself, only this time, it will be the Democrats who will blow away both chambers.

Actually John, the entire House was up for re-election. Every Representative in the House must stand for re-election every two years...

CowDung –

Actually, you are correct…

The winners of this election cycle will serve in the 113th United States Congress. This will be the first congressional election using congressional districts apportioned based on the 2010 United States Census. According to FairVote’s 2012 Monopoly Politics Report, which predicted, with 100% accuracy, the outcomes in 333 of the 435 seats, these districts possibly represented the "worst congressional map ever," with most districts badly gerrymandered and uncompetitive.

On a more positive side: Joe Walsh, Allen West, Todd Akin, Richard Mourdock… GONE!

That’s a GOOD START…

Market opens down OVER 200 and I suspect that trend to continue. Business just took a big hit and that will reflect in employment plans going down and outsourcing going up . Lets face it that makes good business since under Obama . Liberals killed America as the takers outnumber the makers now ....but the fiscal cliff looms and than the takers become the biggest whiners as MANDATORY cuts come in the end and a lesser America truly becomes the norm. Ironically the winners today will become the losers in the end . Ignorance is bliss. I am a man without a President .I will adjust as well .

In the words of the Walker backers to the recallers, "Get over it whiners & move on."

@Rees -

1/2 the country apparently believes in personal responsibility and self sufficiency, while the other 1/2 believes that the wealthy should be penalized and made to pay for those who would rather have the government support them.

Where's the commonality in that exactly?

The outcome of the election pretty much left everything in place. I think you can pretty much expect to get exactly what you wanted - 4 more years. America re-elected the log jam.

Rees Roberts -

Sounds like a fair and enlightened assessment to me, plus a few good suggestions, not put in a snarky manner.

So, I guess I have to ask, what are you doing on the Patch?

On the other hand, you are a refreshing change from the usual fare…

John Wilson:

Please clarify:

"So, I guess I have to ask, what are you doing on the Patch?"

I'm not sure what you are seeking. So, I'm unclear how to reply.

Thanks

Rees Roberts -

There really is no need for a response I was just giving you a compliment on your well thought out comment, delivered without any snarky asides. I agree with you.

Obviously, you are new to the Patch and subsequently you do not realize that approximately 70% of the folks posting on here really do not have a life; so, they bait other folks on the Patch with snarky comments, their political ideology, their religious ideology, their anger and just about anything else, mostly having absolutely NOTHING to do with the blog TOPIC. They are only looking for an ongoing argument, where they can call you a multitude of different names, mainly because you do not share their opinion or worldview.

I just liked your post and the civility with which it was delivered.

Rees, my take is you miss the point, as usual. Remember the ant and the grasshopper? We've decended into a nation of grasshoppers, dancing and singing to American Idol, while winter is coming. Used to be the ant (Romney) was celebrated for his hard work and prosperity. Not any more. He was vilified for killing a women (because of baseless health insurance lie), being a felon, and a sinister person in general. Tommy was vilified as well; both being moderates.

It's tough to vote against Santa Claus, when he gives out free phones, food stamps and heating oil, when the ant says you can become your own Santa Claus through your own efforts, regardless of your sex or skin color. The key word of course is effort.

John Wilson

I believe if you ask any "old timer" here on Patch you will discover that they have seen my "real name" here on Patch from day one or very close to that. My concerns have always been related to those who use an anonymous name to hide behind and therefore be able to irresponsibly respond the way you so clearly stated.

I have attempted to lobby Patch to use real names thereby forcing people to think about the consequences of their comments. But so far it appears Patch is factoring in the entertainment level this brings to their apparent audience they are seeking. It would be relatively easy to force people to use their real names and therefore bring those comments into a real life community. But, again, that is not the policy Patch apparently wishes to subscribe to. As a result we end up with the comments we do.

So, yes.... I am a long time user but say little unless I feel it would honestly add something. I believe in community. This technology has such promise to bring us all together rather than continuing to divide us as it does currently. But time will tell if we will see a positive change about this method of exchange of ideas or not.

Good chatting with you and thank you for your comments.

Alias Gearhead:

I believe you know me well enough that I merely do not agree with your basic underlining values. It is not enough to state that people can simply boot strap themselves and life will be good. It is not that simple and you know that. With the current economic conditions that have been on the table people need a vast amount of help. We simply can not throw out the baby with the water. And as you have observed it is difficult to vote out a way of helping people when those people are dying on the vine caused by the very policies which put them there. And that is where the line has been drawn. You believe in a system which subscribes to people helping themselves but ignore the conditions they are currently in. The election is over. The majority of people have voted to go down a particular path, which you do not agree with. But if you think anything of any consequence can be done by not accepting the will of the people like America has done for two centuries prior then Alias Gearhead, I am sorry we can not accomplish this work with your help. That is sad because in the past when a President was voted in he was everyone's President and the people did not sulk over it. I suggest that there needs to be a recognition that, as I stated earlier, this country is changing and it might prove useful for us all to change with it. Just a suggestion. Together, just think what we can accomplish.

@Rees -

Don't be fooled by Lyin' John Wilson. Search his past comments - he's actually one of the biggest bigots and name callers on our Patch.

@Rees -

"And as you have observed it is difficult to vote out a way of helping people when those people are dying on the vine caused by the very policies which put them there"

Could you please identify those policies specifically, and under what administration they were enacted into law?

Rees, it sounds like you are asking for more government programs to fix the problems caused by government programs to begin with. That sort of circular logic might make you feel better, but what good does it do to feel good as you go over the cliff? I'd rather go over the cliff kicking and screaming, thank you. It was bad enough to be on defense for the past four years. Now it will get worse. Prepare for Atlas to shrug. Prepare, too, Rees... to lose real benefits to your Medicare. You have been hosed. Perhaps then you will wake up. But my guess is you will just scream for more benefits from Santa. By then it will be too late being he has an empty sack.

On a day when the country went Democrat, Scott Walker was the huge winner with a healthy State Senate majority. Chew on that for a minute. Why do you think that happened?

BTW, please get off your high-horse over the alias. Patch editors know darn well who I am, as I made it a point to get to know them, and conduct myself accordingly.

GearHead -

"BTW, please get off your high-horse over the alias. Patch editors know darn well who I am, as I made it a point to get to know them, and conduct myself accordingly."

Yes, they do, and they don't like you very much either...

That is a major issue here with the Patch, the worst TOS offenders all have personal relationships with the editors, so that's sort of like having your right hand punish your left hand for stupid behavior...

Here we go again.

Name calling, asking questions like the election has still to occur.

Alias Hoffa and Alias Gearhead. You have a simple choice. Use your real name and respond responsibly so people have no reason to react negatively toward either of you or quit playing in this sandbox. The election is over. Your values did not stand up in this election.

We might be able to have a decent conversation once we know who we are talking to knowing there are real world consequences to calling people names or defaming people. People do not react positively toward those tactics. So, stop the value questions until you come out of the dark. It would be great to continue the discussion with people who, heck we might even call our friends. But merely hiding your aliases will no longer produce the results you are looking for. I suggest others not teach them it is ok to interact with them this way.

The time has come to create real online communities where we know who everyone is. People would open up but not when others just want to pretend they are being open. If you feel you might be threatened by others online I suggest you treat people with respect. Don't give them a reason to threaten you. You may not be able to call people names and say what you would have under an alias but it's a better way for community.

Rees, I've not called you names, although I've certainly slapped you around a little bit trying to wake you up. The problem is your attempts at getting along always end up poking your hand into either my or someone elses pocket. You are correct... I don't share those values!

As for online communities, I see the one you head up isn't exactly tearing up cyberspace. Maybe because everyone on it thinks the same way?

Rees Roberts:

Isn't putting "Alias" in front of someone's user name a form of namecalling?

Judge people by the content of their posts rather than their choice to use a nom de plume. Over time here, the Patch community has gotten to know each other through our interactions on the boards here, and for the most part we treat each other as respectfully as we would if we were conversing face to face, in real life. There are some people here that I would share my identity with, and there are some that I would prefer to not.

There are lots of crazies in this world, and most of us are smart enough to guard our true identity on the internets and avoid putting ourselves or our families at risk. Even having a difference of political opinion can be reason enough for someone to want to cause harm to others.

@Cow: After giving him plenty of benefit of the doubt, I've come to believe that "getting along" with Rees means giving up any principles that I hold dear. And giving him my wallet.

@GearHead -- So returning to the tax rates that we all paid throughout the 1990s and supporting social programs that have been in place for half a century or longer is 'handing over your wallet'?

Randy, clearly you haven't thought through what looking "forward" means to the Obama admin.

Alias Rees Roberts wrote: "... It is not enough to state that people can simply boot strap themselves and life will be good..."
I don't recall Cowdung, Hoffa, myself or any others that have made Conservative comments saying anything about it being simple. It's simple to sit at home and collect money from the government for rent, food and Obamaphone. It's simple to sit at home and not HAVE to get a job. It's simple to sit at home and blame other's because you don't own the latest car or biggest screen HDTV. It's hard to make the effort to learn a skill. It's hard to take the effort to make a better life for your kids. It's hard to do the job that needs to be done when your friends and family are doing something fun.

It's hard, but it's worth it.

Alias Rees also wrote: "...The majority of people have voted to go down a particular path, which you do not agree with..."
Two comments. 1) The majority of people chose one person over the other, not necessarily to go down one path. 2) The GOP still controls the State Assembly and State Senate, what does that tell you about that path?

oh yeah,
You and right predicted Mitt would win also. How did that work out?
You "predictions" are nothing but fear rhetoric. Nothing new.

BOOM!

now asia is assured of keeping jobs overseas...

morninmist -

I don't know what it is that Lyin' Ryan is going to be doing for the Republican Party; he is so far right of even Akin, that I don't think he has a place to go anymore.

Some clown suggested that he would be a great candidate for president in 2016!

Have you ever seen Ryan give a speech?

When, has someone run for VP, been defeated, and then turned around and ran successfully for the presidency? Well, NEVER!

Finally, he is time barred from serving as the Chairman of the Budget Committee; his term expires on December 31, 2012.

So, just what is Lyin’ Ryan going to be doing for the Republican Party for the next 2-years?

I know, write another incomprehensible, schizoid budget plan, part III…

What rights of people of other races would Mitt Romney take away?

As for buying things, the best investments right now are property, gold, and guns.

typical lefty...give someone else the goods and money I make---even if it hurts me...
You can feel free to donate ALL your money...i dont care. I EARNED every cent i have made.

typical rightie, no comprehension skills.

wow-whatever...

um, no.

