An election about second chances
President Obama and congressional leaders cannot afford to sacrifice another four years to shabby partisan games and perpetual failure.
President Barack Obama began his first term with august aspirations. He has realized some of his goals, but many others remain unfulfilled, dragged down by global financial instability and obstinate extremists in Congress.
November 7, 2012 - 12:22 AM
Alexis de Tocqueville was right.
While the country can survive a second Obama term, surviving an electorate that returned this man and his administration to power is a very different story.
JFK’s inauguration speech has been turned upside down.
So proud to be a Virginian this day. We as a country will be moving forward, not backward. The tea party has done damage to the GOP that will take more than four years to correct. Good luck to them trying to rebuild there image. Lets all hope that together we can make some real progress.
Actually Nick, I think JFK is very proud that this nation is once again asking what we can do for our country and proceeding to do it. We will survive and thrive because the electorate “returned this man and his administration to power” IMO.
I know rejection hurts, we have certainly experienced it, but writing off the real success and improvements much less those yet to come is bitterly partisan, not reality.
We ALL need to impress upon Congress that “gerrymander” or not, we expect them to “Stop Fighting and Start Fixing”. No President can do this alone.
We are doomed.
FSU is going to take us apart tomorrow night.
Sandi, I think the problem is that there are too many asking what their country can do for them. Where exactly are all these people asking what they can do for their country?
Are you trying to say you believe that the 60 million plus who voted for Obama are all only “asking what their country can do for them”? That is as insulting as you intended it and so very, very wrong. We stand more than willing to do our part in the sacrifices that will be required, we merely chose a leader who agrees that we should not bear them alone.
There are 307 million Americans and only 117 plus million actually voted, my guess is that those you believe are only “asking what their country can do for them”, stayed home, as usual.
I don’t disagree with you, Sandi, but I don’t think there are 307 million Americans eligible to vote.
http://elections.gmu.edu/Turnout_2010G.html
But I may be wrong.
#7 – “Are you trying to say you believe that the 60 million plus who voted for Obama are all only “asking what their country can do for them”?”
That is not at all what he said and you know it.
He said there are “too many asking what their country can do for them”…he did NOT say all of those who voted for Obama did so for that reason.
And as much as you refuse to admit it, he’s right…too many people expect a handout from the gov’t and will vote however they need to in order to keep the gov’t cheese coming their way.
Things will be fine if the Republicans ever work with the President. All the Republicans can say is DOA.
Hey guys. This is easy enough. We still have an Ace up our sleeve. The left can pass bills all day long that means nothing. Every single bill that has to be funded, including Obamacare has to start and finish in the House budget committee lead by Paul Ryan. So good luck getting anything.
They just simply wont fund any bill they are not in favor of unless they get something in return.
9 – It’s amazing how words and meanings get twisted around here, isn’t it? And how defensive some people are, even after their guy won last night.
11 – Yeah…basically, millions, billions of dollars have been spent this year, on a campaign that has, in essence, changed nothing.
We’re right where we have been for the last two years, in terms of governance.
Thank God we were able to hold the House.
#11 I thought the folks on the right said the President was responsible for the debt, now you are saying it’s the budget committee that approves the spending, which is it, you can’t have it both ways.
Looks as though you may try anyway!
I did not twist anything.
When Chuck said there are “too many asking”…he was not saying he believed that “the 60 million plus who voted for Obama are all only asking…”. That is a twist that would make Chubby Checker proud.
It’s also a tactic straight from the liberal playbook – take a perfectly accurate statement and distort it in an effort to obfuscate and discredit the source. We’ve seen way too many examples of it. A lot of them from the mainstream media. They only discredit themselves in the process.
14 – The budget committee approves the spending…the President signs off on it. They’re both responsible.
And you on the left sure held Bush responsible for his spending, which was authorized by Congress. Including the years 2007 & 2008 when Dems had majorities in both houses.
14. The president is responsible for the approved money from congress. His policies from the approved monies has failed. So see we have to look at the whole picture not just the surface. So yes tje repubs have got to draw a line and i believe that cantor and ryan will. They will oust bohner if he continues to give in. I believe they will have one mord stop gap and thats it. It is going to come down to the new house but i dont see any progress
The Other Rick, if Chuck had ONLY “said there are “too many asking”, you might have a point. But, he went on to question: “Where exactly are all these people asking what they can do for their country?” You have conveniently ignored that snipe just so you can pretend some “twist” or “tactic” was being used in my reply. That is not the case. The only “playbook” was his, and yours.
