tagged w/ Presidential Candidates
-
Like many people, I am a wee bit fed up with the two party system in this nation, especially when it comes to Presidential elections. Third party candidates are a potential solution, an equivalent of adding new genetic material to a population that has been interbred for far too long if you will. But there is a potential problem with having a third party candidate, Technically just one could and would only leech votes off of a Democrat or a Republican presidential nominee, thus giving an advantage to the other main party candidate by preventing his opponent from collecting votes.
This was claimed to be a HUGE problem by many Democrats back in 2000 when Al Gore won the popular vote and, for all intensive purposes, the election, but did not attain the position of President of the United States. For years, Democrats blamed Ralph Nader, perhaps justly, perhaps not, for stealing votes from Gore that would have made his victory incontestable. Whether or not it was the cause, a cause, or not at all a factor in the overall outcome of the 2000 election, one of the most powerful third party candidates was given an enormous amount of credit for being a deciding factor in the end result of the election, and he wasn't even allowed to be part of the Presidential debates.
A very troubling conundrum has surfaced in light of these Presidential election years over the past decade or so.
On one hand the two party system that we have is growing stagnant. Many of the Presidential candidates seemed, and seem, to have lost touch with the people who elected them, and would elect them, and focus more on divider issues that are of little or no actual consequence to the well being of our nation, but make for wonderful distractions because they are issues that are extremely emotionally charged.
On the other hand, a third party candidate could, and likely would, upset any balance that there might be. The slim majority of people might want a conservative President, but if Ron Paul participated in the Presidential debates then it is very possible that neither him nor Romney would have enough votes to defeat Obama. Similarly, if Jill Stein, the Presidential candidate for the Green Party, was allowed in the debates, the people might want a more liberal President, by a slim majority, and it is very possible that neither Jill nor Obama would attain enough votes to be victorious.
Despite these worries it is obvious that we need a serious third party contender in the Presidential debates. If nothing else it will bring fresh answers that stimulate and invigorate the minds of the voters while making the candidates from the two main parties think outside of the box AND it might even help keep them on target with actual issues instead of using soundbites and divider issues as distractions.
So what, oh what, are we to do?
There is a solution that is difficult and requires the utilization of a very boring, difficult, and otherwise trivial skill. I speak, of MATH.
... specifically basic addition.
One third party candidate would, in theory, throw the election out of balance... Because our elections need to be balanced between the two parties for some reason. But two third party candidates, one from a conservative third party and one from a liberal third party, would keep the balance, in theory, while allowing for fresh blood to be introduced to the Presidential debates.
And who knows, it is even possible that a third party candidate could win...
The strongest opposition to this, by far, are the two main political parties who are in charge of organizing the Presidential debates and choosing which Presidential candidates are strong enough factors to participate in the debates. It is, in virtually every way, a sort of catch 22. The two main parties have an invested interest in not allowing third party candidates into the Presidential debates because it would provide more competition for the candidates for the two main parties, and thus it is nigh impossible that the Democratic Party or the Republican Party would ever allow a single third party candidate into the debates, much less two.
So here is the ultimate question to this problem. How do we, the voters who are ultimately supposed to be represented by our elected officials and are supposed to give voice to this nation and government, effectively get two third party Presidential candidates into the Presidential debates so that we can actually have a choice and not a lack of options?Like many people, I am a wee bit fed up with the two party system in this nation,... more
-
-
Both Obama and Romney do not have a viable plan to turn our economy around. Romney’s reduction of taxes for the rich and corporate America would plunge all but the 1% deeper into poverty; Obama’s proposal to allow the Bush tax extensions to expire while reducing corporate income taxes will do virtually nothing to improve our economy. And Obama’s infrastructure and jobs bills, amounting to little more than $100 billion in spending when economists like Krugman have been proposing trillions, will merely be a temporary pain killer for our economic ailment and certainly no cure.
What needs to be done? Has any Presidential candidate presented a real viable plan to turn our economic livelihood around in the near future?
