Didn't know Obama owned an oil company. Busy guys.

Obamas Energy Policies are a failure.

President's (of the US) don't own oil companies; However, their foreign, domestic, and energy policies DO greatly have an effect on the cost to the consumer.

Oil is a commodity. That's why the price fluctuates so much. We had oil price increases under George W. Bush and Bill Clinton. Third World countries are using more fossil fuels, corn, beef, etc. That affects availability/cost. Obama's opened up more domestic drilling than Bush.

If we're going to discuss the issues and differences between the candidates, can't we stick to what's actually going on instead of making stuff up? Keeping it real would be a lot more helpful.

So you think picking up were we left of at the end of 2008 is a good idea?

There has been abundant proof that the GOP -- including Paul Ryan -- obstructed Obama's policies, in effect turing us all into human shields. And these guys should be rewarded?

Keith - You are either a fool, or completely dishonest. Obama was elected and had both a democratic majority in congress and in the senate for 2 full years. He had NO obstruction whatsoever. He did exactly what he wanted to do with the stimulus and other things in an attempt to get the economy back on track and he failed miserably. So please stop your whining and lies. Our current president is in over his head. Furthermore, he still doesn't have a budget, ideas or plan to get this economy turned around.

Romney/Ryan will provide the leadership that this country has been sorely lacking the last 3 1/2 years.

I know you are fully aware that the Democrats controlled the Presidency, House and Senate for a full two years when he was elected? So which is it, are you foolish or dishonest?

Herr Schmitz, are you really so naive that you are shocked that the goal of a minority party is to win the next election, ousting the incumbent . Of course that's their goal. Just look at Dem actions against Bush. Get real

the 'sha guy, try about 6 months, not 2 years. In Washington that's barely enough time to do anything.

Timeline:
April 2009: Arlen Spector switches from Republican to Democrat (59 Dem senators)
July 2009: Al Franken finally sworn in (making 1st Dem supermajority since 1958)
August 2009: Sen. Ted Kennedy passes away, Paul Kirk temp appt. Sept. 2009
February 2010: Scott Brown (R-MA) signed in. End of Supermajority

So 8 months total months, 6 in which Congress was in session.

So let's please put the 2-year Supermajority lie to bed once and for all. This is a matter of record.

Yes Dan, the US is no longer hemorraging jobs at the rate of 750,000 every month as it was when Bush the Lesser left office. In July 2012, 163,000 new jobs came on line for a net turnaround of 913,000 jobs per month. Can you do the math on that one?

The Dow was at 7,949 when President Obama took office, it closed on 8/31 at 13,091 for a change of + 65%. How's your math on that one? Just as a point of reference, the Dow decreased by - 1% in Bush's first term and -24% in his second term.

The overall tax rates are at the lowest point in 60 years.

Oh, and those horrible Debt figures that were never a problem until Obama took office? The Debt was approximately $! Trillion when Reagan took office; Regan, Bush I and Bush II then proceeded to add $8.6 Trillion to the Debt while trashing the economy during the time of Bush the Lesser. They also charged two invasions and Medicare Part D. Any problems with these numbers?:

The Debt limit was raised 8 times during the Bush II Administration, with nary a peep from the "budget hawks" like Lyin' Ryan who voted for all of these increases.

So, perhaps you should stop listening to the Drug Addled Bloviater Limbaugh and turn off FAUX and do some research.

@Mrs Peel -

Funny how you omit Clinton's 7 years of contributions to the national debt like they don't exist.

Bren,

Where did I mention super-majority? (never) You only need a super-majority if you are planning on not having ANY support from the other side. I said he had a majority for two years to get what he wanted passed, which is true. Past presidents who were effective leaders could get members of the other party to cross over and support their ideas with some compromise. Reagan passed his tax cuts with democrats controlling the house. Bush passed several economic items . Even when Jeffords switched to the Democrats, Bush still had support from Democrats on a number of his issues and got them passed. Your insinuation that one needs a super majority to lead shows your lack of knowledge on both the legislation issue and the history of the relationships between past presidents and the congresses they worked with.

The bottom line is that our current President is a failure on many fronts. The plans that he passed while he had full control for two years didn't work. Since that point he is either completely clueless on what will work, or he is a completely ineffective leader who is unable to work with others to get anything passed the will assist Americans and help the economy. His budget was voted down 100-0 in the senate and he hasn't had anything since. Need I say more.

You can sit here and foolishly defend him solely because of your party affiliation, or whatever other reason, but we need the real leadership.the Romney / Ryan will provide.

Regarding democrats controling the house and senate: Does anyone remember the record number of filibusters? The ones that prevented anything from moving forward?
No, I thought not.

Looks like Kieth has schmitz for brains.

@Dan... are you having Hoffa answer for you?

President Clinton added the whopping sum of $1,114,713,502,186.74, which is 13% of what Bush I, Bush II and Reagan added to the Debt in total. TEAPublicans; the Party of "Charge It", after all Cheney said, "Reagan proved that deficits don't matter".

BTW; you might want to get ready to celebrate 4th anniversary of the Crash of Lehman Bros. which started the Wall St. Collapse during the last year of Bush the Lesser's regime. It occurred on September 15, 2008. Is Lehman Bros. better off than it was 4 years ago? Oh wait, Lehman Bros. doesn't exist anymore.

Ah yes, the "Glory Days" of 4 years ago.

@Mrs Peel -

When Clinton's first budget went into effect, the national debt was at $4.351T. When Clinton's last budget ended, the national debt was at $5.769T.

Thus Clinton added $1.418T over 8 years.

Reagan added $1.873T over 8 years.

Bush Sr. added $1.484T over 4 years.

Bush W. added $4.644T over 8 years.

Obama added $5.587T+ in 3.5 years.

By the time Obama's term ends, he will have single handedly added more in four years than both Bush's combined over 12 years.

So, what's your point?