The American people have spoken and I believe they made it clear that they are choosing President Obama and his policies. If indeed you “look at the whole picture not just the surface”, you can see that clearly. If Cantor and Ryan want to be held responsible for gridlock and inaction on what this nation needs, so be it. They will fall as those before them have. This nation needs to move forward and assure solutions. With or without the TP/R Party. It is theirs to forfeit.
Herb, you have admitted who holds and controls the purse strings. Stop digging…or proceed, as you like.
Sandi..I dont believe that is the case. Didnt the repubs pick up seats in the house. So that will be a mandate for Ryan and Cantor to be sted fast.
Let the American ppl decide by 2014, but by then you will have 50 million out of work more debt and a collapsing country.
Thanks God I started buying Gold 6 yrs ago.
@22 That is incorrect, Herb. There are some races still undecided, but Democrats will pick up a handful of seats, not Republicans.
Here is the deal. I guess the democratic party think ppl are dumb, understatment. No matter what the threshold is 50 employee’s.
We have informed 3 employee’s, 1 a layoff and 2 cut back hrs, so obamacare will not effect us. We had to do this and it makes me sick
to be put in this situation. 1 is a single mother the other is a father with a household of 5. Now they will be depndent on govr, which is just what the left wants. The is the bottom line.
Republican= self sufficiency while Democrat = govt dependency.
So I tell the employee’s blame Obamacare for us having to do what we have to do.
Gerrymandering for political power is not the same thing as being chosen, surely you realize that Herb. There is no “mandate” to continue obstruction and shirking the duty you were elected to do. Cantor, Ryan and McConnell have something to lose. And we are all watching and taking notes for the coming elections. How this “fiscal cliff” is handled will determine a lot for those voters who matter. Those being the voters they did not get Tuesday night.
@24 I’m not quite following you, Herb. Are you saying that you made these hiring decisions because of the Affordable Care Act? If so, does that mean that you do not currently offer health care?
Republicans = “If everyone would just stand on his or her own two feet, society would be better off.” True, but not achieveable.
Democrats = “If we work together to improve society, it will be easier for everyone to stand on his or her own two feet.” Also true, and possible.
#27 – ““If everyone would just stand on his or her own two feet, society would be better off.” True, but not achieveable.”
Instead of telling people they can’t achieve something, show them they can.
I’ve spent my professional career as a social worker doing exactly that. I’ve also learned a lot about the obstacles society puts in their way.
We do offer Health Care very good health care Luanne, but with the Mandates that is required within the health care law we would have to either reduce to below 50 or put more cost on the employee, because our premiums would go up.
27# Bill how many voters in the districts that voted for Obama are the gimmie for nothing crowd. Betcha right now its over 40% just like alot here in Roanoke. The more you help these 40 % the less they do and more they want.
So you do have a point for the 60% and I am all for that, but the Gimmie crowd breads more gimmie crowds. Gotta end somewhere are tax wallets are getting thin because of outrages social costs.
well may be a bit high on the 40% percent..I would say somewhere about 15.
Still a drain.The bad part is I dont want to hurt the kids but its the lazy parents that bread this socialism into them so its a never ending cycle.
Herb, are you aware that the vast majority of the Medicaid budget is not spent on kids and their “lazy” parents? Most of it goes to nursing homes and hospitals, who spend outrageous amounts in the last one or two weeks of life for people whose conditions are not likely to improve. And all of the Medicare and Social Security dollars go to the elderly or people with disabilities, the latter having had to fight for years, in most cases, to prove their need. I’m not saying we shouldn’t take care of retirees, most of whom paid payroll taxes throughout their working careers, or those whose disabilities prevent them from working. But eliminating ALL the money that goes to support needy families wouldn’t make much of a dent in our deficit.
#29 – Unfortunately, Bill, we’ve also made it too easy for people NOT to get on their own two feet.
Being miserable is a great motivator to make changes…too bad we don’t use it in certain cases.
I’m still not following you, Herb. If you have very good health care, you probably already meet the requirements of ACA. Also, I suspect your premiums have been rising with or without ACA, as they have for every other company for a very long time, which has forced many employers to shift more of the cost onto employees.
Plus companies stand to benefit with the ACA through the health care exchanges that finally allow for true marketplace competition for insurance.