Walker promised the jobs boom after the recalls. He lied but now has Obama to prop him up.

@FreeThought Troy -

It's "cats and dogs living together; mass hysteria!"

True, Hoffa. I bet that the walls in the Governor's mansion were bleeding. ;)

Yes, Hoffa.

Thank you for correcting me. I honestly am not being snarky. I hate it when I mis-quote. Thanks for the correction.

Oh, I agree. It is that bad. Unfortunately we are going to have to be vigilent to keep Walker at his word. He represented himself and the state very well last night (in my opinion). He said some very good things.

It is my hope the Recall woke him up to the need for more concensus.

all the "recall" did was WASTE millios of dollars...

@Dirk -

Please explain exactly what policies of the Bush administration led to the current sour economic conditions that our nation has faced over the last 4+ years and continues to face.

Hoffa - Where do I even start? Huge deficits, two wars, tax cuts for the rich, poorly or unregulated financial markets, moving jobs offshore. Defend Bush on these like a lawyer defending a mass murderer, as best you can, then I will get back to you with a bigger list. Gotta go to a political victory party.

Dirk is jumping out of the cake at the Baldwin affair. It's going to be a rainbow cake, MMMM...

@Dirk -

Please explain how "huge deficits, two wars, [and] tax cuts for the rich (actually across the board income tax cuts)," killed American jobs and tanked our economy.

Obama has run even deeper deficits - $6T for Obama in 4 years vs $4T for W Bush in 8 years! If you're saying that "huge deficits" kills the economy/jobs, then it would appear that Obama is actually trying to harm our economy and kill jobs even faster than Bush did, correct?

Obama is using tax cuts/credits and government subsidies to create green energy jobs, shore up the domestic auto industry, etc, wasn't he? And Obama says that he wants to keep the tax cuts for the middle class, in addition to his prior reduction of the payroll taxes. So, it would appear that tax cuts actually help to create jobs or at the very least are good for the economy, or is Obama wrong about this? If he is, then why is Obama advocating for keeping the tax cuts for the middle class and why did he previously reduce the payroll tax burden?

And how does fighting two wars kill jobs exactly? Doesn't that actually create jobs in both the armed services and defense contracting industries?

Also, could you please identify the exact Bush policies that created "poorly or unregulated financial markets, [and] mov[ed] jobs offshore."

In all reality and actuality, aren't the policies enacted by the great Bill Clinton (D) largely responsible for those situations?

Gramm–Leach–Bliley Act, which allowed financial banks to co-mingle with commercial banks, effectively taking the teeth out of the Glass–Steagall Act of 1933, was signed into law by Clinton in November of 1999. Isn't this what caused your "poorly or unregulated financial markets?"

NAFTA, was signed into law by Clinton on December 8, 1993. Clinton also renewed and greatly expanded China's 'most favored trading nation' (MFN) status with the US in both 1993 and 1996.

http://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/ws/index.php?pid=46632
http://www.apfn.org/THEWINDS/1997/05/favored_china.html
http://www.cnn.com/ALLPOLITICS/1998/06/03/china.trade/

Considering that most of the manufacturing/industrial jobs that our nation has lost over the last 30 years went to either Mexico, Canada, or China, wouldn't it in fact be these policies that "moved jobs offshore?"

So, could you please explain why liberals, such as yourself, put the blame on Bush for the messes that Clinton and Obama actually created?!?!

And why on earth did you guys elect a man, who at the DNC convention, was touting how he wanted to take us back to Clinton era policies, and actually held Clinton out as a cheerleader of his campaign?

What is wrong with you guys???

Please explain - and be specific, as Hoffa was with you!

@Hoffa -
1 - Bush ran huge deficits BEFORE the Great Recession. He inherited surpluses and spent like a drunken sailor on foreign wars, etc.. Behind the scenes, we had puppeteer Cheney stating to former Treasury Sec. Paul O'Neill: "Deficits don't matter" when O'Neill warned of a budget crisis. And when you ultra-right wingers state things like Obama is trying to kill jobs, etc, you come across as Alfred. That is H.S.
2 - Tax cuts for the rich. This was supposed to foster trickledown and spur the economy. Bush had to give some bones to the middle class to pull this off politically. The rich kept the tax money saved and raised their CEO salaries.
3 - Anyone with a foot in reality knows that the middle class with some tax savings behave differently than rich people with tax savings. The rich tend to go international with investments lin places like China or Russia and can afford to hoard in the Grand Caymans or Switzerland. They do not typically spend a great proportion of their savings back into the American economy, like buying another huge yacht or a fourth mansion.
4. As far as the two wars, they racked up huge deficits, but do create jobs through government spending on the military goods which generally gets expended, destroyed or go obsolete. But not American infrastructure like bridges, roads, etc. that contribute to building/sustaining commerce. You are dumb happy to spend our national treasures on the military industrial complex.

To be continued.

@Dirk -

You're not explaining anything.

1) How does deficit spending kill jobs and the economy? And if it does, then has Obama deficit spent to the tune of $6T over 4 years vs $4T over 8 years for Bush?

2) The tax cuts weren't just for the rich - they were across the board cuts in the income tax rates that apply to everyone. And if tax cuts are bad, then why did Obama cut the payroll taxes and extended the Bush income tax cuts for everyone? Or are only tax cuts for rich people bad and if so, how much does one have to have to be considered rich, and why are such tax cuts bad only for the rich and not everyone else?

3) That's just silly nonsense and is unsupported in reality. If the rich here aren't buying mansions and yachts, then who owns all the mansions and yachts that are in this country today - poor people? So in other words, you're saying that the rich aren't entitled to spend their money the way they want to because you don't approve of how they spend it - isn't that textbook socialism/communism?

4) Are you saying that no infrastructure projects were done during the Bush years and that military spending in wholly unnecessary?

Again, you're not explaining how Bush's policies killed jobs and the domestic economy vs. the examples of Clinton's policies that Hoffa gave to you.

Come on Dirk - just admit that you and your fellow libs are WRONG!

5 - Chris Cox as head of the SEC under Bush is symbolic of the lax enforcement of the financial markets under Bush. Cox’s SEC hindered probes, slowed cases, and shrank fines, according to the GAO. Cox has been painted as a regulator missing in action Another Ayn Rand disciple, enough said as to his policies.
6- Bush never moved to stop allowing tax deductions for the expenses of opening factories and moving jobs overseas. It is what Bush did NOT do as well as what he did that defines his failings.Obama fights to have that deduction eliminated. Bush obviously was playing to hs corporate constituency.
7 - Clinton succumbed to compromising with the usual suspect short-sighted Republicans on key issues . Encouraging more home ownership was a good idea but it was horribly twisted by greedy mortgage companies, appraisers, banks etc. during the Bush administration. Of course, Bush once again let poor policies ride, it is what Bush did NOT do.
8 - When did Obama want to return to the 1990's? It is the Republicans that wax sentimental about most of the Eisenhower years through the 1990's. Clinton is a likeable guy that grew up barely middle-class. Voters identify with that, a good foil for Romney and Ryan. .
9 - When you, of course, blindly jump to blame Clinton or Obama, remember that most if not all of the policies cast in disfavor today were supported or even intiated by Republicans, e.g. Bush and the bailouts.

@Dirk -

You're spinning so hard that Hoffa has become seriously dizzy just trying to follow your perverted logic and its selective application.

5) Obama's SEC hasn't been very tough yet either, has it?

6) So, now were blaming policies that Bush didn't even enact on Bush, simply because he didn't do away with them? If these policies actually exist (please provide a statutory cite to the tax break you're referring to), and if they are so very bad, then why didn't Obama do away with them during his first term? He had 4 years and 2 years with majority party control of both the House and Senate, remember? So, Obama is just as guilty as Bush - and while you blame Bush, you selectively give Obama a pass, despite being just as guilty for such omission - how very prejudiced of you!

7) And now you're blaming Bush for not undoing Clinton's mistakes - utterly unbelievable! BTW - Obama hasn't done away with any of the policies you're referring to either, did he? And as far as FTAs are concerned, Obama actually entered into three more unfavorable FTAs with South Korean, Panama, and Colombia. But Hoffa supposes that those will end up being Bush's fault as well, right? Just like Obama breaking his promise to renegotiate NAFTA will also somehow be Bush's fault, correct?

8) Did you not watch the DNC convention? Obama was gushing about the Clinton years and the return to Clinton era policy positions - he already opened up even more unfavorable trade agreements, just as Clinton did, and next he wants to revert back to Clinton era taxation policy, yes?

9) Bush's bailouts were all set-up to be interest bearing loans. Obama took the Bush auto-bailout and perverted it by involving the UAW, Italians, Canadians, and a cars czar, lest you forget. Carter's bailout of Chrysler back in '79 made the taxpayers about $350M in interest payments. That bailout was a straight up interest bearing loan with a defined repayment schedule - and nothing more. Obama's behind closed doors hanky-panky (despite promising to be the most transparent and claiming that we could watch on C-SPAN 3 (which was yet another LIE)) with his crony buddies in the UAW and Fiat will end up costing taxpayers an estimated $50B when all is said and done according to the CBO, OBM, and outside analysts. Bush was following the successful Carter model of bailout, but that just wasn't good enough for Obama - no, he had to go and screw it up and give away billions of taxpayers dollars to his crony union buddies. But of course, Hoffa is sure that will somehow end up being Bush's fault as well, right?

Are you seriously this sick and deluded? You really need to seek out some professional help!

BTW: Going back to your #3, which wasn't even a government policy, let alone a Bush policy, you're absolutely right - poor and middle class people spending their money on stuff made in / imported from China at WalMart does far more to create family sustaining jobs here in America than allowing a rich guy, like Mitt Romney, to spend his money on buying new Cadillacs every year for his wife, doesn't it?

Do you honestly believe the CRAPOLA NONSENSE that you're pushing here?

And you still haven't explained 1) the policies of Bush that killed American jobs and our economy, and 2) how those policies worked to actually kill American jobs and our economy.

Clearly, a majority of the blame rests with Clinton and Obama policies, as Hoffa has definitely proven by naming actual legislation and explaining how those policies killed American jobs and our economy.

GET A CLUE!!!

It is jrh that are full of "crapola".
Middle buying power is what keeps the economy going strong. When the finances are low they don't go out & spend money as often on dining & entertainment. So local establishments suffer as well. Not very many Romney's at the local watering holes & pubs the middle class keeps alive. They put off buying a new car or maybe just buy used instead. They forgo the vacation plans. Thus the "staycation". You have proven nothing except you are very adept at spewing vitriol & rhetoric.