Isn't it entertaining: For having the first "post racial" president, the Dem's sure are quick to point out his race...and having done so, drop the race card on anyone that disagrees with his politics and policies. I don't care if he's black, white, green, or purple...he's an ideologue that has surrounded himself with thugs and criminals (tax evasion is still a crime in the US). When he doesn't get his way by constitutional methods (i.e. running a bill through congress), he's proven time and again that he'll sidestep and initiate through fiat. Nice thing about executive orders, though, is that they can be undone buy the next sitting president.
Your Clinton comment is right on as well. For trying to convince anyone (their constituents anyway) that it's the GOP that is waging a "War on Women", they sure pick odd spokespeople.

Rambling spin from a moderate independent: Am I better than I was 4 years ago, No. That's because the economy crashed and I took a hit on investments, etc. like everyone else. Am I better off than I was 2 years ago? Yes. Investments recovering and moving forward. The Affordable Care Act is working well for me and my relatives and even more health insurance reform is needed.

I don't want to return to the failed policies of the Bush advisers that Romney's planning to bring back to the White House. I don't want a venture capitalist getting his hands on our national/natural resources. And I don't want a guy who's been sucking down atheistic, egocentric political and social philosophies since he was a kid sitting in the 2nd highest seat in the country. That's where I'm coming from.

yes

So if Obama is to blame for the Janesville plant closing, does he also get credit for all of the auto industry plants that remained open or reopened?

GWB and the auto bailouts

http://www.politico.com/news/stories/1208/16740.html
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/12/20/business/20auto.html?pagewanted=all

Loan not paid back yet: http://www.newsmax.com/JohnBerlau/GM-Bailout-Obama-Tax/2011/09/26/id/412225

When Bush proposed the TARP program (an enormous bailout plan for financial institutions caught in the housing scheme perpetuated by Congress), one Senator Barack Obama supported the idea, but now, it's all Bush's fault? Instead of cutting back on spending to buy votes and repay political cronies, Obama opened up the spigots of the United States Treasury and tried to buy financial ability. Obama basically screwed private investors in both Chrysler and General Motors in order to turn over both entities to the unions. It cost thousands of jobs to do that, but remember, it was Bush's fault!

Happy Labor Day

Florida Gordon ‏@Floridagordon

Yes, @JoeBiden ! America better off 2day because @BarackOBama is our leader,Osama is dead and auto industry alive. #LyinRyan #MittTheTwit

Mornimisty - now I can see your nuts. Giving props on something Joe Biden tweeted?

Stand up Joe, stand up.

@morninmist -

Apparently, you have no idea what the definition of 'lie' is, as you apparently take obvious parody seriously. Here are some examples of real lies:

- I will half the deficit in four years.
- I will close Gitmo.
- My health care bill will not have a mandate.
- I will not raise taxes on the middle and working classes.
- I will end the wars on day 1.
- My stimulus will lower unemployment to below 8%.
- I will work to retool the Janesville assembly plant and keep it open for a hundred more years.
- I will cut the cost of a typical family's health insurance premium by up to $2,500 a year.
- Half of all cars purchased by the federal government will be plug-in hybrids or all-electric by 2012.
- I will upgrade our infrastructure.
- I will establish a low carbon fuel standard.
- I will provide at least $50 billion by 2013 for the global fight against HIV/AIDS.

Seriously morninmist, I could provided literally dozens and dozens of comments filled with nothing but Obama lies.

Here is the definition of a lie:
"a false statement made with deliberate intent to deceive; an intentional untruth; a falsehood. "
http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/lie
What you list are intentions. What gives you the omnipotent knowledge or privilege of determining a person's intent and stating that determination as fact?

@ hoffa
can you provide some references to all these contentions that you have listed? Some may be factual but they were goals that weren't attained. We can argue why or why not. What was put forth last week were factual misrepresentations of events that actually occurred. Calling the President's promises where the fulfillment of them are not totally in his power lies is sad. Get out of the gutter

@John Feia -

What I've listed are promises that Barack Obama made to the American people in order to get elected back in 2008.

When one fails to keep their promises, I'd say that the original statement was in fact a falsehood, which is one of the synonyms offered by your proffered definition.

You've gotta be kidding me. As long as you can contort the facts to the positions you hold, you will be fine and factual. Not surprising...

@John Feia -

What 'facts' did Hoffa contort exactly?

@Hoffa
Your definition of a lie as it applies to your position. If you say you are going to be somewhere tomorrow and something happens that prevents you from being there, are you a liar?

@John Feia -

Under your posed hypothetical - yes. A failure to perform on a promise made is in fact a lie.

@John Feia -

Obama was a constitutional law professor, or at the very least a self-purported expert of constitutional law - enough so to be lecturing classes at a prominent law school before he became President, correct?

So Obama either knew or should have know the limitations of the power of a President when he was making campaign promises, correct?

And Obama, by virtue of winning the election, was then in the position to deliver on the promises he made to the people, correct?

Based upon intent, as you suggest, Obama must have known that much of what he was promising on the campaign trail couldn't be effected solely by the office of the Presidency, thus the intent to deceive was clearly present in the way he so affirmatively and directly stated such promises, correct?

And as far as things that he does have direct and complete control over, like closing Gitmo and ending the wars on day 1, which he can do as commander in chief, I don't honestly see how you can't call those promises lies!

Best to quit while you're behind my friend, or suffer another Hoffa intellectual smack-down!

Booyah!!!

Booya? You are funny. Grow up please...

@John Feia -

Learn to lighten up a little and have some fun!

Just because the horse you've backed in this race is sub-par doesn't mean you have to be a sourpuss!

I appreciate your divergence from your usual posts. I think we can both agree to disagree. Here is a smiley face back at you :)

@John Feia -

Yes, we can agree to disagree. John Feia can have his emotional unsupported opinion and Hoffa can have his analysis premised upon objective fact.

At the end of the day though, the person who won the argument is clear!

So if Obama's healthcare plan is a loser why did Romney think it up?

The issue isn't that Romney 'thought it up'. The issue is that Obama should have been smart enough to avoid repeating Romney's mistake...

@cowdung: you prove that it does not matter what Obama does, whether bad, good or great - your side cares only about an agenda that shoots him down. Back to the ol' "let us do whatever it takes to make sure he fails". I hope the majority of the people decide that we ALL need to succeed together and not just a chosen few.

True. We really should be lobbying to fix our broken system.

How?

