Where's the Respect?

Here we sit, just weeks before the big elections and Democrats are gettin' no respect! Why is it so when this Congress was the most productive in nearly half a century? It's beginning to sound like a broken record but I will say it again, President Obama has done a good job and you naysayers need to stop listening to wingnuts and read for yourselves the progress made in the past 2 years.

Not since the explosive years of the civil rights movement and the hard-fought debut of government-supported health care for the elderly and poor have so many big things — love them or hate them — been done so quickly.

 I feel increasingly sad and disillusioned when my party gets no respect, because Democrats do deserve respect.  All throughout our history Democrats have consistently made great strides. In 1966 after creating Medicare and Medicaid and passing civil rights laws they got hammered in the election. They lost 48 seats in the House and 4 in the Senate but managed to hold on to the majorities in both houses. We are waiting, not so patiently, for November 2nd to come and go. Optimistic are you?

In the 1960s Democrats paid the price for events largely outside their control — an escalating war in Vietnam going badly, rowdy anti-war protests and violence in American cities, said Linda Fowler, professor of government at Dartmouth College.

"I think that's what's going on this time too," Fowler said, "despite a very significant record of accomplishment."

In terms of legislative successes, the current session of Congress is "at least on a par with the 89th Congress" of 1965-1966, said Norman Ornstein, a scholar at the American Enterprise Institute.

But, he added, Republicans have done all they could to discredit Congress and Democrats have failed to sell their agenda. Moreover, it will take years to fully feel the effects of the health care law and financial regulation.

"A world dominated by bickering and epithet-throwing and bomb tossing in Washington obscures accomplishments," Ornstein said.

Yes, and it will probably take years for the people to understand the effects caused by Republicans which resorted in drastic moves by President Obama. The bank bailouts have been paid back AND with intetrest. But do the people know this?? Who is touting this accomplishment for Obama? The President had no choice but to ask Congress to pass a stimulus package to avoid a depression, thanks to Republican policies....Has the country grasped the severity of the problem and given Obama credit for saving us from economic collapse? No, two years is not enough time to see real change, it will take longer. But sadly the people do not want to be patient so we're headed back in the ditch. I believe if this does happen then the GOP will be forced to actually do some work, they will have to show Americans that they can govern or they will pay dearly in 2012. I say GOOD!

Two landmark acts of this session were the health care overhaul, a giant step toward universal coverage that had eluded presidents back to Franklin Roosevelt if not Teddy Roosevelt, and the Wall Street accountability act.

Obama has also signed into law at least a dozen other pieces of legislation of significance. They include:

_Making college loans more affordable.

_The Cash for Clunkers program that helped rejuvenate the auto industry.

_New consumer protections for credit card users.

_Making it easier for women to challenge pay discrimination.

_Increasing federal regulation of tobacco products.

_Cracking down on waste in Pentagon weapons acquisition.

_Making attacks based on sexual orientation a federal hate crime.

_Giving businesses tax incentives to hire unemployed workers.

_Tax credits for first-time homeowners.

So where is the love?

Do you remember the cries of socialism in the 1960's during the bitter debate over Medicare? Back then even with the fighting on both sides, the polls showed the country had faith their government was doing the right things. Today the polls tell us something very different. The country trusts neither party. This erosion of trust has enabled the Republicans to score points by arguing that Democratic big government programs are destroying our foundation.  It is shameful Americans are not paying attention, they are letting extreme rhetoric tell them what to think and believe. Too much bitterness and partisan divide keeps people from opening their minds to the truth.

.

"The amazing thing is that we have had such a productive Congress despite the obstructionism," Steny Hoyer said. "Republicans and their media have successfully sent out a message that the Congress has failed."

Democrats cling to a hope that voters in the last two weeks before the election will come to a more favorable view of how the party handled health care and the economy.

We Democrats know there is still much to be done. We are not blindly following Obama like the righties think. We do hold his feet to the fire as we do Congress too. Immigration reform, tax cuts expiring, jobs programs, DADT, universal healthcare, wars ending, these are all on the Obama agenda the next few years. If he doesn't get the support and cooperation he needs then who do we blame? We always have to blame someone don't we...

Hateful Wingnut

Hold me down people, HOLD ME DOWN!
There's this post by a bigmouth, know nothing blogger slamming the elderly for collecting a Social Security check every month.
He's crying about the whiny, pathetic old geezers (his words, not mine) in an ad telling the GOP candidate to keep his hands off their SS. Of course he calls SS a ponzi scheme in collapse, so anyone who collects a check every month is stealing from the paychecks of young workers.