@Walker -

So, if restaurants, bars, tourist traps, and used car dealerships create more family sustaining jobs than the domestic auto-industry, then why did Obama go to such great lengths to bail-out Detroit and the UAW? All those autoworkers could have easily found family sustaining employment in restaurants, bars, tourist traps, and used car dealerships, according to you anyway, right?

Honestly, you guys are making this too easy!

Hoffa -
1. You're the screamer about deficit spending. Now you soft pedal it when we look at Bush's huge deficit spending in the good economic years. The problem Obama had was there was no "rainy day" fund, it was all spent and deficit hawks were already worried before the Great Recession. So much for putting "business" types in the White House, what did the Iraq War net us?
2. Tax cuts for the rich were the meat and potatoes of Bush's tax scheme. The bones went to the middle class. We can see evidence of this in the Republican Party's remaining self-destructive defense of the uber-wealthy's very low tax rates historically. Obama's tax proposals for the rich seem about right, and fair. Many rich people agree, they would rather pay a higher rate and preserve our nation. It is short-sighted for our Nation to advocate for the Scrooge McDucks.
3- The rich can spend their money as they like, and they do. Much of it is invested and stashed around the world, not here. Some of it goes for the best tax lawyers available to minimize their already low taxes, and influencing politicians to keep their rates low and fight for tax breaks for them. Even the duplicitous Romney used the term "trickledown" against Obama. Trickledown is now a laughable and perjorative term.
4. Of course I am not saying military spending is unnecessary or Bush spent nothing on infrastructure. But as Obama says, let's do more nation building here, versus other countries.

To be continued.

@Dirk -

Before you continue with a bunch of nonsense, please try actually answering the questions posed:

1) Identify Bush policies that killed US jobs and the domestic economy.

Hoffa gave you three specific Clinton policies, remember?

2) Explain how those policies killed US jobs and the economy.

Hoffa explained how the aforementioned Clinton policies of the GLB Act, NAFTA, and expanded MFN status to China, all directly contributed to the evils you previously identified of financial deregulation and off-shoring, that for some reason or another you attribute to Bush even though you appear unable to name a single Bush policy that accomplished these evils.

STOP the endless spinning, deflection, and projection and just give straight and direct answers to the questions posed or admit that you were wrong about Bush.

BTW - In case you forgot, Hoffa originally asked you "exactly what policies of the Bush administration led to the current sour economic conditions," and you identified "huge deficits" as a policy. If that's the case, then Obama running even bigger deficits than Bush is actually killing jobs and economy according to your logic, right? Or is Bush deficit spending bad, while Obama deficit spending is good? You haven't explained anything on this point yet.

Also, please cite to the provisions in the tax code wherein Bush apparently gave more tax breaks that were solely limited to the rich and explain how doing so killed jobs and the domestic economy - you still haven't done this.

Hoffa - Sorry, a few weeks ago I thought you were a criminal lawyer specializing at defending hopeless cases. But you said you do mostly civil cases. OK, let's go there.
You are aware of negligence in tort law. If a trucking company lets a truck go out on the road without brakes, and a huge accident occurs as a result, we all know what generally happens in court. The same for Bush. You cannot just sit there as the boss and let the truck mechanics pretend to be maintaining the fleet and fixing serious problems. Yes, what Bush did was let "stuff" happen. Then we had the catastrophes out on the highway. 9/11, further intelligence flubs with WMD and Iraq, the Katrina lack and lateness of federal response, Bin Laden's refuge in Pakistan, Iran's growing nuclear threat, huge deficits, regulatory laxity that ultimately led to the Great Recession, etc.
Ultimately, let's consider what happened on BUSH'S WATCH! Let's go to military law. The irresponsible sentry goes to the brig, or worse.
Specifically, The Great Recession came near the end of Bush's eight year term. Yet you insist on going back so much farther than EIGHT years! Obama's entry was as the nation was barreling down the slope toward the cliff. And you complain because Obama did not divine a nearly instant recovery from such a morass.
I cite criminal negligence.
Bitter-ender that you are, you join the losers that have a propensity to blame others, and feel like victims. That is a criminal attitude.

@Dirk -

Bottom line to this whole debate - Hoffa asked you to specifically name the Bush policies that allegedly tanked domestic jobs and our economy.

Fact is that you failed to name a single specific Bush policy, while Hoffa gave you three specific Clinton policies.

Hoffa offers FACT, while all Dirk offers is speculation, hearsay, unfounded inferences, and conjecture.

Hoffa WINS by default, as all of Dirk's evidence is excluded in a motion in limine.

@Fred -

The people complaining are those that will have to pay for Obama's proposed tax increases that will be funneled to the takers, such as yourself. Put yourself in our shoes for a change. Hoffa will probably be forced out of business thanks to Obamacare and the proposed tax increases and all his employees will go on unemployment and suck from the system - so, do you still feel good about he outcome?

Fred's got a personal bailout plan he can implement if necessary. Back to the home country were he's an actual citizen.

Look at the population density of the counties. It's about math, not fraud. (keep in mind that it's only a few companies that provide the machines and software for counting the votes - and they are owned by people that are predominantly Republican)

The maps are 100% correct Mike.
The dense dunce population is typically in big cities, and typically that is where you find the takers and not the makers. They have become content with entitlements, and have no aspirations to better themselves. If only global warming could happen overnight- the East and West coasts would submerge, leaving America with more makers than takers.
Imagine if we stripped away 60% of the budget for entitlements, we could actually pay down the debt.

Mike, it's the "arithmetic thing" again. There are many more people living in the "liberal enclaves" than in the vast empty spaces.

When you look at the nation map most of the Red States are big empty spaces with the exception of Texas which will soon become a "swing state" because of the growth of Dallas, Houston, San Antonio and Austin.

The people who live in metropolitan area live in the 21st century and those in the non-metro area want to live in the 19th century.

djia is getting killed, down almost 300... it's only the beginning.... im starting to really wonder if the mayans were right.

Typical knee jerk reaction. It will settle down & improve as it has the past 4 years after the crash during the previous administration. I do believe it has almost doubled since Obama took over.

The United States of America: Born 7/04/1776 Died 11/06/2012

It was a murder/suicide. The Democrats murdered America and then committed suicide out of ignorance.

America died November of 2008.

Mike&Mike.

Please oh please get over it. Obama won. The country will be fine. Just stop & think for two seconds... maybe it'll be good for the country. Clinton was. This can work, too. We just need some cooperation.

Not happening so far. Rep. Leadership seems to be holding out in their bubble claiming though their candidate lost, all of his positions on things won.

???

Obama has proven he can not manage money and can not create revenue. He has said no to any form of revenue growth because it does not fit the liberal way. And you say it will be fine. I would pray for Clinton right now. Free stuff won over common sense. It can't get any more clear.

thats more of a left thing...they got that on autodial...

they vote while they were here?

@mistycoty...

Those are not "thoughts" but they do present a good imitation of the rants of a very disturbed person. You might want to seek professional help.

Hey Captain Midnight: I'm not in to name calling and I don't argue{especially with ignorant people}, but I will say that if you think I'm disturbed, then watch the movie FOR GREATER GLORY/w Andy Garcia. The communists are the ones disturbed and it sounds like you are too! Think and do your research before you open your mouth. If you ever want to talk to me like an honest person, then let me know and I will give you my phone#. mistycoty

Obummer has thick skin.

@Brittany -

A citizen that has created thousands of private sector jobs and merely exercises his First Amendment rights on a regular basis is "part of the problem?"

To any logical and rational person, you, and others like you, are the root cause of the problem, and not Mr. Beck.

Try again!

Brittany -

Glenn Beck has never been a logical or rational person, by any acceptable definition of those terms... he just loves to stir the pot.

Conversely, he does make quite a good living spouting his psychotic delusions, and he does appeal to a certain group of low forehead, equally psychotic people.

This is America, free speech, et al… we’ve always had people baying at the moon.

@Brittany...

How can you tell that Glenn Beck is "becoming unhinged"? Isn't that his normal condition?

@Brittany -

Mr. Beck has created thousands of private sector jobs. How many private sector jobs have you created?

@ Hoffa -
I was surprised by your comment that Mr. Beck has created thousands of private sector jobs. Please provide a rough outline of those jobs. Does Mercury Radio Arts and it's various radio shows, websites, etc. employ thousands of people? If not at Mercury, then where else has Mr. Beck created all of these jobs? I'm just curious and you seem to know so...

JRH,

It doesn't. They have no plan to reduce the deficit or debt. Just noise designed to create envy that even they can't be stupid enough to believe.

Well, actually, we now have proof that many are stupid enough to believe it...

Neither candidate said anything about plans. I'm still waiting for details.

@Victor Drover -

Romney had a general 5 point plan that he consistently brought up during the debates, and a comprehensive 57 point plan on his website. Ryan also has two documents on paper addressing the federal budget, deficits and debts, known as the Path to the Prosperity and the Revised/Alternative Path to Prosperity.

Again, what is Obama's plan - can you please explain it for me?

Hey! Lets point to web sites and pretend that vacuous, empty pandering is the same thing as a plan. Anyone can make bullet points, but thats not a plan. "Create 12 million jobs". That's not a plan. But I digress. I'll let you go on living in your dream world while the rest of us move on. Enjoy the past and 4 more years of complaining.

@Victor Drover -

Why are you so complacent with Obama's lack of a viable budget (not even a single member of his own party backed Obama's previously proposed federal budget), lack of a plan to address the debt/deficit (which he promised to cut in half during his first term and failed to accomplish), lack of a real plan to expand economic/job growth (which he promised his stimulus package would accomplish and laughed off when "shovel ready wasn't as shovel ready as we expected"), etc?

At least Romney had something on paper that we could all look at, a framework if you will, even if it wasn't as detailed as you expected to be, and Ryan's budget is actually very comprehensive, whether you'd like to admit to it or not.

Again, what's the plan going forward under Obama? What exactly did casting a ballot for Obama/Biden stand for? Please, Hoffa is trying to understand.

Was it merely another round of blind "hope and change?"

This is the sickest thing that Hoffa has ever read on the Patch!

No photo I.D. required to pray....praise the lord!!!