Michael, if you subtract the retirees and people with disabilities, including veterans, from the 47%, there aren’t many people living off the government. Why? Because it’s a pretty miserable way to live. If it really was such a good deal, the numbers would be much higher. Who do you know on public assistance who wants to stay there?
Or have you ever really spent any time talking to anyone on public assistance?
27 – Mr. Bestpitch…not trying to pick a fight, but I ask for a little elaboration:
“If everyone would just stand on his or her own two feet, society would be better off.” True, but not achieveable.
Why is it not achievable?
“If we work together to improve society, it will be easier for everyone to stand on his or her own two feet.” Also true, and possible.
How does this manifest into policy? What is the biggest impediment?
Luanne, I am all for private competition, I am not for Govt competition thats cost are taxes to rise. Also with the Mandates in the ACA their are stipulations of care that we now have to provide that will cause a rise in premiums. Thats were the bottom line is.
Bill, what erks me more then anything is are tax dollars going to one that have not contributed to this society. For example: My father spent 25 years in the U.S.A.F. You should be fighting for them as the very first to receive free health care. Every retiree should get that, but no they get shafted and a rise in champus costs to pay for the ones that have done nothing.
This just burns me up. When is this country going to put the Military first, before illegals and welfare and medicade. They are the ones that have allowd us to give this free stuff out now they have to pay.
BULL.
Yes, Bill, I’ve known several people over the years who consider gaming the system a way of life.
And like Hoo, I’m not looking to pick a fight. Look at what a person is allowed to buy using food stamps…is candy necessary to survive? How about energy drinks? Even more ironic is that you can’t use food stamps to buy vitamins to supplement the crappy food you are allowed to buy.
89Hoo, A: Human nature. B: A progressive tax code with investments in education, infrastructure, and R&D to stimulate the economy.
Herb, as a US Army veteran with 8+ years of honorable service, I take a back seat to no one in supporting our troops and veterans. Spending more on our military than the next 17 or more countries COMBINED seems to me like we are putting it first. Please see my post at #32 above. Taking ALL the tax dollars away from those that have not contributed would not make a significant difference in the federal budget. Simple arithmetic.
40. Bill seems your spending is allgeared towards govt and unions. Where does the private sector come in.
As far as the service I am saying that they should be able to go to any Air base or any hospital and the tab is picked up. If we can do it for those here illegally or who have no desire to contribute we should take care of them first. As far as spending more on the military I agree, but it seems that politicians seem to forget when they retire. I know this first hand.
Look, I don’t like to see people who could be working sitting around with their hands out instead any more than anyone else does. My point is simply that preventing 100% of welfare abuse, while laudable, wouldn’t solve the problem.
Higher taxes on the richest Americans makes sense, not because they shouldn’t have so much money, but because they aren’t spending it. They are leaving it in investments that don’t create the jobs which would circulate the dollars and generate additional tax revenue every time they turn over. In our consumer-based economy, keeping record levels of retained earnings on corporate balance sheets to “improve” stock prices is a recipe for the kind of disaster that W’s policies gave us. That’s what needs to change.
Bill,
Its been said and proven that that tax rate would fund the govt for 3 days. what about the other 362…Whe you tax the job makers it kills jobs.
The only reason to tax the rich is for govt programs. There is no other reason. Period. Thats fact. Look at the spending. You guys raised the cigarette tax food tax and where did that go. Right back into social programs and school which is govt jobs.
I’m late to this discussion so may contribute something completely inappropriate to the topic but since you seem to be talking about poverty, social obstacles, etc. this news story seems to be appropriate.
It’s about a study that was done when people make financial decisions when they’re poor vs. how they make these decisions when they’re rich.
Like all things involving humanity, the results are mixed but always interesting.
http://www.latimes.com/news/science/la-sci-poor-people-decisions-20121103,0,1891454.story
Why do many poor people spend money in ways that seem to squander their already limited resources, like buying lottery tickets? It’s not necessarily that they’re less savvy about financial matters, but a lack of funds appears to affect the way people think, according to new research.
The poor often make decisions that deepen their poverty, such as borrowing money at exorbitant interest rates. Sociologists and behavioral researchers have several explanations for this, including a “culture of poverty” that makes it seem normal to be poor, undermining efforts to join the middle class.
But a study published this week in the journal Science offers another explanation: No matter who you are, having severely limited resources alters the way you make decisions about them.…..
The reason they and people like me are not creating jobs is because of the Democratic regulations and policy. Thats why we andd corperations are sitting on billions upon billions. Now you want to take it because the govt cant get thier greedy hands on it the correct way.