@Greg: A good start would be to greatly limit lobbyists and the big money behind them. Get rid of Super Pacs.

OK, then?

You bringing anything to the table Greg?

Okay, now it's really hard to take you seriously.

What types of jobs did these people have who got laid off? If you could, please list the companies. I'd like to see if:

1) The employees were union-based?
2) If so, which union did they belong to?
3) What industry were these companies in?

Thanks - and yes this is my real name.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UErR7i2onW0

6/29/12
"Earlier today, the House and Senate voted on the Highway and Student Loan Bill (H.R.4348). The legislation reauthorized various surface transportation programs through fiscal year 2014 at a cost of $120 billion and extends the 3.4% rate on Stafford loans for one year. The Highway bill bankrupts the Highway Trust Fund by 2015, and the student loan bill costs $5.9 billion in order to help a small percentage of incoming college students pay just $7 less a month in student loans four years from now."
The "Repubs" voted (wrongly) for "Obama's infrastructure ideas".

As for Education, back-up what you say. Is your only idea, of better education, throwing more money at the failed system and the unions?

OBAMA CARES ABOUT OBAMA: The big house, the helicopter, and the airplane.

Mary Ann - Obama does not care about you.

January 26, 2009 (kinda like when Obama took office) average gas price: Regular gasoline/gallon $1.84.
So if my math is correct $1.84 X 2 = $3.68
The average gas price today is $3.82, so it is 2.08 times higher.

The rest of your mindless babble is not worth my time.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jyrlMr0Bedo&feature=related

Mary Ann - I have a headache.

It's a supply and demand thing WIwishes. When this President limits REASONABLE drilling permits, then he limits the supply which drives prices up.

"According to the Bureau of Land Management, the agency tasked with reporting oil drilling permits, etc. on federal lands has reported that in 2001, the Bush administration approved only 3,439 permits increasing slightly to 3,802 by 2003. It wasn’t until 2004 that Bush doubled the permits approved, but by they dropped dramatically back down to 4,579 in 2005.

"In 2009 under President Obama, there were 4,487 oil drilling permits approved to drill on federal land and in 2010 there were 4,090 permits issued and finally by 2011 there were 4,244. "
http://www.politicususa.com/obama-oil-production.html

"In 2011, about 45% of the petroleum consumed by the United States was imported from foreign countries.1 This was the lowest level since 1995."
http://www.eia.gov/tools/faqs/faq.cfm?id=32&t=6

@John Feia - indeed demand is down due to an increase in gas prices and the unemployment rate being so high - people without jobs tend not to drive as much.

This myopic line of responses is what I like to call getting down to the weeds - find a thread to latch onto, any miniscule point of contention - be it a quote on a website (always excellent sources of information (yes sarcasm intended), a fact posted by some form of printed media (also very biased no matter what side you're on) and drive it into the ground thereby burying the bigger picture.

Gas prices are not driven by one factor - this is why they are a commodity and are prone to speculation - scare the masses and you can get rich on that fear.

The amount of misinformation by both sides is pathetic. The battle for votes is really for those swayed by the sound bite, the bumper sticker and the ADD nation.

Making an informed decision is hard work and you will not find an answer on Fox, in any government website.

I agree. It is an international market which is just one factor. My post was in response to the simple solution of expanding drilling permits proposed by Anti-Alinsky as the solution for the gas price dilemma. The thing is that when demand goes down, prices usually follow ( unless you are a supply sider). As far as quoting news websites, eia.gov which I cited is a government website. One bright spot though is that at the end of the month, provisions in the Dodd/Frank law to harness abuse of speculative markets will go into effect.

Slight correction, The Dodd/Frank law deals with commodities markets of which oil and many agricultural products are being exploited in.

@John Feia -

US oil consumption is also significantly down since 2007.

http://greenecon.net/

And Obama's green energy sector hasn't developed into a viable alternative as quickly as he promised it would. He's even breaking many of his own promises about green energy:

http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/promises/obameter/promise/442/establish-a-low-carbon-fuel-standard/

http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/promises/obameter/promise/469/require-federal-fleet-to-be-half-hybrids-or-electr/

http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/promises/obameter/promise/473/require-production-of-more-biofuels/

http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/promises/obameter/promise/482/double-federal-program-to-help-reverse-commuters/

http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/promises/obameter/promise/465/use-revenue-from-cap-and-trade-to-support-clean-en/

http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/promises/obameter/promise/468/require-hybrid-fleet-at-the-white-house/

http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/promises/obameter/promise/470/require-more-flex-fuel-cars-for-the-federal-govern/

http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/promises/obameter/promise/472/mandate-flexible-fuel-vehicles-by-2012/

http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/promises/obameter/promise/488/require-energy-conservation-in-use-of-transportati/

http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/promises/obameter/promise/491/provide-an-annual-report-on-state-of-our-energy-f/

etc.

Barack Hussein Obama's green energy initiatives have worked out well
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
for Solyndra management!

@Hoffa
You seem to have a fancy for politifact (glad to see you are thinking for yourself). Since they are a source that you seem to trust, what do you have to say about their truth ratings regarding the Welfare to Work ads as well as Romney/Ryan's statements regarding Medicare and the Janesville GM closing and the Obama Apology tour?

http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/statements/2012/aug/31/mitt-romney/mitt-romney-said-barack-obama-began-his-presidency/

http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/statements/2012/aug/07/mitt-romney/mitt-romney-says-barack-obamas-plan-abandons-tenet/

http://www.politifact.com/new-jersey/statements/2012/aug/19/national-republican-congressional-committee/house-democrats-support-gutting-medicare-more-700-/

http://www.politifact.com/wisconsin/statements/2012/aug/29/paul-ryan/did-barack-obama-break-promise-keep-gm-plant-open/

@John Feia -

Hoffa has previously qualified Politifact as only being good to use for the links they provide to primary sources, and nothing else. Politifact's analysis and conclusions should be ignored by anyone with a half brain.

The links that Hoffa provided were merely to show the promises that Obama made, and the proof used by Politifact to determine them as being broken - nothing else. Hoffa encourages everyone to do their own homework, perform their own analysis, and come to their own conclusions.

