World Politics

[Anonymous]

Which proves my point precisely. Private job creation isn't too bad. It's the public jobs which get strangled. That's been going on for over a year (see my link about 10 pages ago).

Now if you think about it, why would Republicans (in particular the governors in Wisconsin, Michigan, Ohio) clamp down on public jobs as they do? Considering that revenue through taxes is in fact quite a bit higher than expected. The money is there! It's outright stupid in such a situation to cut public jobs. It increases unemployment for no good reason. In fact what should be done is a second stimulus (in which the states could participate as spenders, not receivers of money due to the improved revenue situation). All the actual data indicate this. The least of what should be done is to stop cutting public jobs. But reason and data-driven policies hasn't been the strong side of republican thinking since Reagan's voodoo economics came into fashion.

Your graph show the hiring of loads of temp census workers. What your graph also show is the private workers being shed in the millions and nary a blip on your screen with public workers. Now, when the tax base drys up, what would you think the logical effect would be to the public enterprise?

If your chacterization of the public worker is having been 'strangled', how then would you characterize the plight of the private worker? Keep in mind there are over 14 million private unemployed.

Second stimulus to save public jobs that are dependent on private eneterprise and the taxes levied to them.... How about we figure out what private enterprise needs to flourish so there's enough tax base to run the public sector?

 

[Anonymous]

and what was the 1099 vender limit before?

There was no requirement for a business owner to report (Federally) 1099's in the normal course of business unless I employ independent contractors.

The difference here is if I pay a janitorial company more that $600 to do their thing I would have to report them. Same with office supply. Same with AT &T, my internet service provider, the lease on my office space, etc., etc., etc. Literally, every bill I would pay I would have to prepare and submit a 1099.

Edit: Part of the Obamacare legislation required the addition of thousands of IRS agents to track 1099 compliance and also to levy fines against those individuals who did comply by purchasing health insurance.

 

[Anonymous]

that sounds like the NASCAR fan who likes billy joe bubba because he is a christian. So your republicans believe in a stRong private enterprise system( really profound there scott) and democrats, being socialists and communists and/or non white people don't.
It is also like you flying a bigger american flag than your neighbors and then getting all whiney about at least you are 5x7 patriotic compared to your not so real american neighbor who is only 4x3 patriotic.

"I believe that people ought to be free to be free and enjoy freedom of being free and having freedom!!"

YAY REPUBLICANS they have such commitment to american values!!!

What part of "I'm under no illusions" did you miss? I don't think anyone in Washington is anything other than corrupt. I guess you missed that too.

 

[redtreviso]

There was no requirement for a business owner to report (Federally) 1099's in the normal course of business unless I employ independent contractors.

The difference here is if I pay a janitorial company more that $600 to do their thing I would have to report them. Same with office supply. Same with AT &T, my internet service provider, the lease on my office space, etc., etc., etc. Literally, every bill I would pay I would have to prepare and submit a 1099.

Sounds like you ARE hiring them.. All your other services are write offs that you have to document for yourself anyway.

Your janitorial company is not named "s'ttocs janitorial services" is it? and you pay them 5000 a week??? lololol

 

[Anonymous]

Pro Business Republicans

""The GOP's take on the auto industry: Killing the auto industry kills the auto unions. AWESOME!

The lesson from the auto industry and the GOP's stance on saving or killing it is the lesson people keep forgetting. The GOP will pay any price to kill the Unions. Look at Wisconsin. Many of those legislators are bout to be out of a job but they are fine with that. They succeeded in weakening the Unions and that is a fair price.

The same thing is happening in education. Since they couldn't kill the teacher's unions they have decided to kill education. By doing so they will take down the strongest of all the unions. The teacher's unions scare them the most because most of the time the teachers win. See, when you advocate for children you usually win in the public eye. So... the teacher's unions must die.

And the auto union.

And the clothing manufacturers unions.

And the GOP doesn't care what the price is. They were willing to kill the entire auto industry to get their way.

They will stop at nothing.""

Stupid post. US auto industry, like all others, should sink or swim on their own merit.

This was the 2nd bailout of Chrysler. I am of the opinion, probably not more than a generation from now there will be a 3rd. Same for GM.

 

[redtreviso]

Stupid post. US auto industry, like all others, should sink or swim on their own merit.

This was the 2nd bailout of Chrysler. I am of the opinion, probably not more than a generation from now there will be a 3rd. Same for GM.