"I would just bet that this ol' biddy paid perhaps a total of $30,000 into the system over her lifetime, and has now taken out over $150,000 (and counting....), and yet demands that we keep our hands off of 'her so-security." he said

".They must surely know that the checks they are cashing are not the funds that they contributed, and that were stored safely away in the So'-Security Lock Box. Are these old geezers that stupid?."

.

Wow! He is calling these seniors un-American because they are standing up to the GOP candidates who want to end SS as we know it and put that money into the stock market. Has this moron ever been to a teabagger event? I'm sure he has. How many in the teabagger community are seniors on SS?? Those seniors are the ones standing at the rallies with their signs saying 'Keep your hands off my Medicare', 'NO Pubic Option', so I wonder what this guys teabagger rally friends think about his claim they are 'Old Codgers' stealing from him and his buddies.

.

What he really hates about seniors on SS is the fact they collect a check from the government. He calls it eating off of their fellow Americans tables directly and unashamedly. He says they are not self sufficient. They are sticking their old liver spotted hands directly into the pockets of the young worker. Need I go on??

.

Sorry, yes I must.... He says SS was never intended to be a retirement fund, it was set up to assist the poorest among us to make ends meet, not to finance a lifestyle of meeting every want and need from age 62 til death! Oh and he called it a socialized mess of course, lets not forget the socialism word in every conservatives posts...
.

Do you think this 55 yr old has parents who collect SS? Do you think he has ever encountered a senior who lives on SS and SS alone? Does he not hear the stories of seniors who have to skip grocery shopping because they can not afford to eat, pay rent, AND buy their meds??

.

Hey you hateful un-American wingnut, pick a different subject because you are WRONG on this one. Educate yourself on Social Security and the people who collect it before you call them nasty, hateful names.  That senior who is sitting in his apartment hungry and cold because he can't afford heat AND groceries in the same month, will one day BE YOU!!!

. 

All my faithful readers know he is wrong on SS, but if any new visitors want to read an old post on the GOP and their fearmongering about Social Security, you can go here.

they really do want to abolish public education, do not be fooled

I'm done talking to teabagger Linda, she is a lost cause and a waste of our precious time....

Did you know Glenn Beck wants grandparents to get off the golf course and home school their grandkids?!! He wants you to take your kids out of pre-school right now, WHY?? The Heritage Foundation and teabagging so-called patriotic Americans want to abolish public schools. Do not be fooled, this is what they will fight for if they get any power in the upcoming election. The taxes citizens pay for public schools will go where when they shut down the schools? What will happen to the poor who can not afford private schools for their kids? What if parents and grandparents just don't have the skills to home school their kids? Ask yourself people!

from Mother Jones: It's fairly common for conservative political candidates to support eliminating the federal Department of Education. But in California, tea party darling and congressional candidate David Harmer has gone further. He's advocated eliminating public schools entirely and returning education to "the way things worked through the first century of American nationhood," when educational opportunities for poor people, African-Americans, women, the disabled, and others were, to say the least, extremely limited.
Harmer has a long history of pushing libertarian education policy. In the 1990s, he worked on education issues for the conservative Heritage Foundation, and published a book, School Choice: Why You Need It—How You Get It through the libertarian Cato Institute. He also coauthored an article in which public schooling is referred to as "socialism in education." In that piece, Harmer and coauthor Joseph Bast assure readers that they "are 100 percent committed to getting government out of the business of educating our children." They cite the "life-ruining effects of government schools" and argue for school vouchers—but only as a step toward for the eventual total elimination of the public school system.


 In late July, both President Obama and Secretary of Education Arne Duncan spoke to the National Urban League’s Centennial Conference, the president said,  "Now, for years, we’ve recognized that education is a prerequisite for prosperity. And yet, we’ve tolerated a status quo where America lags behind other nations. Just last week, we learned that in a single generation, America went from number one to 12^th in college completion rates for young adults. [We] used to be number one, now we’re number 12. At the same time, our 8^th graders trail about eight [to] 10 other nations in science and math. Meanwhile, when it comes to black students, African American students trail not only almost every other developed nation abroad, but they badly trail their white classmates here at home - an achievement gap that is widening the income gap between black and white, between rich and poor. We’ve talked about it, we know about it, but we haven’t done enough about it. And this status quo is morally inexcusable, it is economically indefensible, and all of us are going to have to roll up our sleeves to change it."