I have one. And it is based largely on what we had in place prior to Reaganomics and the Corporate takeover of our government, particularly the tax policies that were effective in the 1950s and 1960s, our country’s golden years.
First, raise taxes DRAMATICALLY on the rich and corporations. I am not proposing a measely raise to the Clinton highest effective tax rate of 39.6% or the pseudo-progressive rate of 49% rate proposed by the Democratic Progressive Caucus, but the 91% rate in effect during the 1950s. Also raise the highest income tax rate on corporations from 35% to the 52% rate also in effect during the 1950s.
Secondly, eliminate capital gains rates on all investments—other than in physical assets constructed here in the United States requiring American labor and American manufactured goods—and on carried interest of hedge fund managers. Instead tax all those capital gains on stock sales at ordinary income rates. Make Mitt Romney pay 91%, not 15%, in taxes.
Third, uncap the security security tax threshold presently at $110,100. Tax every dollar of earned income.
Fourth, make these taxes retroactive for three years: go after all those trillions earned by those huge corporations and the rich over the last few years.
Fifth, eliminate all business tax credits except those creating jobs in America.
Sixth, tax all deferred compensation on individuals earning more than $250,000 (including the deferred compensation) per year.
Seventh, eliminate the dividend exclusion from taxation for corporations. Corporations need to be taxed on dividends, too.
Eighth, increase the federal unemployment tax on large corporations since their downsizing and outsourcing are largely responsible for the unemployment in the first place.
Ninth, raise the inheritance tax back up to the earlier 77% rate from its present pitiful 35% rate, and reduce the estate tax exemption from $10 million back down to $600,000, where it was for decades.
Tenth, lower or eliminate taxes on small businesses, which create 80% of the jobs in this country, and on individuals earning a modest income.
Next I would void all trade treaties negotiated since Clinton became President.
And I would bring back CETA and WPA programs to provide much needed jobs to rebuild our infrastructure as well as to provide job training.
Of course, Glass Steagall would have to be re-enacted and the Sherman Anti-Trust legislation would have to be vigorously enforced.
It took me merely ten minutes to propose this economic plan. And much of it was derived from the economic plan in place when our working and middle classes prospered. Now I ask you, why our very intelligent, ivy-league educated Presidential candidates, surrounded by purportedly the greatest economic minds in the country, cannot devise a workable economic plan even though they had years to do so, while preparing to run for or serving as President of our country?
Many of you may think my tax proposals are “extreme”; however, my tax proposals were largely in place for decades when our country boomed, whereas Paul Ryan’s proposal to eliminate all taxes on the wealthy’s capital gains, dividends, and interest income is the extreme tax plan, making mine appear modest in comparison.
Please feel free to add your fixes in your comments below. There are many other steps we can take to improve our economy. All it takes is the imagination to break free from the propaganda fed us over the last few decades from Corporate paid mouthpieces.
The Barefoot AccountantBoth Obama and Romney do not have a viable plan to turn our economy around.... more
-
-
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/07/19/ann-romney_n_1685735.html?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+HP%2FPolitics+(Politics+on+The+Huffington+Post)
The viability of Ross Perot's once promising Presidential campaign pretty much ended on July 11, 1992 after he spoke before the NAACP and addressed his audience several times as "you people". The phrase came off as astonishingly condescending, and Perot fell quickly to third place in the polls in a race which he had briefly led.
So "you people" was the downfall of one super rich white guy hoping to be president.
Today, Ann Romney, in an interview with Robin Roberts said, "we've given all 'you people' need to know" about the Romney family finances. The use of the phrase "you people" immediately caught the media's attention for coming across as condescending and dismissive of the (non-white) interviewer, voters, and the press in general. But I have not yet seen many make the connection to Perot's fateful use of the phrase.
Will Ann Romney's use of "you people" have the same devastating effect on her husband's campaign that it had on Ross Perot's? Only time will tell. But it surely plays into a narrative that's already more established for Romney than it ever was for Ross Perot.http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/07/19/ann-romney_n_1685735.html?utm_source=feedburne... more
-
-
Over the weekend, Republicans in the 37th Legislative District gathered to choose delegates to the state GOP convention.