As far as the broken Obama promises linked to by Hoffa, Hoffa's research, independent analysis, and conclusions concur with those reached by Politifact, in that those do indeed represent broken Obama promises.

Always do your own homework though. Never blindly trust the conclusions of a so-called fact-checker - especially in regards to politics!

@John Feia -

As far as your Politifact links are concerned:

http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/statements/2012/aug/31/mitt-romney/mitt-romney-said-barack-obama-began-his-presidency/

Even Politifact admits that this is a SUBJECTIVE standard, and not an objective one. Apologies -- or diplomatic language? Reasonable minds have varying opinions about this, all backed up with varying facts and logical analysis. So for Politifact to conclude a 'Pants on Fire' rating is wholly unfair. Frankly, this is also an issue that Hoffa could care less about!

http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/statements/2012/aug/07/mitt-romney/mitt-romney-says-barack-obamas-plan-abandons-tenet/

Politifact doesn't even mention the actual executive order from Obama in this analysis, thus it cannot be taken seriously! How can you effectively fact check something without even looking at the primary documents involved? This is just outright ludicrous! Are people really that STUPID???

http://www.politifact.com/new-jersey/statements/2012/aug/19/national-republican-congressional-committee/house-democrats-support-gutting-medicare-more-700-/

Politifact itself concludes that "the health care reform is projected to reduce future Medicare spending by more than $700 billion between 2013 and 2022," and yet still rates this a Pants on Fire???? You've got to be kidding me!

Like I always say - THINK FOR YOURSELF!!!!!!!

I excluded an analysis of the one about Ryan and the GM Janesville assembly plant as Hoffa has already covered this in depth and detail on numerous Patch boards over the last several days.

@Hoffa
"Politifact's analysis and conclusions should be ignored by anyone with a half brain."

Yet you still use them. I agree with your assessment of Politicfacts merits. I merely threw them out there to show how your supposed validations of your statements are not what they seem. If this is your assessment of Politicfacts, how can you use them as a source without being hypocritical?

@John Feia -

"If this is your assessment of Politicfacts, how can you use them as a source without being hypocritical?"

Your reading comprehension really sucks tonight! Please re-read Hoffa's 10:03 pm on Tuesday, September 4, 2012, post, as it sufficiently addresses this question.

Next time, please read Hoffa's posts a little more carefully before responding to them!

@ hoffa
Please read my posts ( I won;t refer to them in a third party manner) when calling them hypocritical. I was explaining YOUR hypocrisy for using Politifacts as a citation for your posts. You can say what you want here but know that they won't go unchallenged. You falsely represent yourself as a factual contributor to these threads. Don't fool yourself that your so called facts will go unchallenged. Why is it that you can't attach your real identity to the the comments you post? I'm sure you won't address that legitimate question.

@John Feia -

See Hoffa's 11:22 pm on Tuesday, September 4, 2012 post, as that answers your question.

Again, please read Hoffa's posts a little more closely before responding. It would save a lot of unecessary and off-topic back and forth.

I will repeat this;
"Why is it that you can't attach your real identity to the the comments you post? I'm sure you won't address that legitimate question."

You once again dodged this question. Why are you so afraid of attaching your name to your opinions? You talk about credibility. Why are you so afraid of your own credibility?

@Brittany -

Paulson was primarily advised by then NY Fed Chairman Timothy Geithner, who Obama made the new and current Secretary of the Treasury, and US Fed Chair Ben Bernanke, who Obama kept as the US Fed Chair. The three operated in unison like a well-oiled machine to dictate policy, and Obama chose to stick with that brand of monetary policy.

So, what's your point?

That didn't explain anything.

Obama kept all the Bush era monetary policy people, and yet you rip Bush for following their leadership, but not Obama for doing the exact same thing that Bush did?

That's very inconsistent and shows you to be little more than an extreme hypocritical partisan hack!

...which is more than could be said about Kennedy's passenger that night in July of '69. Teddy Kennedy is the last guy you want to feature in anything being used to imply that a political party is overlooking the foibles, indiscretions or other character flaws of one of its own.

The entire Kennedy family represents the absolute worst of the worst in American politics! Figures that the Dems would be celebrating and paying tribute to Ted, the man who got away with allowing a young girl to die due to his drunken negligence! He should have went to jail.

Shows just how sick Democrats really are!

Sad to see people piling on to a person who dedicated his life to public service and accomplished more than most for the everyday citizen. Mitt looked great in the debate footage. A sign of things to come? Probably not because he has changed his mind on the issues he vehemently stood up for then. Hoffa, I thought you weren't going to watch. "The entire Kennedy family represents the absolute worst of the worst in American politics!" Yeah JFK and Bobby were horrible but they got theirs didn't they...

Yes, a person like Ted Kennedy, handed everything, turns around and dedicates his life to helping 'the little guy' (not without mistakes) should surely be vilified.

JFK, Robert 'Bobby,' Teddy, - Hoffa despises the entire clan of Kennedys! And so would any self-respecting American!

The real James R Hoffa refused to fly the flag at the Teamster DC headquarters at half mast after JFK was assassinated! James R Hoffa was a real American patriot!

Thank you 'Hoffa'. So much easier to dismiss you now.

"The real James R Hoffa refused to fly the flag at the Teamster DC headquarters at half mast after JFK was assassinated! James R Hoffa was a real American patriot!"

"The real James R Hoffa"? Who are you? At least he attached a "real" name to his statements....

@John Feia -

Hoffa's use of a screen name on the Patch forums, as opposed to his real name, has already been explained on multiple occasions. In short, Hoffa started out using his real name, and he and his family received serious death threats from unhinged liberals and their family business was threatened with boycott and protest. Thus, Hoffa now uses a screen name, as dealing with all that nonsense once already was enough!

Nice substantiated excuse. if you believe what you say, be a man or woman (who knows?) and stand by your words. I highly doubt that the Hudson Patch poses such a dire threat to your life or business lively hood. If you can't publicly profess what your beliefs are, what good are they?

ts easy to make statements under the cloak of a colloquial shelter. It takes a real person to stand by their convictions and not ignoring convenient excuses to do otherwise.