This of course was sarcasm --- of those ultra conservative self proclaimed religiously righteous who thought that if a woman was raped and conceived a baby -- it was God's will -- and of course to all those who stressed over and over again that Obama was a Muslim --- although he is a Born Again Christian --- although I could care less if he were a Muslim, Jew, Christian, Mormon, Hindu or whatever --- our country was founded by men who were mostly Deist, and it is time that Conservatives recognize we are a Melting Pot and Religion should not play a role in who we choose to represent us.

Only idiots and the ignorant voted for a second term of Obama. Which one are you?

@ Ice Tea Good name -- you Tea Folks have sure been put on ice ---

David Tatarowicz - You are a mooch, a taker. Pay your bills.

Well, part of it did, Take away the "free stuff" and your conclusions fall to pieces.

Who bought this election? Here's a hint: It wasn't the GOP.

Vicki:

I call BS on your 'I didn't want to make religion the issue' claim. You posted several times spewing your hate of Mormons and their religion, as well as the 'scary' things that you claim would happen should one be elected as president.

Garsh, I didn't know that votin' for Romney was going ta make me one of those Mormons. Good thing we dodged that thar bullet, but am I a Kenyan now?

Vickie - I am a white man who did not get anyone killed in Benghazi. Obama cannot say that.

I think the orange Bone man said he is sticking to his guns (metaphor). I fear it is the same ol, same ol .....crap of Tea from the US House.

I take it that you are also an anti-Mormon bigot, then...

From your pointers:
"campaign finance reform AGAIN! As you see money will not buy all elections"

I read that as you implying that the GOP buys elections, but that must only apply to Republicans not Democrats. When Democrats spend more (to buy the election) and win, it is won by votes.

Nifty how that works.

Sadly you can't invest money you don't have.
"Investing in education" is a campaign promise that just can not be done, where is that money going to come from?
Entitlements are 60% of the budget but we can't cut there. Raise taxes on middle class and watch entitlements increase.
The only good thing is this is Obama's second term, he doesn't have to worry about another term. So he can do the unpopular thing....
Let's just hope it is the right thing.

I hear the stock market almost doubled in value during his first 4 years. May be a clue as to where to put your money; especially now during the knee jerk reaction making it temporarily drop.

Walker: You might like to leverage your investments as well, let me know how that works out for you.

Obama took advantage of Citizens United, his re-election was bought with money just as much or more than any other election. So was the Republican leaning Supreme Court wrong about Obamacare too, or do you just pick and choose?

I guess the Dems just couldn't allow anything to compete with their stream of union money pouring in to their candidates, could they?

Let's face it Cow, the Dems managed to take a candidate who couldn't meet any of the promises he made and got way too many people to buy into a second term. Remember:
"I will turn this economy around in three years or it's a one term deal"
"Unemployment will not go above 8%"
"we will have in the first year an immigration bill"
"we can bring Democrats and Republicans together"

and my favorite
"I will cut the deficit in half by the end of my first term"

Brittany -

I guess I am just a bit more philosophical about ALL of the rulings of the Supreme Court. In our Republic, they do have the final word; that does not mean that their ruling(s) are always the best for America. I am also more philosophical about amendments to the Constitution, but that is only because I take a longer view of these issues.

Look at the 18th Amendment to the Constitution banning alcohol, January 17, 1920; oops, the 21st Amendment overturned that on December 5, 1933. Parenthetically here, Wisconsin has the most alcohol related deaths and accidents than any other state, and the small city of Cudahy has more taverns than any city. We Wisconsinites really do love our alcohol, but you had better watch out for that evil, evil marijuana…

My position would not be going back to the Campaign Finance Reform Bill, if you a referencing The Bipartisan Campaign Reform Act (BCRA) of 2002, also known as the McCain-Feingold Act. Even that bill had too many holes in it. I would like to see something in terms of limits to contributions, and most important of all, transparency, where everyone who gave money/free advertising to a political cause must report it publically. Even given that, I am not naïve enough to think that we will ever be able to stop the influx of illegal money getting into political campaigns.

That is as American as apple pie…

Thanks for the tip, Bill. Those crazy old aunts and uncles say some crazy stuff, don't they....

William Eib
3:02 pm on Wednesday, November 7, 2012
Lady Parts win the day. DEM Dames killed last night. The GOPers better be ready for more Lady Parts in Congress. I pity the GOPer who tries to take on the DEM Dames.

Speaking of mature, how about some leadership and answers on Benghazi? (Palm to forehead) Obama lies and families die.

Ima Hippee –

I think there are several parallel investigations occurring on that, along with the ongoing investigations regarding Bush’s failure to act on actionable intelligence before 9/11…

@skinnyDUDE - Well, you still have Walker, and he is going to net 250,000 new jobs by the end of his term!. Why is that promise not cheering you up? Growth like that will really help the economy and help reduce the deficit. He has a clear shot with all three branches of government in his pocket. No excuses.

We love what we got. Obama will go down in history as a great president when we win the House in 2014 and have two full years to run our agenda. Then, Hillary or Amy Klobuchar will continue the run!

Dirk wrote; "Well, you still have Walker, and he is going to net 250,000 new jobs by the end of his term!.."

That is going to be alot harder now that Obamacare is here to stay. I just sat down with my boss to discuss employment strategies. Either we have to lay off 8 employees, or move at least double that to part time so we don't have to pay insurance. And, no thanks to Obama, our business revenues increased 20% last year.

I am overjoyed Walker can continue his Conservative Reform agenda . Obama is a EPIC FAILURE but its hard to run against Santa Claus . But when the empty sack arrives at some point.....Boy will you liberals cry like babies at the mandatory austerity measures that follow. When no one will invest , or take your debt the massive cuts occur at the same time inflation is rising. That ends the gravy train but kills the nation as at that point you cant grow out of it. I dont expect ignorant liberals to understand the economy .......Obama sure doesnt .

The Anti-Alinsky -

"And, no thanks to Obama, our business revenues increased 20% last year."

That is absolutely priceless!

Comrade Johnny, why is that epic?

doc1954...What history lessons are you referring to? Communism in Russia started with an armed revolution. I don't recall one of those taking place in the US during the past four years.

In what existing socialist countries (if you can identify one) did a "finatical" (fanatical) take over?

When did freedom of religion get eliminated? Last I heard the Religious Right in this country keeps trying to impose its reigious views on others.

Could care less about Fox. But I grieve for my country. The only good thing about this election result is that when it all comes crashing down, the D's will be in charge and it will be the end of that political party.

EPIC FAILURE must be in style !

@Keith Best...I know you weren't prepared for this outcome, but it's time to wake up and start accepting the new reality. Americans weren't duped the first time nor this time. Your party just didn't get the job done and people didn't buy your message of doom and gloom. It is time to move on. Your party is too old, too white, too male and too far to the political right.

Lyle Ruble -

It may take some time for my ultra-conservative friends to work their way through the horrendous loss of the last Presidential Election, and, let us face it, some of you just never will. Some of you will simply just get stalled and permanently stuck in stage 2, lashing out at everything and anything you can find to attack. [E.g. Boffa]

The history of our country unequivocally demonstrates that neither the Democrats nor the Republicans ride the zenith of their stature for long; by 2024 the Republican Party will peak and the Democratic Party will perhaps find its nadir… until that occurs, give yourself the precious gift of healing…

The essence of life is CHANGE.

The Five Stages of Grief:

1) DENIAL
This first stage of grieving helps us to survive the loss. In this stage, the world becomes meaningless and overwhelming. Life makes no sense.

2) ANGER
Anger is a necessary stage of the healing process. Be willing to feel your anger, even though it may seem endless.

3) BARGAINING
We want life returned to what it was…if only, if only, if only.

4) DEPRESSION
After bargaining, our attention moves squarely into the present. Empty feelings present themselves, and grief enters our lives on a deeper level, deeper than we ever imagined. This depressive stage feels as though it will last forever.

5) ACCEPTANCE
This stage is about accepting the reality that our loss is physically gone and recognizing that this new reality is the permanent reality.

Lyle:

Please re-read the many posts from Mr. Poulos and think about that 'your message of doom and gloom' comment. There has been a pretty constant barrage of 'gloom and doom' warnings coming from the left warning us about the consequences of electing the 'Atheistic immorality' of the 'Randian extremists' and supporting the 'plutocratic oligarchy'...

It's also pretty amusing that you claim that the party has moved 'too far to the right' even though the last two Republican presidential candidates leaned farther to the left than the other republican candidates.

@Lyin' John Wilson -

Coming from the man who didn't even know that the entire House was up for (re)election during this cycle! (see above)

You only wish that you had a tenth of Hoffa's vastly superior intellect working for you!

Just remember that jealousy and envy are very unbecoming traits!

@Lyle -

What happens if things really do get worse over the next 4 years instead of better?

Will you and the Dems just continue to blame it on Republican obstructionism?

@CowDung....Whatever Nick has written has nothing to do with my response to Keith Best, so let's keep it in context. The political right has not recognized the changes in the American population and still are addressing things in a manner when white males controlled society. You claim that McCain and Romney where further left than the party and still lost their respective national elections. You are missing the possibility that they didn't move far enough to the left to be actually in the center. It is obvious of what I have claimed all along, the Republican Party has moved so far to the right that the center looks like an extreme left position. Therefore, if the Republican Party wants to become relevant once again, then they need to shed the extreme right ideology, drop the social issues agenda and concentrate where they have the most relevance, fiscal issues.

If the party has indeed moved 'too far' to the right, how do the moderates keep winning the party nomination?

@JRH....If the economy does not fully recover, I will not blame it on any particular group or individual. So much that happens now is beyond our control and responds to more global forces. For anyone who is foolish enough to believe that America is entering into a new Golden Age are self deceiving and don't do themselves a favor. On the same note, anyone foolish enough to believe that America is doomed is equally deceived. We must change to meet the new challenges of reality. It will be neither easy nor without pain and suffering. But, it is what it is. This election has proven that finally the "white man's rule" is no longer relevant. Male WASPs are moving into insignificance and will become as extinct as the Dodo bird.

CowDung -

Gerrymandering and redistricting…

jrh sure is impressed with himself. A legend in his own mind. Entertaining. Good for a laugh.

Moamar Wilson:

"Gerrymandering and redistricting…"

What does that have to do with McCain or Romney winning the nomination?

@Lyle -

Isn't getting our financial house, debts, and deficits in order and growing the economy in the best interest of all Americans, regardless of racial/ethnic/gender/sexual preference backgrounds?

Why do you keep on insisting that Americans of certain racial/ethnic/gender/sexual preference all have different needs than one another that all must be met by our federal government? Shouldn't the federal government just be doing things that benefit all Americans equally?