The caucus started out Saturday morning inside Dimmitt Middle School. But it didn’t end inside the building.
After supporters of Texas Congressman Ron Paul elected one of their own to chair of the meeting, the gathering was booted to an outside basketball court by King County Republican Party Chairman Lori Sotelo.
The move came after attendees irritated Sotelo by rejecting her choice to run the caucus - King County Councilman David Irons.
Instead, the group voted for Tamara Smilanich, a Paul supporter.
That prompted Sotelo to declare the meeting was no longer a Republican Party event. Even though the GOP had reserved the room until 2 p.m., the meeting was pushed outside to the basketball court at about 12:30 p.m. The caucus finished its business outside in the sun, and elected 11 Ron Paul supporters to the state convention, which begins May 31 in Tacoma.Over the weekend, Republicans in the 37th Legislative District gathered to choose... more
-
-
By Eric W. Dolan
Thursday, March 29, 2012 16:21 EDT
Sen. Patrick Leahy (D-VT) said Thursday that corporations could be elected president according to the rationale of the Supreme Court’s 2010 ruling in Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission.
“I remain troubled today that the Supreme Court extended to corporations the same First Amendment rights in the political process that are guaranteed by the Constitution to individual Americans,” he said at a hearing on the DISCLOSE Act of 2012. “Corporations are not the same as individual Americans. Corporations do not have the same rights, the same morals or the same interests. Corporations cannot vote in our democracy.”
According to the Supreme Court’s logic, we should elect corporations to public office, Leahy said.
“This country has elected General Eisenhower as president, shouldn’t we elected General Electric as president? We know we like to elect a lot of yahoos as vice president, why not elect Yahoo as a corporation as vice president. ”
“Vermonters and Americans across the country have long understood that corporations are not people in this political process,” he continued. “Unfortunately, a very narrow majority on the Supreme Court apparently did not.”
The controversial Citizens United ruling struck down key provisions of the federal McCain-Feingold campaign finance reform law and gave rise to super PACS, which have caused campaign spending by outside groups to skyrocket. Super PACs have also exploited a loophole that allows them to postpone the disclosure of their donors until after the elections they participate in.
The DISCLOSE Act of 2012 would require any organization that spends 10,000 or more during an election cycle to file a report with the Federal Election Commission within 24 hours. It would also require the head of any organization that puts out a political ad on TV or radio to state that he or she approves the message, similar to what candidates must do now.
http://www.rawstory.com/rs/2012/03/29/sen-leahy-supreme-court-thinks-corporations-can-be-president/
The DISCLOSE Act of 2010 was blocked by a Republican filibuster in the Senate.
Watch video, uploaded to YouTube on March 29th...
"Right On Senator Leahy, my Hero of the Day!!!!" =)By Eric W. Dolan
Thursday, March 29, 2012 16:21 EDT
Sen. Patrick Leahy (D-VT) said... more
-
-
The latest episode of the Barkhamsted Republican Town Committee’s nine year political interview program features former CT Congressman Christopher Shays now seeking the Republican Party nomination for the U.S.Senate seat being vacated by retiring Joe Lieberman. Seven year host Juliana Simone co-hosts this edition with BRTC officer John Doyle who provides his veteran expertise on politics.The latest episode of the Barkhamsted Republican Town Committee’s nine year... more
-
-
Sen. Sanders discusses the initiatives in 60 Vermont towns to overturn the Citizens United decision.
http://www.democraticunderground.com/101715197
"Another reason I would like to live in Vermont, Right On Bernie Sanders!!!" =)Sen. Sanders discusses the initiatives in 60 Vermont towns to overturn the Citizens... more
-
-
By David Taintor / Talking Points Memo
The tone in reporting on a potential military conflict with Iran has entered a new phase in recent weeks, with the saber rattling seemingly reaching a fever pitch.