@John Feia -

Have you received serious death threats from anyone merely for espousing your opinions on a publicly viewable forum? Were the police involved? Do you have a business located in a highly partisan community upon which your livelihood depends that was threatened with adverse economic activity?

If you can't answer 'yes' to all of these questions, then you haven't a clue and Hoffa could less what you think about him using a screen name.

If you want to look down upon anyone, perhaps it should be your fellow blue fisters whose detestable acts caused the use of the screen name out of necessity.

There's no denying that the left is more violent than the right. How many reports of death threats being made against Tom Barrett were there during the recall election vs reports of verifiable death threats being made against Walker and his family by unhinged leftists?

Get a clue - yours is the side of violence that will resort to anything to try to silence their partisan opposition!

Says the shill hiding behind his or her made up facade pretending what he or she says means anything.

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

Brittany...perhaps you should read up on your history and discover exactly how the Kennedy fortune was made. Joe Kennedy was a mob connected bootlegger who built his empire on smuggling and murder. He then rolled that into polticial corruption and insider trading. Yes... a real American family story.

You folks seem to get more upset about a dog riding on top of a car who got a little wet, but survived the trip, than you do a young women riding inside another one who didn't.

@Brittany -

Who died because of Watergate?

Thanks for proving my point.

"Can this country afford to continue with the Bush Tax cuts" - Yes, if we cut spending.

"how about the talk of going to war with IRAN," - that's just posturing. It's what strong leaders do.

"and lets put it all on the backs of our future generations without paying for it." - I didn't recall seeing this anywhere in the Republican platform. Can you please cite to where in the platform I can find this position? In fact, the platform states to balance the budget and pay down the debt. So where ever you're getting your facts from (probably the Daily Kos), it's not a very accurate or reliable source.

Please try to stick with primary sources and ignore the third party analysis spin.

Why wasn't Hilary Clinton invited to the Dem convention? Don't many regard her as being a the future leader of the party after Obama retires?

Bush has chosen to stay out of of the political light since 2009, unlike clinton. Now reply with a new line of rhetoric.

Hillary as the Secretary of State is supposed to stay out of political process. It was her decision. Watch her husband knock it out of the park tomorrow!

@John Feia -

"Hillary as the Secretary of State is supposed to stay out of political process."

LOL!!! The SOS is a cabinet position, thus very partisan and very political.

Proving that you haven't a clue!

@John Feia -

Bill Clinton will have as much positive effect for Obama as he did for Tom Barrett in the recent recall election. Who won that recall election again with an even greater majority than he did in the regular election?

@ Hoffa
So tell me, where is Hillary Clinton? She is in Beijing China doing her job. If you have observed her comments this past year you would know that she is not about politics. she is about performing the duties assigned to her. Who doesn't have a clue? You are no longer going to be able to spout out your vitriol without being called on it. Got that clue?

@John Feia -

And that trip couldn't have been scheduled to either before or after the convention? Yeah, I'll believe that when my crap turns purple and smells like rainbow sherbert!

Or maybe it's because Hilary doesn't endorse Obama after he destroyed her in the 2008 primary using dirty tactics and lies?

Nah, that couldn't be it!

@Brittany -

Sorry, Hoffa didn't realize that only you were allowed to posit questions.

If you listened to the speeches at the RNC convention at all, and especially Ryan's, the GOP admitted that the Bush years weren't exactly a shining moment in conservative ideology. So why bring out someone that you admit didn't exactly do right by the party? While GW wasn't the worst, he admittedly wasn't great either.

What's more disturbing is your side's love of Clinton - as in all reality he screwed us more than Bush did. Clinton was responsible for NAFTA, lifting investment bank regulations, and giving favored trading nation status to China. Not to mention how immoral the man was while in office. One of the two Presidents in our nation's history that was actually impeached while in office. And yet, you guys still celebrate him!

Proving once again how SICK Democrats really are!

As expected more empty partisanship and on a new line. Bush has stated many times after the election that he would stay out of the process. We have a memory of what is promised unlike anyone voting for Obama.

“If you repeat a lie often enough, it becomes the truth. "
Obviously that is your motivation for your posts,

Oh John, you are so clever.

Maybe you should try "I know you are, but what am I?"

What? Lets get out of grade school...

@John Feia: "What? Lets get out of grade school..."

Trying to man, but you keep dragging me back down!

The second sickest comment that Hoffa has ever read on Patch!

The sickest comment? Read what you just wrote. Please give me the the rationale behind your analysis of why that is the sickest comment Mr. third person has ever read here.

@John Feia -

Because it epitomizes the culmination of your statements tonight indicating a blind and unwavering love of the three worst things that ever happened to modern America, politically speaking - the Kennedy's, the Clinton's, and the Obama's!

What in Michelle Obamas speech led you to your determination? A very sad commentary of your intellectual input here. Please discontinue your representation of yourself of a broad "fact" based thinker. Your comments reveal you as nothing more than a partisan shill. I may be somewhat the same, but at least I admit it, with my real name Mr. Pseudonym.

If Michelle Obama was honest and had any integrity at all, she'd apologize for the $3M Alice in Wonderland WH party hosted by Tim Burton and Johnny Depp that her and her husband threw at our collective expense. Or the expensive vacations that her and the girls took at our expense, calling it a 'diplomatic function.' She could have at least offered to pay back the taxpayers for such foolishness.

But she didn't, did she?

Nor did she explain any of Obama's broken promises - like failing to close Gitmo, half the defiict, etc.

It was essentially a content free speech with undertones of class warfare.

No wonder the Democrats back Obama - they have such low standards to begin with!

@Hoffa
if you watched Michelle's speech last night and can attack her for it, you are a lowly human being. Doesn't matter what you think because you misrepresent yourself. You stated last week that you wouldn't throw away time your time watching the DNC this week. I guess you are just like Mitt, you changed your mind...

Michelle is a walking example of anti-american values. She got her comfy job at a hospital due to her race, and cronyism. She indulges in anti-white rhetoric when it suits her crowd, yet says we all must get along. She things America is racist, yet if not for racist policies, she'd be a nobody.

And, she wants to dictate what we all consume, yet she has a fat arse.