You think big oil, banks and defense contractors are swimming on their own merit?

 

[redtreviso]

There was no requirement for a business owner to report (Federally) 1099's in the normal course of business unless I employ independent contractors.

The difference here is if I pay a janitorial company more that $600 to do their thing I would have to report them. Same with office supply. Same with AT &T, my internet service provider, the lease on my office space, etc., etc., etc. Literally, every bill I would pay I would have to prepare and submit a 1099.

Edit: Part of the Obamacare legislation required the addition of thousands of IRS agents to track 1099 compliance and also to levy fines against those individuals who did comply by purchasing health insurance.

ohhhhhhhhh... kinda like 35hr a week employees eh?? tsk tsk...what a liar

 

[Anonymous]

Sounds like you ARE hiring them.. All your other services are write offs that you have to document for yourself anyway.

Your janitorial company is not named "s'tocs janitorial services" is it? and you pay them 5000 a week??? lololol

I do not have any independent contractors, but if I did I must report thier compensation via 1099.

Do I expense the cost of janitorial services?? Uh, yes. Do I look at my P&L? Uh, yes.

Is that bad?

The analogy here is this; Let's say you are going to do a kitchen remodel at you house. You buy new cabinets (1099), an new refrigerator (1099), cooktop (1099) granite counter top (1099) oven microwave (1099) sink/faucet combo (1099) new tile for the floor (1099) and the installation of all the above using three contractors (1099, 1099, 1099).

All of this to make sure, in the eyes of the federal govt, that everything you bought from each vendor has been reported and taxes collected. The IRS already has the ability to do this, but let's put you through this excercise just because we can.

 

[Anonymous]

You think big oil, banks and defense contractors are swimming on their own merit?

Nope. TARP was a joke, for example. It's a huge problem with lending right now.

 

[Anonymous]

ohhhhhhhhh... kinda like 35hr a week employees eh?? tsk tsk...what a liar

Don't know what you are babbling on about here.

 

[redtreviso]

I do not have any independent contractors, but if I did I must report thier compensation via 1099.

Do I expense the cost of janitorial services?? Uh, yes. Do I look at my P&L? Uh, yes.

Is that bad?

The analogy here is this; Let's say you are going to do a kitchen remodel at you house. You buy new cabinets (1099), an new refrigerator (1099), cooktop (1099) granite counter top (1099) oven microwave (1099) sink/faucet combo (1099) new tile for the floor (1099) and the installation of all the above using three contractors (1099, 1099, 1099).

All of this to make sure, in the eyes of the federal govt, that everything you bought from each vendor has been reported and taxes collected. The IRS already has the ability to do this, but let's put you through this excercise just because we can.

""The paper trail

Why did these tax code revisions get included in a health-care reform bill? Welcome to Washington. The idea seems to be that using 1099 forms to capture unreported income will generate more government revenue and help offset the cost of the health bill.

A Democratic aide for the Senate Finance Committee, which authored the changes, defended the move.

"Information reporting improves tax compliance without raising taxes on small businesses," the aide said. "Health care reform includes more than $35 billion in tax cuts for small businesses ... indicating that during these tough economic times, Congress is delivering the tax breaks small businesses need to thrive."

The new rules could drastically alter the tax-reporting landscape by spotlighting payments that previously went unreported. Freelancers and other independent operators typically write off stacks of business expenses; having to issue tax paperwork documenting each of them could cut down on fraudulent deductions.

More significantly, the 1099 trail would expose payments to small operators that might now be going unreported. If you buy a computer for your business from a major chain retailer, the seller almost certainly documents the revenue. But if you buy it from Tim's Computer Shack down the street, Tim might not report and pay taxes on his income from the sale. """

http://money.cnn.com/2010/05/05/smallbusiness/1099_health_care_tax_change/

 

[patricknd]

I do not have any independent contractors, but if I did I must report thier compensation via 1099.

Do I expense the cost of janitorial services?? Uh, yes. Do I look at my P&L? Uh, yes.

Is that bad?

The analogy here is this; Let's say you are going to do a kitchen remodel at you house. You buy new cabinets (1099), an new refrigerator (1099), cooktop (1099) granite counter top (1099) oven microwave (1099) sink/faucet combo (1099) new tile for the floor (1099) and the installation of all the above using three contractors (1099, 1099, 1099).