Thats wrong no matter how you look at it.
So tell the kids today dont try to be too successful because uncle sam will only beat you back down.
Great future for entrepeneurs.
40 – Human nature? I must ask you to expand on that…are you saying it is human nature to not WANT to stand on their own? “Human nature” rules out ability (inability?), (lack of) opportunity, and other circumstances outside of the control of the individual, and puts the onus solidly on matters people CAN control…is that what you’re saying?
And don’t we already have a progressive tax code, with heavy government funding in education, infrastructure and R&D?
42 – how does investing money not create jobs? You do know, don’t you, that when a company sells a bit of itself in the form of stocks, it uses the revenue to hire or train people, or improve its physical plant, or some other way to increase revenue, which invariably creates jobs. Also increases the tax base. And when you remove that investment opportunity (in the form of taxing the rich) businesses are left with either borrowing (which is bad) or not expanding/hiring at all (which is also bad).
Investments and savings are what grow the economy, as they are the basis for any sort of expansive project – construction, plant improvement, etc.
How many jobs does taking that money and giving it to one of those “people who could be working sitting around with their hands out” create? Instead of giving them money (gone tomorrow), let those producing jobs keep their money and give the unemployed person an employment application.
Herb, you’re saying that taxing the job makers kills jobs, but their tax cuts went into effect under W and have continued throughout the last four years. What are they waiting for? Oh, they can’t create new jobs because of regulations. So let’s not inspect pharmacies and let people take their chances with the medications they assume are safe and beneficial. Let’s not try to keep our air, water, and soil clean and useful. Why worry about lung disease, cancer, or lead poisoning, especially when we can confine most of the pollution to the areas where poor people live. Is that it?
89Hoo, I’m saying that human nature is to get what you can for you and yours and not share any more than you have to. Opportunity has never been equally available to all, and it never will be. We actually don’t spend much of the federal budget on education, infrastructure, and R&D. Most of it goes to defense and entitlement programs, i.e., Medicare, Medicaid, and Social Security to retirees who have paid into the system throughout their working careers, with some for people who are disabled and can’t work. Period.
89Hoo, investing creates jobs, but we have a stock market over 13,000 and a huge unemployment problem. How do you explain the discrepancy? The model you present once described the best capitalist system in history, but we’re now back to the excesses and abuses of the robber barons of the late 19th Century. As you know, the investments in education, infrastructure, and R&D I advocated also create jobs, mostly in the private sector, and I never suggested giving more money to those with their hands out. Your fondness for putting words in other people’s mouths really doesn’t become you.
#49 – “…I’m saying that human nature is to get what you can for you and yours and not share any more than you have to.”
So you endorse forcibly taking away from someone who earned the money and give it to someone who hasn’t?
What someone chooses to do with money they earn is THEIR decision…not the governments. If they want to save it and pass it on to their future descendants is their right. It is not the right of the government to step in and take it away.
I do not think this conversation is even casually related to reality. Firing, cutting hours or laying off people because of imaginary extra costs, when in reality you likely got a rebate for the first time ever. Blaming people for needing help, when the reality is there are people born disabled or who become so. Pretending all of the safety nets are about lazy people, when the vast majority of the money is spent on health care that is so expensive near the end of life. Pretending money made is invested back into “job creation”, when the opposite has been true for well over a decade. Pretending a lot of the “reactions” are not politically motivated, when it is as obvious as the nose on a face. Pretending people would rather suck up welfare than have a job.
No, no relation to reality at all.
Check the numbers for monthly nursing home care, hospitalization for open heart surgery, the cost of surgery and rehab for broken hips, Diabetic supplies, hell just look at what the maker of Flomax makes per month.
You are blaming the wrong end of the problem any way you cut it.
I suppose it is and has been a universal argument. But taxes are NOT going away and neither are poor and needy Americans. Even less likely is losing pols who make bad decisions we all have to pay for. Oddly, most forgive bad leaders who left this nation in bad shape before they do the poor.