Thank you for revealing the person who you really are. Its unfortunate but necessary to know that people like you still exist in this society.

and John Feia thank you for revealing the racist person you are for discounting and dismissing people of color at the RNC including Condi Rice, Mia Love, and Marco Rubio.

@ aborted
What? i was commenting on a slur to our First Lady. Where is the connection to the last weeks RNC?

If that is the best critique you have of the First Lady's speech, she must have done pretty well...

Ignorant troll.

Thank you...

George Walker Bush = failed in every business venture.
George Walker Bush = snorted coke.
George Walker Bush = smoked dope
George Walker Bush = alcoholic
George Walker Bush = taken off of flight status in TANG
George Walker Bush = AWOL from TANG
George Walker Bush = ignored warnings about possible terrortist attacks
George Walker Bush = president during worst terrorist attack on the US
George Walker Bush = president when the 2nd worse financial crash hit the US
George Walker Bush = lied about WMD's in Iraq
George Walker Bush = approved torture as interrogation technique

So, there is where the height of "the bar" was set.

@MrsPeel -

FYI - Bush is history as far as politics go, and is not running in this election. Your apparent obsession with him is disturbing to say the least.

I guess seeing what a real Political Convention is supposed to be is kind of hard after last week.
GOP Convention=me me me
DEM Convention=us us us

Sounds like last weeks RNC attempt to appeal to the Latino community. Very funny and disingenuous

Which group of Ann Romoney;s "you people" are you addressing?

Because some people have a problem with attacking a teenager who has done nothing wrong. I am curious. Where is the criminal aspect here?

It was a school trip.

GOP backers seem to be grasping for straws. I love it!

Shouldn't the Obamas have footed the bill for private security for their daughter's trip instead of using US resources paid for by the taxpayers? There was nothing governmental or official about this trip.

Hoffa you know darn well that the secret service is and has been part of the deal for the president and his family. Even out of office a president will continue to have secret service protection for the rest of his/her life.

Jason, you might want to remind The Hoffa that the Secret Service is charged with the protection of the President and his family. Unlike people like Willard Romoney they do not "outsource" their responsibility.

If the Obama's had suggested private security the Service would have nixed the idea out of hand.

I would have thought that The Hoffa would have done his research and come to that conclusion on his own. Perhaps that information was not included in the "Daily Talking Points for Trolls" report?

Having this imaginary friend called Hoffa allows it to make stupid comments.

............

MrsPeel

2:56 pm on Wednesday, September 5, 2012

Jason, you might want to remind The Hoffa that the Secret Service is charged with the protection of the President and his family. Unlike people like Willard Romoney they do not "outsource" their responsibility.......

Hoffa does as Hoffa says Hoffa does...

@Mrs Peel, @morninmist, @John Feia -

Obama claims to be sympathetic to the plight of struggling Americans, right? But he has no trouble with his daughter taking a trip that he knows will cost the American taxpayers hundreds of thousands of dollars because of the mandatory protection by the Secret Service.

Thus, if Obama truly cared about the stewardship of the American people's tax-dollars, he would have asked his daughter to forgo taking a luxury trip until the economy had improved for all Americans and we were in a better position to foot the bill for such a trip. That's what's called leading by example.

This just show how out-of-touch Obama is to the struggles of the average American family. Just like the $3M Alice in Wonderland party hosted by Tim Burton and Johnny Depp at the WH that Obama threw.

Apparently when Mitt Romney is spending his own money on luxuries, it means he's out-of-touch with the average American.

But when Obama spends taxpayers money on luxuries for himself and his family, he's not out-of-touch????

You liberals and your double standards - Hoffa never will get it!

That's good because if Hoffa ever got it it would be scary...

You whine about Secret Service agents? Both Mitt and Ann had them on their Labor Day vacation.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/08/26/ann-romney-secret-service_n_1831289.html

These are standard procedures. Once again, grasping for straws... :)

@John Feia -

As you pointed out earlier, SS protection is mandatory. Romney didn't leave the country to go on vacation, thus there were no international travel expenses involved compared to Obama's daughter's trip.

No Renee you are wrong ALL Presidents do not get Secret Service for life, Starting with George W. Bush he will only get secret service protection for 10 years after leaving office along with all future Presidents. But you all make excuses for obummer, it comes down to simple math, you can not spend 1.3 billion more than you take in every year. All you democrats do an experiment. if you make $500.00 a week for example, start spending $1000.00 a week and see how long it takes to go bankrupt. And why do we still not have a budget after 3 and 1/2 years? And why do you not point out this is the FIRST and ONLY PRESIDENT to EVER have the USA CREDIT RATING DOWNGRADED? That is another accomplishment of his you fail to talk about.

Are you for real?

Good lord Paul Revere. Get on your horse and ride. Straight to your therapist.

Spoken like a true member of the American Christian Taliban.

As a friend of mine says, "You can't fix stupid".

Mr. FEIA:
You've been talking to Jimmy Hoffa here.
Why not Me?
ARE YOU SHOCKED?

Renee, Mrs Peel
I take you don't lke what I have to say??????
OR
You don't believe in "GOD"
Either way----I'm not riding away , until every state hears what I have to say.
Just vote your conscience.
If it's Obama, maybe we should re-define "marriage" between a "Woman & Govt."

You have no idea what I believe. But I'll give you some insight, I believe,right now that you are a misogynist head case.

@ Renee
Well put!

@Paul Revere... I really don't give a rat's ass what you say. Insane people are usually not held responsibe for what they babble about. You sir, will soon be stamped as "Religious Lunatic" and will be inhabitating a well-padded room alone with your Bible to thump as often as you wish.

You make as little sense as the Hoffa, only you don't write or spell nearly as well as he does.

While you are speaking with the Hoffa you might ask him why he didn't object to Willard and Ann going to London to watch her "dancing horse" and the Secret Service protection that they received for their journey to insult the Brits; and their journey to Israel to observe the Socialized Medical System that it has. Also was it OK for the Service to accompany them to Poland?

Did the Hoffa also object to the numerous visits that Bush the Lesser made to his "ranch" which was formerly a pig farm?