From the New York Times recently reporting on how Israel would carry out a strike against Iran, to pundits casually throwing around the words "bomb Iran," to presidential candidates trying to out-tough each other on a daily basis, the prospect of a potential military conflict with Iran is increasingly discussed less in terms of "if" but of "when."
By David Taintor / Talking Points Memo
The tone in reporting on a potential... more
-
-
ctv
-
added this
-
1 year ago
- |
-
2012 Republican presidential candidate Mitt Romney carries some heavy baggage. From the millions stashed in the Cayman Islands, Swiss bank accounts and elsewhere...2012 Republican presidential candidate Mitt Romney carries some heavy baggage. From... more
-
-
So Suddenly a Fun Candidate, starring Rick Santorum, is mostly a feel-good romp through two decades of conservative tropes in service to hailing the skills and bonafides of a schoolmarmish ultra-hard-right conservative whose only human emotion seems to be that of antagonistic prig in dire need of someone to lecture. If this is the conservative idea of a fun fellow, then I shudder to think what the average pastimes of Republican America might look like.
HERE follows sentence by 'idea' dissection.
Apparently there is simply no such thing as extreme, in Republicanism. There's not a damn thing that would count, and no end to the embarrassing crackpots to be held up as new exemplars of the movement. That Michele Bachmann was considered anyone, or Palin, or Cain, or the truly inexplicable Perry, or the once-disgraced Gingrich, who apparently has the remarkable superpower of making nearly everyone he has ever worked with hate his everloving guts; what a gallery of misfits.
http://tinyurl.com/6q5ohouSo Suddenly a Fun Candidate, starring Rick Santorum, is mostly a feel-good romp... more
-
-
LOrion
-
added this
-
1 year ago
- |
-
Gingrich, as well as Texas Gov. Rick Perry, did not meet the state's requirement of 10,000 signatures and, therefore, did not qualify for the ballot, the Virginia GOP said via Twitter.
Meanwhile, Mitt Romney and Ron Paul did qualify.
Virginia requires candidates to submit petitions with 10,000 signatures from registered Virginia voters. Additionally, 400 signatures must come from voters in each of the state's eleven congressional districts. Virginia holds its Republican primary on March 6.
http://www.cnn.com/2011/12/24/politics/gop-virginia-primary/index.html?hpt=hp_t1Gingrich, as well as Texas Gov. Rick Perry, did not meet the state's requirement... more
-
-
The documents, which include harsh, prejudiced attacks against the black community, are evidence of a libertarian movement trying to find an audience.
So as Ron Paul is on track to win the Iowa caucuses, he is getting a new dose of press scrutiny.
And the press is focusing on the newsletters that went out under his name in the late 1980s and early 1990s. They were called the Ron Paul's Political Report, Ron Paul's Freedom Report, the Ron Paul Survival Report and the Ron Paul Investment Letter.
There is no doubt that the newsletters contained utterly racist statements.
Some choice quotes:
"Given the inefficiencies of what DC laughingly calls the criminal justice system, I think we can safely assume that 95 percent of the black males in that city are semi-criminal or entirely criminal."
"We are constantly told that it is evil to be afraid of black men, it is hardly irrational."
After the Los Angeles riots, one article in a newsletter claimed, "Order was only restored in L.A. when it came time for the blacks to pick up their welfare checks."
One referred to Martin Luther King Jr. as "the world-class philanderer who beat up his paramours" and who "seduced underage girls and boys."
Another referred to Barbara Jordan, a civil rights activist and congresswoman as "Barbara Morondon," the "archetypical half-educated victimologist."
Other newsletters had strange conspiracy theories about homosexuals, the CIA, and AIDS.
In 1996 when the Texas Monthly investigated the newsletters, Paul took responsibility for them and said that certain things were taken out of context. (It's hard to imagine a context that would make the above quotes defensible.)
[snip]
When the newsletter controversy came up again during the 2008 campaign, Paul explained that he didn't actually write the newsletters but because they carried his name he was morally responsible for their content. Further, he didn't know exactly who wrote the offensive things and they didn't represent his views.
