1 - 10 Next
In response to:

On Cantor's Breathtaking Blowout Loss

jmkidd Wrote: Jun 11, 2014 4:43 PM
The best take away I have read about Eric Cantor's loss is that it was because he lost sight of who he represented. He became more concerned about running for Speaker of the house as opposed to running for congress. He became more a representative of K Street then a representative of the VA 7th district. Immigration and his multiple positions was a factor but not the major one, his lack of interest in those who he was supposed to represent was the big factor.
Why does every side (Including Daniel Doherty of TH) assume that the issues in Ukraine or so black and white? I would expect more in depth research. Both sides are committing violent acts. And the fact is the nation is split on closer ties to the E.U. vs closers to Russia. All the media does is muddy the waters and make a solution harder to find.
Romney lost for two reasons...first after the initial debate he lost his fire and second the base decided to stay home in such numbers that it cost him the election. That is part of the problem with purity tests in politics. I think when it comes down to choosing between the candidates in the general you choose the lesser of evils based on your political leanings. Not voting is never the answer as a vote never cast is a vote never counted.
way to screw rural Americans moron
In response to:

Missing: The American Worker

jmkidd Wrote: Jan 10, 2014 3:03 PM
The fact is neither party has clean hands with the bogus unemployment figures. The re-calibration started in 1994 when the BLS went from using the U-5 number to using the U-3 number. Which means the figures were bogus during President Clinton & President Bush terms as well as the current administration. And add to that both parties accept the U-3 numbers when it serves their narrative. Until recently the Obama administration and MSM touted the U-3 numbers as proof the economy was in recovery, now they use the U-6 numbers as proof that the EUC needs extended. The GOP touted the U-6 as proof the economy was hurting until recently , now they use the U-3 numbers to say extending the EUC is not needed. So both parties play politics, fail to offer solutions and disregard the people being hurt by the economy.
now lets see how many groups I can PO in one post. I disagree with Obama playing politics and blaming the Republicans alone, but I do think we have a serious issue in the economy and the fact is neither party is serious about fixing it. Each side just wants to use it to bludgeon the other side. I see a lot of comments here by those who seem to think that the unemployed are lazy and getting rich on unemployment. I don't know about your area but unless you were making high wages before losing your job you aren't do much more then bouncing along the bottom. I have family members who have been unemployed for quite a while and employed part time off and on. And let me tell you they barely cover rent with what they make never mind living high on the hog. The fact is it will take honest effort from both parties to fix the economy not demonization and playing politics. Playing the blame game is fun for those not effected by the recession but does nothing to help those falling out of the labor pool on a daily basis. No disrespect to Mr. Schaus or any posters here but it is easy to play politics when you aren't proposing solutions. A program that includes support, training and incentives to employers to hire the long term unemployed is a bare minimum of what we need. (A good example is the compromise program President Clinton & Speaker Gingrich worked out to reform welfare in the 90's).
the biggest difference between liberal and conservative talk radio (and the reason one thrives while the other dies) is tone. The rule for the conservative talk radio is a measured tone and open debate. Not only the ideas but the way they are discussed. Liberal talk radio the tone seems shrill even when talking about minor issues. People are more likely to tune in to a host that seems respectful over one that seems to scream about everything
you do realize that more money means more demand? Which means HIGHER prices, so less spending power for all.
I have a question for you. You claim to be so wise. If you own a small business with a profit level that is somewhere between 2-3% at max and your cost go up say 10% what will most likely happen?
You do understand that the driving factor in the stock market level at present is the Federal Reserve and it's QE bond buying program?
1 - 10 Next