Mrspeel
U donut half 2 reed any of meye werds.

My comment was to "Catholic Woman"
I can assume You are not Catholic.

@Mrs Peel -

Wasn't Michelle Obama at the London Games as well?

Hoffa heard enough lies and substance free speeches last night - NFL kick-off game it is!

You really live up to your name Bewildered...

Gee , happy fela, never heard that one before. Thx for pointing it out. Wanta answer my question instead of your usual attack dog mentality? Naw, didn't think so

@ Bewildered
You will have to wait until tomorrow for the answer of ratings. As far as the blame game goes, foolishness doesn't deserve consideration.

@The Hoffa.... did Lyin' Ryan speak at the Democratic Convention last night?

@Mrs Peel -

Was there a Democrat named Ryan that spoke at the DNC convention last night - Hoffa admittedly wasn't paying that close attention to the pre prime time speeches.

At least you guys are finally starting to admit that your candidates are nothing but liars - good to see some acceptance of reality from the left!

@ Bewildered
Here is the answer you were looking for
"And even with football on NBC, the 10pm hour of the DNC’s night two still topped night two of the RNC a week ago: 20,622,000 vs. 20,049,000"
http://www.mediabistro.com/tvnewser/category/ratings

"NBC averaged 20.6 million viewers"
http://www.zap2it.com/tv/ratings/

"According to Nielsen, Here Comes Honey Boo Boo drew in over 3 million viewers during the 10 o’clock time slot. The RNC, meanwhile, only managed to ensnare 1.7 million during the same"
http://www.inquisitr.com/321727/honey-boo-boo-thompson-family-isnt-getting-rich-from-reality-tv/

@John Feia -

Why do you insist on perpetuating LIES?

Your comparison of 'Here Comes Honey Boo Boo' to the RNC Convention only pits TLC against one network, and a cable network at that, Fox News Channel (FNC).

FYI - People were watching the RNC Convention on more networks than just FNC.

So Here Comes Honey Boo Boo did not beat the RNC convention in total viewership, as your grossly misleading propaganda suggests.

As to which Convention will receive a total larger viewership, let's wait until they're completely over to compare!

So, Mr. Feia, final Neilsen numbers from last nite are in:

NFL. 23, 890,000 viewers
DNC combined 9,030,000 viewers

Guess Bubba and the Giants both lost last nite. Not surprising. Live football or Clinton reruns. Must be a Bush conspiracy.

BTW, my question was which will have higher ratings, DNC or NFL. As usual, Feia creates his own question (RNC vs DNC) , refusing to answer orig question. I'll answer my own question ( damn, I sound like you).... NFL in a landslide. Go Pack !

You guys are hilarious... seriously...

What is that supposed to mean?

Feia = racist!

Yeah I'm the racist. Figure it out fact man. Look at Allen West's comments and come back when you have more information. As far as your associating my family's name with a derogatory slur, its not surprising from someone like you. What is your name? Oh yeah you are too much of a coward to attach your defamatory statements to your name. Big man, or woman, who knows because you need to hide.

Hilariously funny. My understanding is that he is trying to get "Nine, nine, nine" Herman to join his committee. However Herman is not interesting serving with someone who is "bat shit crazy".

@ Hoffa
i can't let this go. For you to attach a racist label to me and my family name is low, even for you. Let me tell you something about myself. I am married to a wonderful Hispanic woman and have many close African American friends. For you to drop to those levels is reprehensible. I hope you are proud of yourself.

@John Feia -

Explain your comment about West then. If it wasn't intended to invoke some kind of racist sentiment, then Hoffa will apologize for his comment.

Hoffa also admits when he is proven wrong - so prove Hoffa wrong. What did you mean by your statement?

@ Hoffa
That's not good enough. If you need someone to explain Allen West's comments and positions on issues, you need to study. But for you to call me, or anyone else a racist based on your ineffectual analysis of a statement is unacceptable. You once tried to give me some advice for credibility, I think you need to look inward for your own.

@John Feia -

Hoffa isn't the one who made a comment about West. What comments of West's are you referring to exactly? And what exactly do those comments say about Romney's African American Outreach Program?

Hoffa is giving you a chance to explain your comment and your refuse to explain it?!?!

Sorry, but until I hear an explanation of the comment, Hoffa has no alternative other than to accept the comment at its facial value - that it was meant to invoke some kind of negative racial sentiment against Romney and the GOP.

Hoffa is a shameful person. He calls me a racist ("Feia = racist!") with insinuated facts and refuses to apologize without conditions. He has shown his true colors. I don't think I need to prove that I am not a racist. Enjoy who you are Mr. I refuse to reveal my own identity.

@John Feia -

Honestly, what did you expect when you made such a facially racial statement as the one you made?

Hoffa is prepared to admit that he was wrong and apologize, but you refuse to explain your comment beyond it's facial interpretation.

You find that shameful, fine. What Hoffa finds shameful are the inherent implications of the facial statement that you made, thus the label from Hoffa that you appropriately received.

Cheers!

@ Hoffa
You are a sad person who is unable to look at his or her own actions without blaming them on someone else for them. If you can justify calling me or anyone else a racist with the rationale you have put forth, I repeat, you are a sad person.

My point in talking about Allen West is that the comments and positions he has taken do not support diverse communities. Look them up Mr. fact man. You call me a racist for pointing that out?
"Parts of West’s campaign are nothing more than hate speech"
http://www.browardbeat.com/bad-for-the-gop-allen-wests-hate-speech/
Granted this refers to his position on Muslims but racism is racism ( there are many more regarding different issues from where that came from). My point is that for someone like you to call me a racist is purely unacceptable. But Hoffa is above acceptable standards of conduct and unable to put forth an unconditional apology. Your respectability on this forum has been extremely diminished. I know that this means nothing to you coming from me or anyone else who disagrees with your positions, but that is the truth.

@John Feia -

Are you really citing an article that contains no direct quotes as support for your statement? I hope that you have sounder facts than this to support your statement, the point of which still eludes Hoffa.

Allen West is heading Mitt Romney's African American Outreach program. Allen West is an African American, is he not?

Either Hoffa is missing something, or ...