Why are you so race-oriented in your post election analysis?

It's nice to see Keith Best, a member of the executive committee of the Waukesha GOP, post the same thing on over 20+ Patch stories across the nation.

My friends, Keith is spamming the nation and doing it poorly.

Keith Best -

One would expect better from a member of the executive committee of the Waukesha GOP.

Joseph Goebbels would be so proud of you; now please remember, you just had your derriere handed to you in the General Election...

maybe Kathy N can scratch up a few TeaGOP votes for you. give her a call.

yep- everthing is "free" now...oh, unless you have a job...then you just bend over...

"Galt." That name invokes thoughts of everyone's favorite chain-smoking, passport bride, adulteress, B-philosopher, Medicare and Social Security mooching author Ayn Rand. How old was I when I read Rand? Around 12? I do remember thinking, "This attitude would never work in the real world." And I'm still right. Me-first is not an attitude that inspires self-growth or instills confidence.

"Bren" Please stick comment where the sun does not shine. You cannot make me participate, so enjoy yourself.

Bren, I am aware that "adulteress" is a problem for some of you that were born in the late 1800's, but please fill me in on the "Medicare and Social Security mooching" part. Is that even possible from a liberal viewpoint? And what exactly is a passport bride? How is it relevant to 2012?
As for Atlas Shrugged, if that is the Rand you read, I assume you read it hot off the press in 1957. You may want to pick it up again, it's not as far off as you think. Redistribution is real today.

@Greg -- Ayn Rand's personal issues are germane in that they point out the hypocrisy of the woman and the utter lack of value in her vision. A passport bride is someone who marries to enter this country and then goes merrily on about her own life -- the adulteress part. Then, when this champion of self-sufficiency finds herself poor and ill, she makes use of the two collectivist programs she could access through her marriage -- Social Security and Medicare. Somehow it's evil when everyone else gets them, but not her.

As for wealth redistribution, the top marginal tax rate in 1957 was 90%. There's very little to complain about now.

Randy,
So adding hipocrisy on top of hipocrisy is your answer? You would deffend everything this woman did if she had not written a few books.
As for 1957 vs. now, I just have to point out Obamacare, it was fiction then.

Greg, I merely savor the hypocrisy of those followers of Ayn Rand who embrace her "me-first" philosophy while conveniently ignoring what would seem to be a contradictory code of ethics (which included a pro-choice stance) to what this far-right segment claims to espouse. As for Atlas Shrugged, I believe I picked it out of a bookstore bargain bin. I did throw it out afterwards as a community service. Someone dumped the Fountainhead on me, knowing that I would read anything within reach. I was told it was "better" than Atlas Shrugged. It was not.

Go Galt, for good or ill, you chose your pseudonym.

The majority are just plain tired of being talked down to by the extreme TeaGOP!

Was This The Most Progressive Set of Election Outcomes in American History?
Written by Kenneth Quinnell on 8 November 2012 — Leave a Comment

Probably. We’ve had more progressive presidents and Congressional delegations, but has there ever been an election where the voters did more to push progressive outcomes via the ballot. The biggest aspect of this is the fact that the people rejected just about everything that conservatives stood for this year — their candidates, their manufactured “scandals,” their attempts at voter suppression, their issues, their media manipulation, their math, their very understanding of the way the world works. It’s always sketchy to draw a “message” from aggregate votes, but this list of progressive outcomes is unprecedented and seems to have really sent a message about what it is the American people want. Here’s a incomplete list of what happened:.......

Alabama, Florida, Missouri, Montana and Wyoming voted down assaults on the Affordable Care Act http://ow.ly/f7qRw #p2

keep dreaming morning...nice "progressive" rose colored world you live in...
Someday dems will face reality.

yomammy: When the finally Dems face reality, all of us will be required to pay the price for them taking so long to admit it.
More accumulated debt for another four years which is predicted to top $20 Trillion, this amounts to ~ $300,000 per family. Rather than rack up more debt maybe Obama should just give $100,000 to each needy family, and tell them to make it last.
The main problem is there are more takers than makers now- this is going to turn off some makers and they will become takers. It is a snowball effect that will lead us into financial ruin and/or Socialism.

Hoffa;
Enough of the campaign points already. Obama won. Half your campaign points are pure fiction. Besides, the campaign is over. Obama won.

It's time we get serious about solving our problems collectively.

@FreeThought Troy -

"Half your campaign points are pure fiction."

Which ones, and provide your proof. Hoffa never just makes crap up out of his rear end!

Hoffa - you take your points from Fox News and the Candidate's aritmitically (??) challenged web site.

Your go-to in an argument that you know you are on the losing side of is to ask for sources and then shoot them down like you are the guru of sources (even though yours are questionable at best).

Just stop, please. Obama won. The Dems gained seats in both the house & senate. The most radical Reps. were beaten.

@FreeThought Troy -

Why didn't you answer Hoffa's question? Since discovering REALITY is so very difficult for you, Hoffa supposes that he'll help you out a little, but only because Hoffa is an awesome guy! Let's take Obama's promises one by one, shall we?

No mandate in his healthcare law.

http://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2012/06/how-obama-broke-his-promise-on-individual-mandates/259183/

Halfing the deficit in his first term.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SaQUU2ZL6D8

Renegotiating NAFTA and other unfair trade agreements.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PF9gpvI2UfU

A stimulus that would create 8M+ shovel ready jobs and lower unemployment to below 5.6%.

http://change.gov/newsroom/entry/your_weekly_address/

A comprehensive immigration reform bill.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yUWJHmRjJy0

To end both wars on day 1.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8VlXfs1K04g

To make green energy an affordable viable alternative.

http://www.forbes.com/sites/realspin/2012/11/02/president-obamas-green-jobs-cost-taxpayers-big-bucks/

http://www.canadafreepress.com/index.php/article/49498

http://www.reuters.com/article/2012/04/13/us-usa-campaign-green-idUSBRE83C08D20120413

To lower health care insurance premiums by an average of $2,500.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_o65vMUk5so

To make the cost of higher education more affordable.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MQZHyyKJe_4

To bring peace to the Middle East.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UcomtahzSRs

As you can clearly see, no Fox News and Hoffa relies on the words of Barack Obama himself. Honestly, if you thought that Hoffa was making this stuff up, then apparently you don't even know the man who you voted or his prior campaign promises. It's ignorant voters, such as yourself, that are destroying this country!

Next time, do your homework before voting!

Don't you think you owe Hoffa an apology?

How is this not a compromise?

In what way is revising the tax code the 'exact platform of the Republican ticket'--haven't the Dems been complaining about there being too many loopholes? I would think that making the offer to work with Dems to close those loopholes would be a fair compromise...

A compromise would be a serious discussion of revenues. No discussion of increasing taxes is compromise. Merely agreeing with the majority party is not compromise.

A serious discussion would involve the level of tax increase. I remember Sen. Shumer willing to up the ceiling from $250k/yr. to $1mil/yr. This is compromise.

Not changing your position one inch is not compromise. It is ignoring the message of the election.

Troy, if the country wanted their government to accomplish something, they wouldn't have left it essentially unchanged by the election. The country apparently wanted "4 more years". They voted for it and they got it.

I'm sorry?

Are you trying to tell me the country wanted another obsturctionist Republican Congress more interested in anti-abortion legislation than job creation? They wanted a Senate that has used the filibuster more the last four years than any point in our nation's history? They wanted a Congress who hit 10% approval rating?

I know what you are trying to say, Greg. The gov. is left pretty much unchanged. My point is that senate seats that were supposed to be slam dunks for Republicans were won handily by Democrats. What was supposed to be a super close election, turn into a wholloping. The country wants change in my opinion. They want action. To me, the election proves it.

First off, I'm not Greg.

Second, the "message" sent by the voters was that they wanted the next 4 years to be essentially the same as the last. Whether that was the intended message or not, that's what happened. The balance of power has not shifted, the primary players in all positions are essentially the same. If the voters, assuming they actually know what the hell they're doing in the first place, wanted to send a message about compromise, moving forward, solving problems, etc. then they shouldn't have left the same bull-headed incompetents, from the very top on down, in place.

There were no slam dunks or wallopings - either way. The message, like it or not, sent (and received, apparently) is "stay the course".

So we will have 4 more years and people like you can be outraged because you think some other message was sent, but it wasn't. We reap what we sow.

Bob - are are right, of course. You are not Greg. I would like to apologize to you and Greg. I didn't mean to. I am sorry.

We disagree on the message of the election. That is fine. The fear that nothing more will be done in four years is a legitimate one. My point is that the goal to make Obama a one term president was not reached. My opinion is the goal now needs to be serving the American People - not taking back power.

Well, let's see. I voted for Obama/Biden, Baldwin, Heaster, and Pokrandt. I can't help it if my districts are even more gerrymandered than they were before. I can't vouch for the intelligence or sanity of most of my neighbors either.

The House Republicans need to to one of two things -- either compromise on the tax issue or shut up about the debt.

Troy:

Why does there necessarily have to be a tax increase in order for it to be a compromise? If they can curb spending and close 'loopholes' to bring the income and outgo closer together, isn't that a good thing?

It always is about taking back power and it always has been. This false issue of the uniqueness of making Obama a one term president is just that - the opposition always attempts to make the president a one term president and put obstructions in their way. They did the same thing with Clinton. Clinton had the ability to actually lead because he understood what leadership is about. Obama, from the get go, decided that leadership meant treat the minority opposition as if they're subservient to you. Haul them in for "stern talkings to" and publicly humiliate them. That doesn't work when you're success depends on your ability to get the other giant egos in the room to see things your way or, at the very least, work with you. And those giant egos never forget.

Petty? Yep, but it is what it is and a good leader can bring people into his circle even if their initial reaction is to hate his guts. Clinton could do that. Reagan could do that. To the extent that they were able to do that, they were successful in seeing to it that their agendas moved forward. Most of the rest of them, between then and now, have struggled - including Obama.

CowDung - I do understand the concept. My opinion (and that of the Democrats) are merely closing loopholes are not enough. What loopholes would get closed? The mortgage deduction? The child tax credit? These would absolutely kill (not literally) the middle class. The low hanging loop holes do not cut it. Not even close. Cutting spending is not enough. What programs will be cut? SSI? Medicare? These programs are the biggest expenses. The low hanging waste is not enough. Of course there need to be spending cuts and loop hole closings. My point is none of these cuts and closings are enough. The wealthiest amoung us to pay our tax rates is not an out-of-line request.