Is this a black or white issue? Isn't it the right who cries about accusations of racism yet they want to deliberately hurt the poor and minorities by abolishing public education? The rightwing of America wants your kids dumb so they will not know what the hell is going on in our country! We must NOT let them take us back to colonial times. If what happened to Jerry Falwell and Pat Robertson is any indication of how the American people feel about the rightwing religious fanatics, the teabaggers should be killing themselves off in the next 2 years. But that doesn't mean we sit back and wait for their demise, we have to stop them before they kill us....

Public education has to be a priority in this country. Secretary Duncan says...
"This issue is even bigger than education - it is an issue of social justice and economic security. We have a moral obligation to change these outcomes and it won’t happen unless we start doing things differently. Not just talking about it, but actually doing it."

Obama outsmarted the righties, it's that simple

http://www.epolitics.com/2009/05/15/learning-from-obamas-financial-steamroller-how-to-raise-money-online/
I don't know why but Linda wants to talk about Obama's donors. I think the righties are just jealous of Obamas strategic and masterful campaign victory and it makes them crazy!



Obama’s platform may have envisioned a grand reform of the political system, but the primary change he brought to political fundraising was to do more of it than anyone in history:

3 million donors made a total of 6.5 million donations online adding up to more than $500 million. Of those 6.5 million donations, 6 million were in increments of $100 or less. The average online donation was $80, and the average Obama donor gave more than once…Obama also raised millions from traditional campaign bundlers — rich, well-connected fundraisers — but the bulk of the more than $600 million that Obama raised throughout the campaign was through the Internet, aides said. (Some of those bundlers, of course, also arranged for donations to be made online, so there is some overlap.)
“Obama Raised Half a Billion Online,” Jose Antonio Vargas, Washington Post, 11/20/2008

That last line is key: “online” doesn’t necessarily mean “small.” In fact, early in the primary season Obama had already assembled a network of big-money bundlers, fundraisers who tapped social and business connections to solicit large checks from other wealthy people. Obama’s big donor program accelerated as the general election approached, and regardless how many millions of small donations arrived over the internet, the bulk of the cash he raised in the end — some 75% — came from people who gave $200 or more over the course of the campaign.
Let’s tease two different ideas out of these numbers. First, it helps a campaign immensely if most individual donations, even the big ones, come in online rather than as paper checks. Money collected via credit cards is available instantly, allowing a candidate to take immediate advantage of an overnight surge in income. Plus, online donation details automatically end up in a database, simplifying accounting and reporting — a serious concern in a campaign environment in which the press and bloggers pour over a candidate’s FEC filings online.
By contrast, physical checks present an immense logistical burden, since each one has to be processed individually whether it’s collected at a fundraising dinner or arrives in the mail. Had Obama’s financial tsunami come in on paper, the process of opening, logging and depositing it would have overwhelmed just about any political staff in the pre-internet era. The time delay might have been equally fatal, as Gary Hart found out after winning the New Hampshire primary in 1984, when a surge of donations arrived too late to help in the next round of elections.
Another point: many (most?) Obama donors who gave more than $200 did so over the course of months rather than all at once. They tended to part with relatively small amounts repeatedly, which in turn is why a small-donor list is such a valuable resource — it’s the gift that keeps on giving, quite literally. Unlike traditional big donors who often reach their quota for a given candidate with a single check, small donors can contribute repeatedly, providing a financial consistency that’s priceless in a years-long campaign.
This dynamic was already apparent on the Democratic side of the presidential race by September of 2007: Hillary Clinton’s strategy of wrangling big money from traditional Democratic sources was beginning to max out, but Obama was able to return to his much larger list of grassroots donors again and again. By 2008 and the general election, his enormous pool of donors and volunteers provided Obama with a tremendous advantage over John McCain, with results decisive both financially and at the polls.
Of course, Obama’s supporters didn’t give that money all on their own — they were the target of a series of emails and other contacts stretching over the course of a year or more.

Cultivating the Grassroots

As we’ve already seen, the Obama campaign turned volunteer mobilization into a science, and it’s no surprise that they took equally great care in managing donors. The main tool they used to solicit money? Email — it’s not hip, it’s not sexy, but it absolutely worked. Of course, every communications tool from direct mail to Facebook no doubt played a role, but the campaign’s fundraising workhorse was a combination of email and a website — some two-thirds of the money they raised online was directly attributable to an email solicitation.
While anyone can send out a message asking for money, it takes a professional operation to manage virtual relationships with millions of people over a period lasting many months without burning them out in the process. Any activist database experiences “churn” as old members drop off and new ones join, but mismanagement can turn churn into flight. The Obama solutions: analytics, technical skill, experience and tactics.