@ Hoffa
You are a joke. Call me a racist and not own up to your own actions. Like I said, i have a wonderful Hispanic wife and we have many African American friends. You are someone who is afraid to look at his or her (who knows coward?) actions and take responsibility for them. Thank you for showing what you are really about.

Are you really so naive that you are shocked that the goal of a minority party is to win the next election, ousting the incumbent . Of course that's their goal. Just look at Dem actions against Bush. Get real

You mean how the Dems and liberal left's efforts to recall Walker started before he was even sworn into office?

So where's your proclamation that Barrett and the entire DPW is working against Wisconsin?

"You mean how the Dems and liberal left's efforts to recall Walker started before he was even sworn into office?"

Another intelligent comment by the coward who claims to be a "fact" man...

"She was the leader of the US Presidential Delegation to the Opening Ceremony of the Olympic Games; thus being there in an "official capacity"."

That's quite a fancy way to say 'taxpayer funded vacation.'

"The Romoney's were there in no "official capacity" so, by your thinking they should have re-imbursed the Feds for their Secret Service protection."

Yes and no. Yes, they should offer reimbursement, but at the rate that they could have obtained private security for the trip, instead of at the overinflated rate of the government provided services, as such service is forced upon the candidate - Romney has little say over the issue.

Hoffa is not a partisan shill - he's consistent in application of his personal views and beliefs!

Hoffa is a partisan shill. Just look at his posts regarding the Kennedys, Ciintons and Obamas. He is also a non apologetic label er of people who disagree with his positions. His beliefs are something that should be disregarded.

@John Feia -

So says the man who can't even back up or explain his own statement!

@morninmist -

Why wasn't Hillary invited to speak at the convention?

Hoffa
You, the self identified intellectual (or maybe it is that 3rd person you id as the intellectual????) should know that since she is the head of State Dept, the law forbids her presence at a political convention.

@morninmist -

The 1993 amendment to the Hatch Act, 107 Stat. 1001, removed the prohibition on participation in "political management or political campaigns."

So as long as Hillary wasn't on 'active duty' and as long as she wouldn't be a on federal property when engaging in political activity, she'd be free to do so without violating federal law.

Want to try again?

@ Hoffa
"Why wasn't Hillary invited to speak at the convention?"

Because she in China doing her job.

You need to get your facts straight though.
"In 1974 Hatch Act restrictions on state and local government were watered down, and in 1993 the advocates for removing or reducing restrictions on the political activities of federal employees carried the day. The Hatch Act Reform Amendments of 1993 (107 Stat. 1001) removed the prohibition on participation in "political management or political campaigns." Federal employees are still forbidden, however, to use their authority to affect the results of an election. They are also forbidden to run for office in a partisan election, to solicit or receive political contributions, and to engage in political activities WHILE ON DUTY OR ON FEDERAL PROPERTY. The Merit Systems Protection Board and its Office of Special Counsel are responsible for enforcement of the Hatch Act"
William V. Luneburg. Hatch Act (1939). enotes.com

@John Feia -

Hoffa said all that, in case you didn't realize it. Is your reading comprehension really that bad?

So essentially you're saying that she couldn't have scheduled a vacation during the week of the convention. Or are you arguing that the stadium is federal property, because I don't believe it is? Could it be that you're trying to make two faulty arguments at the same time?

Seems awfully convenient to Hoffa!

But believe as you will!

Feria, so Hillary is in China. Didn't the Chinese VP just snub her, refusing to meet with her? Hmmmmm...great job ( real question is why China doesn't bother negotiating with Obama).

You really are bewildered. The SOS is doing her job. Hoffa, if she had done as you suggested you would be lambasting her for that. Where was Condy in '04? She was doing her job as she should have been. Get a grip.

Hoffa

Hillary keeps good ethics during the convention. You need to get a grip and stop crying about where Hillary was during the convention. You sound desperate!

At the time, Condi Rice wasn't considered to be the future leader of the party, unlike Hillary Clinton.

Big difference!

@morninmist -

You guys were saying the same thing about Falk being the first woman governor of the state during the recall election. How did that one work out for you guys again?

Smart folks!

,,,Breaking: Gallup Reports Major DNC 'Bounce' for Obama
Greg Mitchell on September 7, 2012 - 1:23 PM ET

UPDATE New Reuters-Ipsos poll tonight joined Gallup in finding an Obama bump from the DNC. It had not seen much before, but today revealed a 2 percent spike for Obama, and a 1 percent decline for Romney, along with some favorable metrics for the president, up about 4 percent. Obama now leads there 46 percent–44 percent. They suggest there could be more gains tomorrow.,,

@morninmist -

Hoffa supposes that it's easy to get Gallup to front for the Dems after the Dems threaten Gallup with a DOJ lawsuit!

http://dailycaller.com/2012/09/06/justice-dept-gallup-lawsuit-came-after-axelrod-criticized-pollsters/

My, my, my - how desperate and thuggish have the Democrats become!

Just goes to show that the slimy Dems will do anything to try and steal an election!

America isn't buying the left/Dems Saul Alinsky tactics anymore!

ROMNEY/RYAN 2012!!!

Walker promised that the jobs in WI would pour in once the recall was over. ha ha.

@morninmist -

That was assuming that Obama would do his job properly - obviously he hasn't. Less people are working today than when Obama took office. Yesterday it was confirmed that another 360k are so discouraged that they just gave up and dropped out of the work force.

While that's a record that you're proud of for some reason or another, any one with half a brain would conclude that it's time for a change!

ROMNEY/RYAN 2012!!!

@Ann Wright -

This conclusively proves that you didn't listen to a single RNC convention speech.

Ann Wright!
Are you related to the "wright" brothers?
So yo want to know why GW was not at the RNC and the best line you can remember is CLINTON's.
Now that makes you an informed voter.
Ever ask yourself why over 7 prominant Democratic Senators , like Claire McCaskill did not attend.

Ann Wright!
Are you related to the "wright" brothers?
So yo want to know why GW was not at the RNC and the best line you can remember is CLINTON's.
Now that makes you an informed voter.
Ever ask yourself why over 7 prominant Democratic Senators , like Claire McCaskill did not attend.