But it is still a serious issue. Jamie Kirchick reported in The New Republic that Paul made nearly one million dollars in just one year from publishing the newsletters. Could Paul really not understand the working of such a profitable operation?
[snip]
Undoubtedly the movement that Paul inspired has moved far beyond the race-baiting it engaged in two decades ago. Young people from college campuses aren't lining up to hear him speak because of what appeared in those newsletter about the 1992 L.A. riots. Rand Paul tried his hardest to place Paul-style libertarianism into the context of the Tea Party. And he will likely carry on the movement without this 1990s baggage.
But the questions remain. If Ron Paul is so libertarian that he won't even police people who use his name, if his movement is filled with incompetents and opportunists, then what kind of a president would he make? Would he even check in to see if his ideas are being implemented? Who would he appoint to Cabinet positions?
__________________________________________________________
So, in 1996 he did not deny writing them, but twelve years later he did... I wouldn't trust that man half the distance that I can throw the Eiffel Tower in Paris.The documents, which include harsh, prejudiced attacks against the black community,... more
-
-
August 16, 2011 1:31 pm ET
Right-wing media attacked President Obama for traveling on buses that reportedly cost $1.1 million each on his bus tour through the Midwest. But Secret Service officials have said the buses will pay for themselves over time [and have also said there has been "demonstrated need for [the buses] for some time" [http://www.npr.org/blogs/itsallpolitics/2011/08/15/139652118/a-different-kind-of-party-bus-for-obama]; additionally, the buses will be available to the eventual Republican nominee during the 2012 election, as well as future presidents.
Drudge Hypes Cost Of Tour: "Armored Buses Cost $2.2 Million." On August 15, the Drudge Report posted a series of links [http://www.drudgereportarchives.com/data/2011/08/16/20110816_020417.htm] about Obama's bus tour beneath a picture of one of the armored buses, including a link to an April 21 Politico post about their then-projected "$2.2 million" cost: [Drudge Report Archives, 8/15/11]
AFP: "The Service ... Reason[ed] That The Initial Total Outlay Of 2.2 Million Dollars For Two Buses Would Soon Pay For Itself Over A Projected 10-Year Lifespan." An August 15 Agence France-Presse (AFP) article stated:
The US leader swept onto the campaign trail Monday with a sleek and even sinister looking set of wheels with blacked out windows worth $1.1 million.
The shiny, black armored bus, bristling with secret communications technology, with flashing police-style red and blue lights on the front and the back, made its debut on Obama's three-day tour of Minnesota, Iowa and Illinois.
The vehicle was commissioned by the Secret Service, which has always hired buses for election campaigns and retrofitted them to provide suitable protection for presidents and rival party nominees.
But the Service decided to commission its own vehicles, reasoning that the initial total outlay of 2.2 million dollars for two buses would soon pay for itself over a projected 10-year lifespan. [Agence France-Presse, 8/15/11, via Google News]
Secret Service Spokesman Ed Donovan: "The Reality Is That We're Overdue For Having This Type Of Protective Asset In Our Fleet." From the April 21 TPM article:
"We've never been fully comfortable with the security provided by a bus we lease and then try to retro-fit," Secret Service spokesman Jim Mackin told TPM.
"This would be just like other vehicles we're adding to our fleet," Mackin said. "We'd use them for the campaign, but they're not for campaign purposes. They would be part of our fleet -- just like our limos, just like our follow-ups, just like our emergency vehicles."
[...]
"The reality is that we're overdue for having this type of protective asset in our fleet," Secret Service spokesman Ed Donovan told TPM. [Talking Points Memo, 4/21/11]
Donovan: "Designing Our Own Vehicle Really Gave Us A Level Of Security Which We Don't Get When We Lease A Bus." The TPM article further stated:
[Donovan said,] "We've had protectees in buses since at least 1980, Ronald Reagan, Gov. Reagan, was in a bus during the campaign. It's overdue because designing our own vehicle really gave us a level of security which we don't get when we lease a bus."