“…As a very important source of strength and security, cherish public credit. One method of preserving it is to use it as sparingly as possible, avoiding occasions of expense by cultivating peace, but remembering also that timely disbursements to prepare for danger frequently prevent much greater disbursements to repel it, avoiding likewise the accumulation of debt, not only by shunning occasions of expense, but by vigorous exertion in time of peace to discharge the debts which unavoidable wars may have occasioned, not ungenerously throwing upon posterity the burden which we ourselves ought to bear. The execution of these maxims belongs to your representatives, but it is necessary that public opinion should co-operate. To facilitate to them the performance of their duty, it is essential that you should practically bear in mind that towards the payment of debts there must be revenue; that to have revenue there must be taxes; that no taxes can be devised which are not more or less inconvenient and unpleasant; that the intrinsic embarrassment, inseparable from the selection of the proper objects (which is always a choice of difficulties), ought to be a decisive motive for a candid construction of the conduct of the government in making it, and for a spirit of acquiescence in the measures for obtaining revenue, which the public exigencies may at any time dictate.”
~Washington’s Farewell Address 1796
Who said anything about taxes going away? And speaking of reality, we all have our own version. The reality of the results from Tuesday is the change in demographics which finally passed the tipping point. If you look at the basic message of the two campaigns, it came down to work hard, get people employed in order to jump start the economy versus free stuff. 30 years ago, work hard would have been a slam dunk, but now the takers have swung the pendulum. Welfare numbers have increased by 30% during the last 4 years, food stamp users are up 72%, Social Security Disability has become the new unemployment. Add to that, the occubot Wall St. types who want everything for free (except soap), the Sandra Fluke types who think they have a constitutional right for someone else to pay for their birth control and many other groups dependent on government programs. These are the people who will vote for free stuff, hands down, while at the same time making it impossible for anyone who proposes reform to be heard.
Even those of you who are proponents for big government have to admit that entitlements cannot continue to grow at the present rate. There are taxpayer funded radio and tv ads encouraging citizens to sign up for food stamps, free cell phones and EITC. What kind of message does that send? To me, it says that entitlements are self serving with no pretense of weaning to population off of them. Baseline budgeting guarantees that funding will increase yearly whether it is needed or not. This is insane. How can any reform or austerity be injected into the system when so many do not care about the country but care about their government check?
Given the chaos in Washington, I don’t have any answers that would escape villification by the left or the press. The clock it ticking.
I suppose you miss the irony of speaking about reality and then making up a fantasy. What the results from Tuesday reflect is the lack of change in the right wing agenda and the “demographics” are not on your side. Those 60+ million votes for Obama were not about “free stuff” in any realm of reality.
That 60+ million is living the “work hard” mantra every day and have not been able to get or stay ahead for well over a decade. I do not blame the economy on the crisis, I blame the economy on those wealth protecting and inducing Republicans who dreamed up the schemes and ruined the system by putting a bubble on steroids, to a lesser degree I also blame the Democrats who fell for “pie in the sky”; so claiming WE are the party of “free stuff” is even more ludicrous when you look at who got what. They “got the gold mine, we got the shaft”.
Whining about “takers” and so called “makers” is class warfare and nonsense to boot! Americans have been working hard with little to show for it for a long, long time and even less has “trickled down”. The tide has been rising for the wealthy and drowning the rest of us.
The actual “takers” (if you must use that epithet) are people who cannot work harder, achieve more or take care of themselves, no one has to like it, but you might want to explain what it is you think they are supposed to do.
Your sour grapes are just the bitter fruit of being wrong. Blaming the economic crash on Obama did not work in the campaign and it will not work here. The meme of people wanting to be on welfare instead of working is so over used and people, even without jobs, need to feed their families. What is up with begrudging people the humiliating status of using food stamps? How far do we have to fall as a people?
You may not respect their sad efforts but the Occupy movement was generated out of a very real concern about the way this nation is manipulated by Wall Street. WalMart is now perfectly happy to interrupt Thanksgiving so they can pit poor people against each other in their pursuit of Christmas for their families. But of course that is corporate greed so it is the “good kind”!
No one has asked for “someone else to pay for their birth control”, many of us pay a good portion of our health insurance, we just want it covered under the plan and do not believe our boss should make that decision for us. Why do you think your boss should?
Whine that people voted “for free stuff” if it makes the medicine of your defeat go down, but know that we do not believe you.
The ads you decry are informing the poor and often ignorant of the things available to them, they are not trying to sell them (although big businesses take their money too). When you find one of them you want to trade places with, you let us know.
Reforms are coming, for us all. At least now we have a good chance that the whole burden will not be on the worker’s back.
I believe what is “insane” is thinking that just because you lost an election, “so many do not care about the country but care about their government check”?