All of this to make sure, in the eyes of the federal govt, that everything you bought from each vendor has been reported and taxes collected. The IRS already has the ability to do this, but let's put you through this excercise just because we can.

It's job creation

 

[redtreviso]

It's job creation

hasn't happened yet... but sh*^^*ng one's pants about it is the republican way.

 

[rhubroma]

that's who i was hoping to vote for. i've said it before and i'll say it again, i thought she had more integrity than anyone in the field, and the older i get the more i realize that that is the most important qualification. (i learned the italics from rube, i think it suits me)

As far as Hillary goes, she's a great diplomat who has mastered all the subtleties, but how can we applaud the fact that the woman was willing to sacrifice everything for her political career, even her own feminine dignity, as having any integrity? She's perfect for the job, a true Washington insider, which is why I'd honestly prefer someone else.

And now she can't tolerate a great personality, such as Bill, beside her, for which each of them is the focal point, Patrick - there aren't two focal points - Hillary through her sophistication, Bill through his naturalness. Hillary's sophistication derives from her Wellesley connections, Bill's naturalness from his Arkansas origins. Both are conscious of their greatness and their hatred, but Hillary is the stronger of the two and therefore does not always have to retreat, unlike Bill, whose only weapon has always been to retreat. Hillary really comes into her own when things get dangerous, Patricknd, but Bill retreats. Both have a penchant not only for sartorial extravagance, but for extravagance generally. After all the one came from the only big Midwestern city, the other from the provinces, Patrickind, and could only assert themselves through their extravagance. Everything about Hillary is extravagant and so is everything about Bill; her extravagance is extremely sophisticated, his extremely natural. Bill once said that if he were to write a book about the quintessence of charlatanry he wouldn't hesitate for one moment to make Hillary the chief figure.

Bill is inevitably the person on whom everyone has to concentrate, and he knows it, just as Hillary knows that she is bound to be the center of attention in whatever company. If Hillary and Bill are both present at a party it has to split up into its constituent parts, as they say, because they've disrupted it. Either Hillary or Bill is the focal point, but they can't be both. Imagine if she were elected president! Hillary at least gives the impression that she doesn't hate Bill, but she never really conceals her contempt for him; on the contrary, she flaunts it whenever she has a chance, Patricknd. Hillary constantly says how much she admires Bill's political career, thereby to divert attention from her hatred of him and seeing such expressions of admiration and esteem as a means of concealing her hatred, but of course she doesn't succeed, Particknd. She always goes a shade too far in her praise of Bill's political career, which incidentally can't possibly appeal to him because it is only directed toward allowing her to surpass him and must have a positively devastating effect on him. Hillary's praise of Bill's presidential career is so fulsome as to reveal the true measure of her hatred.

 

[Cobblestones]

Your graph show the hiring of loads of temp census workers. What your graph also show is the private workers being shed in the millions and nary a blip on your screen with public workers. Now, when the tax base drys up, what would you think the logical effect would be to the public enterprise?

If your chacterization of the public worker is having been 'strangled', how then would you characterize the plight of the private worker? Keep in mind there are over 14 million private unemployed.

Second stimulus to save public jobs that are dependent on private eneterprise and the taxes levied to them.... How about we figure out what private enterprise needs to flourish so there's enough tax base to run the public sector?

But that's the point. The tax revenue is actually far above projections.

Yes, private sector jobs were on steep decline from the start of the recession. But now, private sector jobs are on the upswing which is a good thing. The problem right now is the shedding of public sector jobs. This is a stupid thing to do. In particular since the states' tax revenue is much larger than projected.

The census workers were a blip on the graph. It's so last year. All the temporary census workers are long since gone. This is not why the public sector is shedding jobs right now.

As to your previous post: your definition of 'confiscating labor' is really stretching it. If I invest in stocks, bonds or futures today, sell in a week and make a huge plus, these gains are taxed. Is there any 'labor' involved? Most people would disagree.

And payroll taxes. I said it's one way to finance things. Alternatively, you could pay the whole thing out and shift the tax over to the employee and call it income taxes. Same difference.

I agree with you that we need a system which changes less frequently than it does now. A single-payer healthcare system would do that. So does, in fact Medicare, Medicaid and Social Security. But I would agree that simplifying the tax code could go a long way to help businesses. I'm not aware of the precise details of the 1099 reporting so I won't comment. But the amount of work needed to navigate the tax code and to get the best deal out of it is stunning. This should be changed. Actually, the first thing which should be changed is to separate businesses from individuals. Whenever someone wants to hike tax rates on millionaires, there's an outcry because apparently the tax on some businesses would go up as well. Why not start out by separating these two categories? (Not that the argument has mostly been debunked anyway, see the link concerning the subject.)