In the past, the Secret Service has enhanced the security features of buses leased by presidential campaigns, and they say having their own secure buses that can be used during campaign trips just makes more sense.
"If we have a candidate who has leased a bus and we're going to be protecting that candidate, we're going to look to enhance the security of that vehicle," Donovan said. "This is just the next step, and as I said, something that we're overdue for." [Talking Points Memo, 4/21/11 http://tpmdc.talkingpointsmemo.com/2011/04/obama-to-use-new-secret-service-bus-on-campaign-trail.php]
Donovan: "We Have Demonstrated The Need For These Buses Going Back To 1980." The August 15 AFP article stated: " 'We have demonstrated the need for these buses going back to 1980,' said Ed Donovan, a Secret Service spokesman, recalling the days when future president Ronald Reagan stormed the country by bus." [AFP, 8/15/11, via Google News http://www.google.com/hostednews/afp/article/ALeqM5g2Jxv8XiM1FRcsCIM9Nvz_X5z0iA?docId=CNG.5546416fb2b33bb880d4246e81a40a68.6c1]August 16, 2011 1:31 pm ET
Right-wing media attacked President Obama for traveling... more
-
-
—-or-presidents/
Mitt Romney would have us believe that a proven track record of running a successful business will produce similar results in the White House. It’s a message that resonates well with voters who often lament that government should run more like a business. It sounds good in theory, but how it plays out in practice is a different story.
Leadership in the public sector requires a different skill set than in the business world. CEOs can put their initiatives into action without having to negotiate and broker deals with legislatures and without worrying about transparency, public opinion polls and re-election.—-or-presidents/
Mitt Romney would have us believe that a proven track record... more
-
-
srpr
-
added this
-
1 year ago
- |
-
Video at the Link
Republican presidential candidate Rick Perry's campaign is facing meltdown after one of the most humiliating debate performances in recent US political history.
His chances of securing the Republican nomination slipped after one painful minute in which he could not recall the name of a government department he is planning to kill off.
Perry reeled off two of the three departments he wants to axe, but could not remember the third. Some Perry supporters declared his campaign over and suggested he head back to Texas to focus on his job as governor.
Perry, conscious of the damage he has done to his chances, came out to face the media in the spin-room immediately afterwards rather than leaving it, as is normal, to his press staff. "I'm sure glad I had my boots on because I sure stepped in it out there," he said.
The Republican presidential debate in Rochester, Michigan, had been predicted to be dominated by the sexual allegations against one of his rivals, Herman Cain. Instead Cain escaped unscathed and all the focus was on Perry's gaffe.
Perry's moment of embarrassment came when he was asked about one of the main planks of his policy for cutting federal spending, the elimination of three departments.
"It's three agencies of government when I get there that are gone: commerce, education, and the uh ... what's the third one, there? Let's see." He went on to say: "The third one. I can't." He made it worse by adding: "Oops."
Fifteen minutes later he attempted to undo the damage, saying: "By the way that was the department of energy I was reaching for a while ago." But it was too late.
Although he has millions of dollars in campaign funds accumulated it will be hard for him to recover. A Perry donor sent a tweet to the Washington Post: "Perry campaign is over. Time to go home."
Larry Sabato, profesor of politics at the University of Virginia, tweeted too almost immediately on seeing Perry stumble. "To my memory Perry's forgetfulness is the most devastating moment of any modern primary."
Perry's brain freeze, reminiscent of some of the awkwardness associated with George Bush, was shown live on television nationwide and will be shown repeatedly over the next few days.
He was already struggling in the polls, having dropped from frontrunner status to single-digit figures. He alienated many Republicans when he described as heartless anyone who did not agree with his relatively liberal approach to the children of illegal immigrants.
He had been talking before this debate about pulling out of future ones, an acknowledgment that he is a poor performer.
Cain, asked afterwards if Perry was finished, was charitable. "I would not say that. The American people can be very forgiving," he told NBC, which hosted the debate.