Given the purposeful “chaos in Washington”, I don’t expect any answers will come from those crippled by their hate, judgement and bitter partisan agenda. In that respect, it is all on us to save this country. Maybe someday, you all will figure out why that really is and stop blaming it on “free stuff”. That clock is not even ticking, it is stopped.
THIS is what I am talking about, and it has NOTHING to do with “free stuff”!
“A 20-year veteran at the plant, she was responsible for double-checking other workers’ jobs as the truck made its way to the end of the production line. Her movements were seamless and seemingly effortless. The muscles in her arms flexed as she pulled herself from one spot to another, her legs darting left and right. When she caught a glimpse of my wide-eyed stare, she grinned and kept moving.
It was a crystalizing moment, standing less than two feet away from her as she worked. A core narrative of the presidential race had unfolded right in front of me.
That woman and I are the same age and call Ohio home, but we live miles-apart lives. As she clawed her way over the top of that cab, I was mindful of the toll that kind of work takes on a human body and of the clueless politicians who never give that a thought.
When suit-and-tie Republicans talk about things such as tax breaks for the wealthiest Americans and raising the retirement age for Social Security, they make two big mistakes.
The first is thinking that workers such as that woman don’t matter.
The second is assuming that workers such as that woman don’t care.”
http://www.nationalmemo.com/a-lesson-from-ohio/
There is a lesson here and it has nothing at all to do with “free stuff”. I will, as I am want to do, keep repeating that until it sinks in.
Concerning a job fair in Chicago, one attendee said, “I stood in line for four hours. They better give me a Wal-Mart gift card, or something.”
What a perfect example of the entitlement mentality.
I wonder who he voted for?
http://chicago.cbslocal.com/2012/11/09/city-to-hold-job-fair-today-at-kennedy-king-college/
If we are going to pick crazed individuals as examples of the whole, do you believe your POV is immune? Why do you need to go there, knowing better?
#57 – Why do you consider him a “crazed” individual? How do you know that some other attendees don’t feel the same way?
The entitlement mentality exists…you can’t deny that. To what extent..that’s the question.
There are a lot of words I can put in front of the word “mentality”, and offer links to prove they exist. That is anecdotal, and IMO silly.
The ignorant mentality exists:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qqUdwCf1F5c
The racist mentality exists:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=snKo0MYDHUo
The stupid mentality exists:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UkK27gjB7mk
There is the out of touch mentality:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lFUUDrh9wNg&feature=related
Is this really how you want to play this? To what end?
#59 -It would seem that to some, “denial” really is a river in Egypt.
It does seem to be true.
“What a perfect example of the entitlement mentality. “
I realize it’s difficult to rationalize a shellacking, but you can do better than this. Has anyone checked on our friend John R.? I’m concerned for him.
I’m not rationalizing anything, Art. The guy expects to get something for nothing, which seems to be quite common these days.
Here’s an idea…the free cell phones handed out by the government are a waste of money. Try taking those away and see how well that works.
“free cell phones”
Who started that program, Michael? Why do you think we should waste our time debunking the Fox talking points? Why do you parrot them?
Just an FYI, Art, I don’t watch Fox, so no, I’m not parroting them. I know you can’t believe that, but it’s true…not all conservatives watch Fox.
Who started it? I don’t know and don’t care. It’s a waste of taxpayer money and needs to stop.
Tell me, Art, do YOU think it’s necessary? If so, why? And please, try and do it in your own words…not MSNBC’s.
“I don’t know and don’t care.”
Ah, so we have reached the crux of the biscuit! You are opining on a program you know absolutely nothing about.
And the Vegas billionaire, the Koch brothers and Wall Street brethren “expected” to get nothing if Romney had won? Do you really believe it was only some poor schmuck who went into that booth hoping to get something “for free”? That only liberals worked for their candidate to gain their agenda? Who is it you are trying to convince? The rest of us know better.
I will tell you “who” started the free cell phones, it was the cell phone companies and the people who stood to make money on “customers” they did not have. Just like a hell of a lot of other government money that goes to big business, but of course you will not admit that truth.
Do you think all the old people in the world decided we all needed a freakin’ “Scooter” to “Hoveround” too?
Do you believe it was the American public who crafted Gramm-Leach-Bliley to let the banksters play an even more loaded game and “give” a mortgage to people with a pulse? Do you really?
You look at the rot and filth and greed in your own party and the CEO with a corporate jet WE PAID FOR, before you keep screeching about the poor folks with a cell phone.
“Who started it?”
Wilsonphones?
You are entitled to your own opinion, but not your own facts.