@Free ThoughtTroy -

If the Republican legislators all ran on their platforms, and were (re)elected by their constituents, then don't they owe it to those constituencies to stick to their guns?

Honestly, why do you think that the Republicans should sell out the constituencies that elected them and roll over just because Obama/Biden were re-elected to the Executive Branch?

What kind of twisted logic is this exactly?

Once again, the Republicans are at least coming to the table with a proposal - tax code reform. What have Obama and the Dems put on the table exactly, cause it sure looks like it's the Dems that are pushing a my-way-or-the-highway approach, doesn't it?

Randy, I guess if you want a system that takes into account your vote even when you lose, you're going to have to find one elsewhere. In lieu of that, drop one of those guys you voted against a line to let them know that even though they won, you'd like them to govern as if their opponent had. I'm sure that'll work.

What of the Republicans who ran on that platform and lost?

The Democrats have agreed there needs to be tax reform. They also have stated a part of that needs to include revenues. Replicans aren't even willing to discuss. Compromise to them seems to be Democrats changing their minds.

This isn't compromise. IT's the continuing formula of plans that just don't work.

Troy, if they ran and they lost they're not there, right? If they're not there and we still have the same balance of power, that means that enough of them ran on the platform and won to preserve it. That's kind of the whole point, is it not?

Yeah, Troy, it is, to the same extent that asking the Republicans to compromise is doing the same thing. Compromise would be both sides changing their minds. If one or both are unwilling to do so, no compromise. The time to start thinking about that is when folks are in the voting booth deciding whether they want the same cast of characters in office or not. Not a couple of days later.

" Compromise would be both sides changing their minds. If one or both are unwilling to do so, no compromise. The time to start thinking about that is when folks are in the voting booth deciding whether they want the same cast of characters in office or not. Not a couple of days later."

I absolutely agree.

Bob McBride -

I suspect that the electorate was reasonably pleased with the path and trajectory of the economic recovery and the direction that President Obama was leading.

The American people wanted to guarantee that ACA was fully implemented – CHANGE.

The American people wanted real Tax Reform, with millionaires paying their fair share and an end to the oil, gas, and petroleum subsidies – CHANGE.

The American people wanted to make sure that Social Security, Medicare and Medicaid were not gutted – CHANGE.

The American people wanted to see some effective, comprehensive Immigration Reform – CHANGE.

The American people wanted an end to the war in Afghanistan and only a remote chance that we might unilaterally attack Iran – CHANGE.

The American people wanted to take the government out of Abortion/women’s reproductive healthcare. [Todd Akin and Richard Mourdock are not aberrations within the Republican Party; they simply made the unpardonable error of making their parties position PUBLIC.] – CHANGE.

The American people wanted to get judges appointed to the Supreme Court who did not think that wearing a loincloth and carrying a big club was proper attire – CHANGE.

Where real change did not occur was in the House; I largely assign that to the influence of SuperPACs, gerrymandering and redistricting. [That will be a huge problem for Democrats until 2020.]

Troy:

Shouldn't both sides be willing to give up some things in a compromise?

We can start the spending cuts with Big Bird. Then we can move on to eliminating the penny (which each one cost 2 cents to produce). There are lots of things that can be eliminated or cut back before they look at getting rid of SSI or Medicare benefits.

Senator Coburn has even published a list detailing what he believes to be wasteful spending by the government.

http://www.coburn.senate.gov/public//index.cfm?a=Files.Serve&File_id=b7b23f66-2d60-4d5a-8bc5-8522c7e1a40e

I'll go by what happened, not your attempt to spin it, Wilson.

We're right back where we were before the election. Based on the results, the majority of the voters wanted "4 more years", warts and all.

CowDung. Yes. Both sides should be willing to compromise. I personally would have no problem with a Sen. (it is Sen. & not Cong. Colbern, right? I can't remember-sorry) Colbern bringing this list to the negotiations.

The issue is with the platform. Democrats have said they will rev. and cut. The problem I have is Dems ran on a platform of the richest of us contributing taxes at the Clinton era rates. They won. Republicans need to square with that and allow those discussions in the negotiations, also.

I am not saying Dems wouldn't compromise to a higher level than $250k. That is compromise, also. I would live with that. But the level needs to be set if we are serious about these things.

Using the 'we won, so we get to have it our way' method isn't compromise. Even Obama has agreed that raising taxes during a recession/recovery isn't a good idea. Besides, raising tax rates and/or creating new taxes aren't always effective in bringing in more revenues, and could actually bring a reduction in tax revenues.

Why not look at spending cuts first, close loopholes second, and see what that does?

Spending cuts are fine, but firing Big Bird isn't going to do it, and making life even more miserable for the ones who have been hit hard by the recession is heartless. You're right that raising taxes during a recession is not a good idea, so maybe the GOP could go back to tolerating deficits the way they did between 2001 and 2008.

Going back to the deficits we had in 2001-2008 would be great in comparison to the deficits we are currently running.

Eliminating government funding for Big Bird isn't going to end Sesame Street, and is only the first of many things that can be cut to help bring Washington's spending problem under control...

CowDung, "Using the 'we won, so we get to have it our way' method isn't compromise."

Yes. Of course I agree. Dems are not saying this. They are saying a balanced approach to both cuts, tax code review and tax increases to the most wealthy.

If the deficits are really the world ending problem that I keep hearing about, I don't understand why requireing those who have done extremely well to sacrifice a little more while the rest of us keep our tax breaks.

It's not "We won. We get our way." It's, "We ran on a platform. You ran on a platform. The country chose. It's time to implement what the country chose - not the platform of the party the country rejected."

Romney ran on reforming the tax code lowering the rates, cutting loopholes and spending. Obama ran on the balanced approach described above. Obama won. The country chose. Implementation on the platform is what the country expects.

@FreeThought Troy -

Back in 2008, Obama ran a platform of:

No mandate in his healthcare law.
Halfing the deficit in his first term.
Renegotiating NAFTA and other unfair trade agreements.
A stimulus that would create 8M+ shovel ready jobs and lower unemployment to below 5.6%.
A comprehensive immigration reform bill.
To end both wars on day 1.
To make green energy an affordable viable alternative.
To lower health care insurance premiums by an average of $2,500.
To make the cost of higher education more affordable.
To bring peace to the Middle East.
Etc, Etc.

So, using your logic, shouldn't Obama have actually done all of those things during his first term? In reality, those were all LIES and he didn't perform on any of those promises. What makes you think that his new promises won't be anything more than a new bunch of LIES?

Just for the sake of discussion, let's forget what Obama the Candidate said when he was a Presidential hopefull.
The people re elected him, true. (more than 50%)
The people want him to continue with his plan, true. (+50%)
The people also have not given all power over to the Democrats- there is still more GOP vs Dem. So this is not a mandate by the people to implement everything Obama wants.
In order for us to stop the runaway train heading for the financial cliff- something must be done.
Slash spending and increase taxes! But....
The poor will be expected to get by with less.
Increased taxation may push the middle class into the dependant class.
The wealthiest will stop spending and investing in their business, resulting in fewer jobs.
***so everyone suffers equally***
Which is better, a Nation on the verge of Bankruptcy, or a Nation heading into another depression?
Realistically, neither is better. It has to hurt everyone equally in order to right the wrongs of the current and prior Administrations.
Hyper inflation may be the only way to go: Costs double, wages double, the buying power of grannies' SS check is halfed- and the debt effectively becomes halfed because of the increase in GDP (due to inflation).
Scarey shit I think.

you are Karl are two peas in a pod. --

#FoxNews @MegynKelly introduces Karl Rove as "election expert". Frames Obama victory w/racist dog whistles & says no need to go to "middle".

Amen to that Dennis. The whole political line for dems is divide and conquer by blaming someone else for your problems and using that to get your vote. They don't seem to notice that their lives don't get any better and yet they keep voting the same people in and blame some rich person or corporation for their problems. The biggest "corporation" in the world is the American Govt and they get to make their own rules whereas all other corporations the dems chastise actually have someone looking over their shoulder.

Chadwick and Dennis seem to be confusing Democrats with Republicans.

Democrats don't accuse of Socialism because of disagreements. Democrats don't blame the poor and call them entitled. Democrats don't focus on poor, black/hispanic & old voters and attempt to supress their vote in the name of some fictional problem. Democrats don't force themselves into a woman's doctor's office for some religious conviction. Democrats don't discriminate over who is allowed to marry (also for religious reasons).

Those are Replicans.

Chadwick –

I call your attention to the last sentence in your post.

Specifically, “whereas other corporations the dems chastise actually have someone looking over their shoulder.”

Who would that be looking over their shoulder, Chadwick?

I remember reading a Milwaukee Journal front-page article back in 1985. The title was “IBM Too Large for IRS to Audit.”

Now, if that isn’t giving a corporation a license to steal, I do not know what is.

If regulation of corporations, Wall Street, banks, etc. really worked – other than a façade for public confidence – the economic disaster(s) of 2008 would not have happened. The real truth behind all this “over-regulation” and just plain “regulation” is that these entities buy off the regulators; additionally, most of these corporations have very complicated internal computer accounting systems that these governmental regulators do not and cannot understand, much less regulate.

In the all too rare cases where a corporation is caught doing something illegal, they do not go to court, they simply bargain for a fine, and go right back to doing what they were doing. In the one-in-a-million case where the crime is really over the top, you may find a CEO or high corporate officer going to a Federal Club Med for a year or two. When they come out, they just plug right back in to where they started.

Yeah, Chadwick, corporations really do have someone looking over their shoulder…

FreeThought Troy -

"Chadwick and Dennis seem to be confusing Democrats with Republicans.

Democrats don't accuse of Socialism because of disagreements..."

Easy there big fellow... you cannot bury these folks in hard facts at this point in time!

You have to respect the grieving process that these folks are going through. Give them some time to deal with their huge loss and reason may prevail…

Golly, at this point in time they are even characterizing war-mongering McCain and Willard as MODERATES!