Cain acknowledged the last 10 days had been rough as he faced allegations from four women of sexual harassment. Although the debate bad been billed as primarily about economics, one of the journalists on the panel asked him about the allegations.
The mainly Republican audience booed the journalist for raising the issue and applauded Cain when he complained of being tried in the court of public opinion.
There were further boos from the audience when the journalist asked Mitt Romney, the former government of Massachusetts, about the allegations. He sidestepped the question, to applause from the audience.
Romney gave another confident, calm performance that will have cemented his frontrunner status. With Cain facing the sex allegations and Perry's campaign in deep trouble Romney's chances of securing the nomination increased on Wednesday night.
Although there is resistance to him among rightwingers, he is doing much better and is more relaxed than he was in 2008 when he lost out in the race for the nomination to John McCain.
The former House Speaker Newt Gingrich is at present in third place in the polls and could face scrutiny over his role as a consultant to Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, the organisations that provided the mortgages to those with poor credit ratings, precipitating the economic slump.
The organisations hired consultants and lobbyists to avoid federal regulation.
During the debate Gingrich claimed he had warned Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac against giving out such mortgages. He received $300,000 in 2006 for his consultancy role.
The other candidates on the stage failed to make any significant impression.Video at the Link
Republican presidential candidate Rick Perry's campaign is... more
-
-
pdy
-
added this
-
1 year ago
- |
-
“(I)f anyone will not work, neither should he eat,” Bachmann said.
What this Republican presidential candidate is apparently overlooking, however, is that the number of job openings in the country is far, far less than the number of unemployed.
According to the most recent data from the Bureau of Labor Statistics, there are 3.1 million job openings in the country.
The number of unemployed, though, is 13.9 million, says BLS. That’s more than four times greater than the number of jobs available.
Add in the fact that a majority of those 13.9 million Americans (52 percent) are not receiving any unemployment benefits whatsoever, and it stands apparent that Bachmann’s goal is already underway: they have no money to buy food to begin with.
http://www.rob-servations.com/1/post/2011/11/starve-the-unemployed-bachmann-says.html“(I)f anyone will not work, neither should he eat,” Bachmann said.... more
-
-
Republican presidential candidate Michele Bachmann's paid campaign team in New Hampshire has jumped ship from her political operation, WMUR reports.
The news comes as only the latest bump in the road for the conservative congresswoman ahead of 2012. According to WMUR, five staffers left Bachmann's Granite State team.
After reports surfaced on the Bachmann campaign shake-up in New Hampshire, the GOP candidate told Radio Iowa, "That is a shocking story to me." She denied such changes to her Granite State team taking place and explained, "I don't know if this is just a bad story that’s being fed by a different candidate or campaign. I have no idea where this came from, but we've made calls and it’s certainly not true."
Ed Rollins stepped down as Bachmann's campaign manager last month and additional advisers to the presidential contender subsequently left her team.
Read more here: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/10/21/michele-bachmann-2012-new-hampshire_n_1024036.html
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Based on this and the article on NPR today, nothing she has done has been successful. She needs to go home and be that submissive wife now and leave us alone!Republican presidential candidate Michele Bachmann's paid campaign team in New... more
-
-
Imzadi
-
added this
-
1 year ago
- |
-
Help a Middle Class Presidential candidate receive press
-
-
Sarah Palin has announced she won't be running for President. As if the country was waiting with baited breath for this media whore to waste our time again.
See front page story on CNN.com for details.Sarah Palin has announced she won't be running for President. As if the country... more
-
-
JustZ
-
added this
-
1 year ago
- |
-
"Rachel Maddow Monday night eviscerated Rick Perry’s disavowal of the beliefs he wrote about in his nine-month old book, Fed Up! Perry now claims he never suggested social security is unconstitutional, blah, blah, blah… It’s in the book!" http://tinyurl.com/4xo8hc2"Rachel Maddow Monday night eviscerated Rick Perry’s disavowal of the... more
-
-
LOrion
-
added this
-
1 year ago
- |