 

[patricknd]

As far as Hillary goes, she's a great diplomat who has mastered all the subtleties, but how can we applaud the fact that the woman was willing to sacrifice everything for her political career, even her own feminine dignity, as having any integrity? She's perfect for the job, a true Washington insider, which is why I'd honestly prefer someone else.

And now she can't tolerate a great personality, such as Bill, beside her, for which each of them is the focal point, Patrick - there aren't two focal points - Hillary through her sophistication, Bill through his naturalness. Hillary's sophistication derives from her Wellesley connections, Bill's naturalness from his Arkansas origins. Both are conscious of their greatness and their hatred, but Hillary is the stronger of the two and therefore does not always have to retreat, unlike Bill, whose only weapon has always been to retreat. Hillary really comes into her own when things get dangerous, Patricknd, but Bill retreats. Both have a penchant not only for sartorial extravagance, but for extravagance generally. After all the one came from the only big Midwestern city, the other from the provinces, Patrickind, and could only assert themselves through their extravagance. Everything about Hillary is extravagant and so is everything about Bill; her extravagance is extremely sophisticated, his extremely natural. Bill once said that if he were to write a book about the quintessence of charlatanry he wouldn't hesitate for one moment to make Hillary the chief figure.

Bill is inevitably the person on whom everyone has to concentrate, and he knows it, just as Hillary knows that she is bound to be the center of attention in whatever company. If Hillary and Bill are both present at a party it has to split up into its constituent parts, as they say, because they've disrupted it. Either Hillary or Bill is the focal point, but they can't be both. Imagine if she were elected president! Hillary at least gives the impression that she doesn't hate Bill, but she never really conceals her contempt for him; on the contrary, she flaunts it whenever she has a chance, Patricknd. Hillary constantly says how much she admires Bill's political career, thereby to divert attention from her hatred of him and seeing such expressions of admiration and esteem as a means of concealing her hatred, but of course she doesn't succeed, Particknd. She always goes a shade too far in her praise of Bill's political career, which incidentally can't possibly appeal to him because it is only directed toward allowing her to surpass him and must have a positively devastating effect on him. Hillary's praise of Bill's presidential career is so fulsome as to reveal the true measure of her hatred.

your opinions, have as always ,been read with great interest.

 

[Anonymous]

But that's the point. The tax revenue is actually far above projections.

Yes, private sector jobs were on steep decline from the start of the recession. But now, private sector jobs are on the upswing which is a good thing. The problem right now is the shedding of public sector jobs. This is a stupid thing to do. In particular since the states' tax revenue is much larger than projected.

The census workers were a blip on the graph. It's so last year. All the temporary census workers are long since gone. This is not why the public sector is shedding jobs right now.

As to your previous post: your definition of 'confiscating labor' is really stretching it. If I invest in stocks, bonds or futures today, sell in a week and make a huge plus, these gains are taxed. Is there any 'labor' involved? Most people would disagree.

And payroll taxes. I said it's one way to finance things. Alternatively, you could pay the whole thing out and shift the tax over to the employee and call it income taxes. Same difference.

I agree with you that we need a system which changes less frequently than it does now. A single-payer healthcare system would do that. So does, in fact Medicare, Medicaid and Social Security. But I would agree that simplifying the tax code could go a long way to help businesses. I'm not aware of the precise details of the 1099 reporting so I won't comment. But the amount of work needed to navigate the tax code and to get the best deal out of it is stunning. This should be changed. Actually, the first thing which should be changed is to separate businesses from individuals. Whenever someone wants to hike tax rates on millionaires, there's an outcry because apparently the tax on some businesses would go up as well. Why not start out by separating these two categories? (Not that the argument has mostly been debunked anyway, see the link concerning the subject.)

Let's deconstruct.

The tax revenue is actually far above projections.

Tax revenue may be far above projections but way below the level of income required for local and state govts to even stem the deficit spending. Don't get too excited. In Cali, the tax revenue is 2.3 billion above projections but we have a 20 something billion hole.

The problem right now is the shedding of public sector jobs. This is a stupid thing to do.