Boy if you two are the bastions of the liberal party then crushing your party shouldn't take to long. Democrats don't force themselves into your doctors office? Republicans do that how? By claiming that a childs life is important to save? If your referring bills that have been put out and never passed then I see that your truly grasping at straws. Democrats don't discriminate over who is allowed to marry? I'm assuming your talking about gay couples and believing that something is morally perversive or against all science and human anatomy consitutes discrimination? John Wilson's comments about corporations are truly without fact so I won't even waste my time listing all of the corporate executives that have gone to jail. The crash of 2008 started back in the 90's and the govt was the one who got the ball rolling and kicked it if it slowed down. Individual people and corporations jumped on and here we are. John references an article from 1985; that's perfectly hilarious. Yea, the IRS is still in the same predicament. FreeThoughtTroy put together this sentence "Democrats don't accuse of Socialism because of disagreements" enough said on that one. Did you see that even the UN observers couldn't believe we didn't require an ID? I couldn't believe it the first time I went to vote and I still can't believe it. The state literally will give the ID to you for free and if you can't make it you can vote absentee and be verified.

Chadwick -

"John Wilson's comments about corporations are truly without fact so I won't even waste my time listing all of the corporate executives that have gone to jail."

First, name five of the executives that went to JAIL, not a FEDERAL CLUB MED... You seem to have a long list ready, so just name five.

Second, I did not say corporate executives did not go to jail; I said IF they go to jail, they go to a Federal Club Med facility.

Finally, “someone is looking over the shoulder of corporations” is a disingenuous joke!

John Wilson;

Here you go:

Jeff Skilling, former CEO of Enron
Serving 24 years for fraud, insider trading, and other crimes related to the collapse of Enron
Bernie Ebbers, former CEO of WorldCom
Serving 25 years for accounting fraud that cost investors over $100 billion
Dennis Kozlowski, former CEO of Tyco Serving 8 to 25 years for stealing $134 million from Tyco
John Rigas, former CEO of Adelphia Communications Serving 25 years for bank, wire, and securities fraud related to the demise of Adelphia
Sanjay Kumar, former CEO of Computer Associates Serving 12 years for obstruction of justice and securities fraud

Your right they get to do whatever they want and no one says a word.

Chadwick –

Thank you!

[All convicted in 2005-2006, all at FEDERAL CLUB MEDS] Apparently, you do not have a clue what it is to do TIME at a FEDERAL CORRECTIONAL FACILITY [i.e., Club Med.] It’s like living at a college dorm…with your own private security guard.

As I said, “someone is looking over the shoulder of corporations” is a disingenuous joke!

Jeffrey Keith "Jeff" Skilling In 2006, he was convicted of multiple federal felony charges relating to Enron's financial collapse, is currently serving a 24-year, four-month sentence at the Federal Correctional Institution in Englewood, Colorado.

Bernard John "Bernie" Ebbers was convicted of fraud and conspiracy in 2005. He is currently serving a 25-year prison term at Oakdale Federal Correctional Complex in Louisiana.

Leonard Dennis Kozlowski is a former CEO of Tyco International, convicted in 2005. He is currently serving 8.33 to 25 years at the Mid-State Correctional Facility in Marcy, New York. April 2012 is his parole date.

John J. Rigas is one of the founders of Adelphia Communications Corporation. In 2005, he was convicted on multiple charges of fraud and sentenced to 15 years at Federal Correctional Institute, Allenwood.

Sanjay Kumar pled guilty to obstruction of justice and securities fraud charges on April 24, 2006. On November 2, 2006, he was sentenced to 12 years in prison and fined $8 million. Kumar is housed at the Federal Correctional Institution in Miami, Florida.

John Wilson; are you clueless? It's white collar crime. They don't put white collar criminals with rapists and murderers. I'm guessing you have never been in any type of jail because you have no idea what you are talking about. Well that pretty much applies to any thing you type so I guess we can take that for granted.

Chadwick –

My brother-in-law has worked at Waupun Correctional Institution, at Waupun, Wisconsin for over 8-years as a Correctional Officer and I have toured that facility; they have fraud, embezzlement and many other types of WHITE COLLAR CRIME criminals incarcerated at that facility, right in the same cell blocks with rapists, burglars, and murderers.

These WHITE COLLAR criminals, however, are not the elite CORPORATE WHITE COLLAR criminals, who have stolen billions of dollars to obtain a FREE PASS TO CLUB MED.

Jeffrey Keith "Jeff" Skilling, Bernard John "Bernie" Ebbers, Leonard Dennis Kozlowski, John J. Rigas, and Sanjay Kumar are the true Summa Cum Laude criminals from the corporate world; that is why they get the special CLUB MED treatment, not because they are a WHITE COLLAR CRIMINAL.

Steal $400,000 through embezzlement and you go to a state prison; steal $1 Billion or more AND be a high corporate executive and you get the FEDERAL CLUB MED.

It is just sad that John McCain, a member of the infamous “Keating Five”, had enough corporate and political connections to escape his due in that mess…

I do hope I have clarified who goes where on a WHITE COLLAR CRIME for you, as it seems the entire criminal justice system and how it functions or malfunctions in favor of corporate executives just seems to elude you.

John Wilson; you toured a prison; holy smokes I apologize you are truly educated in the prison system. Your comparing two different crimes tried by two different levels of govt. Most people sentenced for fraud at the level you are talking about have pleaded down from other felonies. Most small time white collars don't even end up in prisons but serve their sentences in jail. In most cases real white collar criminals are tried in federal court and sentenced to medium or minimum security prisons. I have buddies that work in prisons and a couple work at Oak Park Heights which is a true maximum security prison. Your facts about who goes to a federal prison are complete bs too. I just looked up the federal prison population (just federal club meds like you call them) and there are over 20,000 white collar criminals in medium security so unless 20,000 people have stolen over a billion dollars I guess your completely full of it again. Go ahead keep embarassing yourself and make up some more bs

Chadwick –

My original statement: “In the all too rare cases where a corporation is caught doing something illegal, they do not go to court, they simply bargain for a fine, and go right back to doing what they were doing. In the one-in-a-million case where the crime is really over the top, you may find a CEO or high corporate officer going to a Federal Club Med for a year or two. When they come out, they just plug right back in to where they started.” FACT!

You cited five Summa Cum Laude corporate executives who were sentenced to CLUB MED for from 15 – 25 years. [The sentence on each one of these persons will be cut in half due to statutory “good time.”] IN ADDITION, these are the EXCEPTIONS, not the rule. You then made the [diversion] comment that these people would not be housed with rapists and murderers because they were WHITE COLLAR criminals. I informed you that there are plenty of WHITE COLLAR criminals in our own state prison at Waupun. Now, you conflate WHITE COLLAR criminals [diversion] at the Federal and state level. Further, now you want to drag [diversion] super-max, max and medium security prisons into the discussion.

Then, claiming research, you discovered 20,000 WHITE COLLAR criminals in Federal CLUB MEDS that have not stolen $1 Billion dollars. Well, that’s great!

My comment:

Steal $1 Billion or more

“AND”

Be a high corporate executive and you get the FEDERAL CLUB MED.

“AND” is the operative word here!

GET IT, YET?

Chadwick. Please put down your bible. It is a fictional book that does you a dis service.

Abortion does not kill children. Life does not begin at conception. Science backs that up.

Homophobia is not a moral issue. The LGBT Community is every bit legitimate as the straight community. To claim otherwise is not moral. It's just plain wrong.

"gay couples and believing that something is morally perversive or against all science and human anatomy consitutes discrimination?" Yes. It constitutes discrimination. The science you are referring too is as convoluted as that the denies climate change (when can we have a serious discussion about that by the way), evolution and pregancy due to rape or incest (legitamate rape shutting down the reproductive process? What is that, anyway?).

Why is it that religion today claims to be so moral and loving, yet lives in such hatred and violence?

Troy:

Show me the science that supposedly 'backs up' the 'fact' that life does not begin at conception. The cell division that takes place after fertilization cannot happen there is no life...

There likely is a scientific explanation for the idea that the body can react to traumatic situations by shutting down reproduction. I imagine that it's like the protective 'fight or flight' reaction that they body tends to have when reacting to certain stimuli.

CowDung
http://hplusbiopolitics.wordpress.com/2008/06/25/inconsistancy-in-the-life-begins-at-conception-argument/

Hope this helps.

That really isn't a scientific site, Troy.

The blogger is attempting to use science to 'prove' his/her position, and the argument they make is very weak--'life doesn't begin at conception because conception is not an instantaneous process.

http://www.rhrealitycheck.org/blog/reality-check-video/does-life-begin-at-fertilization

http://teachingsapiens.wordpress.com/2010/10/11/when-does-life-begin-a-scientific-perspective/

Do you have anything that doesn't have the word 'blog' in the web address?

OK--I read the second link.

I'm not sure how he makes the jump from:

"Sperm cells are alive. Egg cells are alive. Sperm cells and egg cells have all the features of life. Sperm and egg cells combined to form a fertilized egg that can divide.

Egg cells and sperm cells are alive."

to:

"Life doesn’t begin at conception, not at least, life as defined by science. "

If the cells are indeed alive, then combining those live cells to form a living zygote (that meets all the criteria he listed to determine life), then life does indeed begin at conception.

http://www.huppi.com/kangaroo/L-personhood.htm

'Personhood' is not the same as 'life'. It is a term made up by those that don't want to acknowledge that a developing fetus is a life...

FreeThought Troy -

Look people, folks have been debating “when does human life begin” for centuries. In addition, it does seem just a bit off topic here. Does anyone seriously think that we are going to finally resolve this issue on the Patch? Seriously?

Pro-Lifers believe that all human life is sacred, needs to be protected and nurtured, and, a zygote is an INNOCENT life – you hear the INNOCENT quite a bit in their arguments. They also believe that life begins at conception, when the sperm penetrates the Ovum. Well, if it is INNOCENT, then we had better not mess with it.

Now, whether that zygote is a PERSON, as proffered by various people is still another issue. I guess I would not give a zygote a name, birth certificate and driver’s license.

Then we have the man on death row found GUILTY of murder and sentenced to death by Gov. Rick Perry sitting on his face.

Therefore, we think it is logical to call all human life something sacred, but we may use an adjective [Innocent or Guilty] to decide whether it is worthy of continued existence...

Yes, I, for one, really do understand it all now… so, I am passing…

In other words, you are one of the fear mongers...

Divide and conquer of the TeaParty? Yea, lower taxes and less spending is divide and conquer; seriously?

I do not have any faith in Obama either, but the market always has been fickle like a teenaged girl. Unless there is a swing of 1000 points I prefer to ignore it.
What we may be seeing is the 'w' effect in the market- a second dip from the recession. The impending Debt crisis may also be causing some lack of confidence, but if this is the cause we have many weeks to go with a downward trend.
If there is nothing put in place after the first of the year for the financial cliff, then I would expect to see the market drop by thousands.

The problem was he ran out of money and had to adjust his tactics to gain support of private donations. During this time, Obama was running Bain Cap ads, and utilizing public funding.
In a nutshell, I think this is where he was beat.

http://finance.yahoo.com/news/how-race-slipped-away-from-romney.html

Craig -

"The problem was he ran out of money..."

The problems was he lied so much he did not know who or what he was and the electorate picked up on that; ditto for his sidekick, Lyin' Ryan.

Why do you keep making excuses for these epic losers?

Let’s move on… the future is in front of us, not back on November 6…

Air Ball Wilson:
Did you even take a minute to read the link before you let some hot air out?
Romney was raising private funds for the election, while Obama was using public money trashing him on TV with Bain Cap adds.
You can't move forward if you don't understand the past. If you think you understand the past and you are wrong, then you will continue to be wrong in the future.

Ya know Johnny, the only analysis I have hear from your side is that Romney lost the election because he lied. PROVE one lie. The problem is you can't because all these "lies" were based on Obama's rhetoric.
Obama said by lowering taxes, but removing deductions on the rich, it would put the burden on the middle class.
Obama said you can't increase defense spending, cut spending, and not put a burden on the middle class.
Obama said Romney couldn't create 12 million new jobs.

But we will never know if these are lies since Romney will not occupy the White House for the next four years.

Here are some statements we know are lies:
"I will turn this economy around in three years or it's a one term deal"
"Unemployment will not go above 8%"
"we will have in the first year an immigration bill"
"we can bring Democrats and Republicans together"
"The sequester is not something that I’ve proposed...”
"Benghazi violence was caused by an internet video & demonstrations"
"health care premiums have...gone up slower than any time in the last 50 years.”
"Fast and Furious...begun under the previous administration"
"American oil production is the highest that it’s been in eight years."
“Every idea that we’ve put forward are ones that traditionally have been supported by Democrats and Republicans alike.”

and my favorite
"I will cut the deficit in half by the end of my first term"

Anti-Alinsky -
http://www.politifact.com/personalities/mitt-romney/statements/byruling/false/

There are 20 confirmed lies.
Sorry, I know you only asked for one.

@FreeThought Troy -

Politifact? They're clearly biased! They're as bad as Fox News (which you love to hate), at least according to one of your favorites, Rachel Maddow, anyway:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=T8v6oqTn4Xo

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Yi9fQJ-2ATs

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wOZdePkO46A

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_HBD5gw8eOE

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=B8S4Ng7V728

Funny how Politifact is only right when is suits your agenda, but when it's against your agenda, it's "creating a zombie nation," in the words of Ms. Maddow.

STOP RELYING ON THE SO-CALLED FACT-CHECKERS!!!

Think for yourself by analyzing primary sources!

Free wrote: "There are 20 confirmed lies. Sorry, I know you only asked for one."
I asked for FACTS Free, not Politifacts. There analysis has been so wrong lately it's not even funny. I will just take one for now. The claim that B.O. has doubled the deficit ( http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/statements/2012/oct/05/mitt-romney/mitt-romney-says-barack-obama-has-doubled-deficit/ )

I'll pull data from the Historical Tables put out by the Office of Management and Budget for Fiscal Year 2013. I'll even pull it from the White House website.
( http://www.whitehouse.gov/sites/default/files/omb/budget/fy2013/assets/hist.pdf )

Table 1.1 (SUMMARY OF RECEIPTS, OUTLAYS, AND SURPLUSES OR DEFICITS (–): 1789–2017) has the data I need.
I will just use the data from the Deficit column (in millions of dollars):
YEAR DEFICIT
==== ........... ==========
2008 ........... -458,553
2009 ........... -1,412,688
2010 ........... -1,293,489
2011 ........... -1,299,595
2012 ........... -1,326,948

Politifact is making the claim that since B.O. didn't take office until 2009, we should use the amount from that year. But since B.O. made that statement while running for office in 2008, we should be using that data.

I guess Romney was wrong...in reality, B.O. has tripled the deficit.

You are right again, of course, Hoffa. Maddow and I can't disagree on anything. She says it, I believe it. That may be true for Most Conservatives and Fox News but no one can accuse me of being conservative.

I guess I don't have that strong of opinion on Politifact. There are holes in their arguments, yes. I guess as my fact checking options are rather limited, I am kind of in a quandry about the thing. I suppose I should agree with you, Hoffa. We can't judge sources by their titles (like MittRomney.com). They are partisian and lie.

Let's try:
http://www.rollingstone.com/politics/news/the-first-debate-mitt-romneys-five-biggest-lies-20121004

Now, let us proceed to rip on Rolling Stone for their bias, kk?

The modern way to determine facts is to expose yourself to as much information as possible then make up your own mind. Romney lied. He lied a lot. More times than not his campaign contacted media outlets to correct his statements after interviews and a lot of his whoppers were never corrected. This could be considered a ploy. Personally, I am glad it didn't work.

No matter your opinion on Obama's record, he won the election. He won by a lot.

A lot of the criticism on this site was against the "bias" of polls (funny how Fox News said the same thing). Too bad for these arguments the polls turned out to be incredibly accurate.

@FreeThought Troy -

What do you mean Hoffa's "opinion on Obama's record?"

Hoffa provided you primary source links for all of the promises that Obama made in 2008 and broke over the last 4 years. Thus those would be called FACTS, and not opinions.

Remember, everyone is entitled to their own opinions, but not their own facts. The FACT that Obama lied about most of his 2008 campaign promises is undisputable. Whether or not you want to make excuses for him and believe in those excuses is up to you and is a matter of perception/opinion.

BTW - Hoffa must ask how could you vote for a man that you apparently didn't know that much about? Hoffa thought that you were an informed commentator, but is beginning to wonder and has his doubts.

Campaign promised are broke all the time, Hoffa. I would think someone as intellegent as you can remember that.
http://reagan.procon.org/

Here is the fourth person of the godhead in the Conservative movement. There are lots and lots of broken promises when reviewing (I did find quite interesting the deficit ran up my Pres. Reagan - everyone who bangs on Obama for spending and pines for Reagan seems to not keep this one in mind... Hmmmm).

I can go down the list of every president. Obama had fierce opposition who watered down anything he tried to do - or flat out stopped him by filibuster (there will be an age old argument).

But the point is if you want to accuse the President of a LIE due to broken promises, then you better check out all your heros, first. They all lie by your standard.

I don't have to worry about your double standared, Hoffa. You have shown that pretty regularily.

@FreeThought Troy -

There you go with shifting the subject and making assumptions again!

What does Reagan have to do with Obama? Was Reagan running in this election? That's as stale of an argument as constantly blaming Bush for all of Obama's personal failures is! Give it up and focus on the subject being discussed!

When did Hoffa ever say that he thought that Reagan was a good conservative or a personal 'hero?'

Stop shifting the subject and stop making assumptions Troy - they really do make you look like an ass!

Read the very first sentence, Hoffa. The following are examples to prove my point.

I don't know why I keep falling into arguing with you and your circular logic and unflappable opion you are the judge of sources and facts.

I'll stop, now. It's not worth it.

FreeThoughtTroy wrote: "...No matter your opinion on Obama's record, he won the election. He won by a lot...."

Huhhhhhh? 1.5% is not ALOT.

The Anti-Alinsky -

When Is a Mandate Not a Mandate?
Different standards for different elections--and parties

11/9/12

When it comes to explaining election results, there's no precise way to determine whether voters gave the winner a "mandate"--defined by Oxford as "the authority to carry out a policy, regarded as given by the electorate to a party or candidate that wins an election." That makes it interesting to see how media use the expression--and which presidents they think earned one.

In 2004, George W. Bush won 50.7 percent of the popular vote over Democrat John Kerry, and had a 286-251 edge in electoral votes. As FAIR noted (Media Advisory, 11/5/04), many outlets proclaimed that to be a "mandate." "Clear Mandate Will Boost Bush's Authority, Reach," read a USA Today headline (11/4/04); NPR's Renee Montaigne said (11/3/04), "By any definition, I think you could call this a mandate."

So this week Barack Obama won re-election; he had a 332-206 electoral vote advantage and 50.5 percent of the popular vote. What do you call that? For a lot of people in the media, definitely not a mandate.

Johnny, I said NOTHING about a mandate. Free said B.O. won by alot. Since when is 1,5% ALOT?

@Lyin' John Wilson -

The people of Wisconsin gave Walker yet another MANDATE by returning majority control of the State Senate back over to the GOP, 18 seats vs 15 seats.

Hoffa can't wait for Walker's next biennial budget - it's going to be a great one!

"These people are potential victims of the divide and conquer tactics of the Tea Party Goppers."

Riiiiiight--You aren't a fear monger. Did you warn them that Romney/Ryan were out to destroy SS and Medicare as well?

@Dung
They were out to destroy those programs. Fortunately, they won't get the chance...

There are fear mongers, and those that buy the crap the mongers are selling...

No one is buying the crap that you are selling.

Perhaps you should look up Politifact's 'Lie of the Year', then...

Do nothing and Medicare and SS will be finished, I admire Ryan for having the balls to put some proposal on the table, unline the Democrats who keep kicking the can down the road- not to mention the reduced FICA from Obama.
If Medicare increased coverage so no one needed a med sup plan, that too would be "ending Medicare as we know it".

An excellent suggestion!

Mitt Who? I thought we resolved this two days ago.

Get on the stick Wilson. It's all about the demise of AWMs or WMWs or MWMs. Not sure which. They're still struggling with the acronym they're going to run with. Anyways, you know, old white guys.

Here's one pouring gas over his head and setting himself on fire in the streets of Shorewood right now....

http://whitefishbay.patch.com/blog_posts/election-results-the-death-of-white-male-dominance

Here's one who has apparently noticed he's developing male pattern baldness and is pecking away at his lily-white genitals with a spork in Greenfield....

http://whitefishbay.patch.com/blog_posts/whats-white-crusty-full-of-holes-and-aging-quickly-the-gop#comments

It's a cleansing process. You should really join in. Then we'll all go for walk through the dangerous parts of town and see if the residents can accurately separate the progressives from the non-. Sounds like fun, no?

Classic McBride - Hoffa loves it!

Wilson throws yet another Air Ball, while McBride does a SLAM DUNK!

Craig -

May you "Live long and prosper..."

Wilson, you are a trek ie? I thought you were a ninja.

Bob McBride -

"I thought we resolved this two days ago."

Careful, little man... you have thoughts?

Apparently I do, Wilson. You're stymied.

Bob McBride -

May I inquire whom you borrowed them from?