This is the smart thing to do. The only reason it's happening now instead of two years ago is federal stimulus. In what world does it make sense for public workers who depend on tax receipts for their income to force the federal govt to borrow money from foreign entities and/or print money to sustain jobs that then continue to deplete the treasury as public money pays their salaries? That is just backwards. The only thing the govt should be doing is trimming labor to the point of affordability, just like what happens in the private world. This idea that public service jobs are somehow sacrosanct just contributes to the overall problem. It's essentially a game of kick the can.

your definition of 'confiscating labor' is really stretching it. If I invest in stocks, bonds or futures today, sell in a week and make a huge plus, these gains are taxed. Is there any 'labor' involved? Most people would disagree.

Most people might disagree but that does not make them right. Take your example of invested monies... where did the money originate from for you to invest? Either from your labor or the labor of someone else (in the event you either inherited the money or stole it). Taxes are the taking of labor any way you slice it.



Finally, there is a reason the tax code is not and likely will never be simplified. It will remove a big portion of central power from Washington DC. The political class won't stand for that.

 

[Anonymous]

your opinions, have as always ,been read with great interest.

You are really becoming quite accomplished with the use of iatalics. It really adds panache to your posts.

 

[Anonymous]

""The paper trail

Why did these tax code revisions get included in a health-care reform bill? Welcome to Washington. The idea seems to be that using 1099 forms to capture unreported income will generate more government revenue and help offset the cost of the health bill.

A Democratic aide for the Senate Finance Committee, which authored the changes, defended the move.

"Information reporting improves tax compliance without raising taxes on small businesses," the aide said. "Health care reform includes more than $35 billion in tax cuts for small businesses ... indicating that during these tough economic times, Congress is delivering the tax breaks small businesses need to thrive."

The new rules could drastically alter the tax-reporting landscape by spotlighting payments that previously went unreported. Freelancers and other independent operators typically write off stacks of business expenses; having to issue tax paperwork documenting each of them could cut down on fraudulent deductions.

More significantly, the 1099 trail would expose payments to small operators that might now be going unreported. If you buy a computer for your business from a major chain retailer, the seller almost certainly documents the revenue. But if you buy it from Tim's Computer Shack down the street, Tim might not report and pay taxes on his income from the sale. """

http://money.cnn.com/2010/05/05/smallbusiness/1099_health_care_tax_change/

More sheer stupidity (not from you but whomever dreamt up this idea). It's not a tax on small business? What about the cost of compliance that will add exactly nothing but take away from every bottom line?

I give Obama credit for at least enough understanding that this would actually cost the govt money.

When power brokers get elected who have zero business acumen this is the shit you get.

 

[redtreviso]

More sheer stupidity (not from you but whomever dreamt up this idea). It's not a tax on small business? What about the cost of compliance that will add exactly nothing but take away from every bottom line?

I give Obama credit for at least enough understanding that this would actually cost the govt money.

When power brokers get elected who have zero business acumen this is the shit you get.

So it isn't going to happen but you complain about it..and keep complaining about it..Maybe you should let your complain lobe have a break from distillates for a bit.

 

[ChrisE]

Are we not pretty close to full *** now??? Why the eff would you want to wake the idiots?

I am a registered independent. I vote republican the vast majority of the time but I'm under no illusions. I'm of the belief that, particularly in Washington, it does not really matter who is there. Corruption rules the day. Those of you "disappointed" with Obama just have not been paying attention. Winning elections is the number 1, 2 and 3 priority for politicians and the more power associated with the elected position the more this becomes absolute.

I vote republican mostly becuase they have at least a passive belief in a stong private enterprise being that which drives us economiclly.

Gotta tell you though, I think if Hillary were in the oval office the US economy would be in a much better place.

Why is that? What specific policy do you think she would support contrary to Obama that would make things all rosy? What has Obama done? Raise taxes? No. New ball busting regulation? No. Bomb arabs? Yes. Bush status quo? Yes, and then some. He's doing the same things and more than Bush did and the stock market is up 5k. Scott, WTF is exactly your problem with Obama? Do you even know?

And, why do you think H Clinton would support something different? Remember she was the head cheerleader for *gasp* healthcare reform in 1993. She is the queen of triangulation, and Obama is a willing student. They are the same person other than genitalia and skin color, but of course genitalia is rock to skin color's scizzors in your game. Is tha why she would be better?

As for rubard upthread calling me "deluded" because I am tired of being fed BS then sobeit. Dems keep getting taken advantage of because of people like red and rubarb; at the end of the day no matter how much the dems shyt on them "Dems are better than the alternative" and red/rubarb march on like good little soldiers to the voting booth and save us from the Palin invastion. You guys are tools, and the dem leadership knows it lol.

In reality except for fringe issues that nobody really cares about (gay marriage, etc) Dems do zero in terms of what they confess to believe in with foreign or domestic policy. Look at Feinstein/Obama, raising all that hell about the Patriot act when Bush was in office, now a line toeing defender now that Obama is in office. Gitmo, oh the horror, but it is ok now that Obama is in office. No touching SS....but its tax has been cut and will never come back. Let Bush tax cuts for the rich expire, no way. Hey, let's bomb Libya with freedom missiles! It's all good, I've got red and rubarb's vote lol.

The majority in the US are party loyal rubes like red that bend over for the soap with Dems every couple of years, and "independents" that cannot open their eyes and just sway back and forth between two lobbyist w***ing parties expecting something to change. Doing the same thing over and over again expecting a different result is the definition of insanity. I will keep being deluded rubarb, you guys can keep being insane.

 

[Anonymous]

Why is that? What specific policy do you think she would support contrary to Obama that would make things all rosy? What has Obama done? Raise taxes? No. New ball busting regulation? No. Bomb arabs? Yes. Bush status quo? Yes, and then some. He's doing the same things and more than Bush did and the stock market is up 5k. Scott, WTF is exactly your problem with Obama? Do you even know?

And, why do you think H Clinton would support something different? Remember she was the head cheerleader for *gasp* healthcare reform in 1993. She is the queen of triangulation, and Obama is a willing student. They are the same person other than genitalia and skin color, but of course genitalia is rock to skin color's scizzors in your game. Is tha why she would be better?

As for rubard upthread calling me "deluded" because I am tired of being fed BS then sobeit. Dems keep getting taken advantage of because of people like red and rubarb; at the end of the day no matter how much the dems shyt on them "Dems are better than the alternative" and red/rubarb march on like good little soldiers to the voting booth and save us from the Palin invastion. You guys are tools, and the dem leadership knows it lol.

In reality except for fringe issues that nobody really cares about (gay marriage, etc) Dems do zero in terms of what they confess to believe in with foreign or domestic policy. Look at Feinstein/Obama, raising all that hell about the Patriot act when Bush was in office, now a line toeing defender now that Obama is in office. Gitmo, oh the horror, but it is ok now that Obama is in office. No touching SS....but its tax has been cut and will never come back. Let Bush tax cuts for the rich expire, no way. Hey, let's bomb Libya with freedom missiles! It's all good, I've got red and rubarb's vote lol.

The majority in the US are party loyal rubes like red that bend over for the soap with Dems every couple of years, and "independents" that cannot open their eyes and just sway back and forth between two lobbyist w***ing parties expecting something to change. Doing the same thing over and over again expecting a different result is the definition of insanity. I will keep being deluded rubarb, you guys can keep being insane.

Why would you respond to someone with an IQ in the double digits?

Do you ever see Obama signing something similar to Welfare reform or NAFTA? Never happen.

There is a practical side to Hillary that does not exist with Obama, imo. No big drawn out discussion required, it's just my opinion.

 

[ChrisE]

Why would you respond to someone with an IQ in the double digits?

Do you ever see Obama signing something similar to Welfare reform or NAFTA? Never happen.

There is a practical side to Hillary that does not exist with Obama, imo. No big drawn out discussion required, it's just my opinion.

If I take that jab back will you tell me why she would be better, specifically?

Edit, I see you added it was just your "opinion". The guy that kicked over the first domino in dismantling SS would never touch welfare or Nafta. Right. Carry on.

 

[Anonymous]

If I take that jab back will you tell me why she would be better, specifically?

Edit, I see you added it was just your "opinion". The guy that kicked over the first domino in dismantling SS would never touch welfare or Nafta. Right. Carry on.

Oh this should be entertaining. Do tell...

 

[redtreviso]

Why would you respond to someone with an IQ in the double digits?

Do you ever see Obama signing something similar to Welfare reform or NAFTA? Never happen.

There is a practical side to Hillary that does not exist with Obama, imo. No big drawn out discussion required, it's just my opinion.

Hilary is DLC,, DINO.. Like Mary Landrieu...