Snopes says Linda is wrong...

In response to Lindas claim about President Obama and his campaign donors.


SNOPES.COM
Home --> Politics --> Barack Obama --> Campaign Contributions


Campaign Contributions

Claim:   The bulk of donations to the Obama campaign come from a handful of wealthy foreign financiers.

Status:   False.

Example:   [Collected via e-mail, July 2008]

WHERE IS THE MONEY COMING FROM ? By MAUREEN DOWD Published: June 29, 2008 OBAMA'S TROUBLING INTERNET FUND RAISING Certainly the most interesting and potentially devastating phone call I have received during this election cycle came this week from one of the Obama's campaign internet geeks. These are the staffers who devised Obama's internet fund raising campaign which raised in the neighborhood of $200 million so far. That is more then twice the total funds raised by any candidate in history — and this was all from the internet campaign. What I learned from this insider was shocking but I guess we shouldn't be surprised that when it comes to fund raising there simply are no rules that can't be broken and no ethics that prevail. Obama's internet campaign started out innocently enough with basic e-mail networking, lists saved from previous party campaigns and from supporters who visited any of the Obama campaign web sites. Small contributions came in from these sources and the internet campaign staff were more than pleased by the results. Then, about two months into the campaign the daily contribution intake multiplied. Where was it coming from? One of the web site security monitors began to notice the bulk of the contributions were clearly coming in from overseas internet service providers and at the rate and frequency of transmission it was clear these donations were "programmed" by a very sophisticated user. While the security people were not able to track most of the sources due to firewalls and other blocking devices put on these contributions they were able to collate the number of contributions that were coming in seemingly from individuals but the funds were from only a few credit card accounts and bank electronic funds transfers. The internet service providers (ISP) they were able to trace were from Saudi Arabia, Iran, and other Middle Eastern countries. One of the banks used for fund transfers was also located in Saudi Arabia. Another concentrated group of donations was traced to a Chinese ISP with a similar pattern of limited credit card charges. It became clear that these donations were very likely coming from sources other than American voters. This was discussed at length within the campaign and the decision was made that none of these donations violated campaign financing laws. It was also decided that it was not the responsibility of the campaign to audit these millions of contributions as to the actual source (specific credit card number or bank transfer account numbers) to insure that none of these internet contributors exceeded the legal maximum donation on a cumulative basis of many small donations. They also found the record keeping was not complete enough to do it anyway. This is a shocking revelation. We have been concerned about the legality of "bundling" contributions after the recent exposure of illegal bundlers but now it appears we may have an even greater problem. I guess we should have been somewhat suspicious when the numbers started to come out. We were told (no proof offered) that the Obama internet contributions were from $10.00 to $25.00 or so. If the $200,000,000 is right, and the average contribution was $15.00, that would mean over 13 million individuals made contributions? That would also be 13 million contributions would need to be processed. How did all that happen? I believe the Obama campaign's internet fund raising needs a serious, in depth investigation and audit. It also appears the whole question of internet fund raising needs investigation by the legislature and perhaps new laws to insure it complies not only with the letter of these laws but the spirit as well.

Origins:   The faux news article reproduced above is a masterful bit of political effluvium, one which proffers the "shocking revelation" that not only were the bulk of donations to Senator Barack Obama's presidential campaign made via the Internet coming from a handful of wealthy financiers in China, Saudi Arabia, Iran, and "other Middle Eastern countries" (rather than from American voters), but that Senator Obama was fine with accepting such tainted and compromised funding because of the technicality that "none of these donations violated campaign financing laws."

The article was not, as claimed in its header, written by veteran political columnist Maureen Dowd (her 29 June 2008 column was about Senator Hillary Clinton's supporters, not the financing of Senator Obama's campaign), who said of it:

The line about it being the 'most shocking revelation,' I don't think I've ever said those words, except in a satire. Also, it is about money, which I never write about. Sometimes you try and protest things you hear about, but sometimes it's just not worth it... It is hard to track down and control these things, and anyone who reads my column knows that this wasn't me. I got to the second line and I knew it wasn't me.

And aside from the article's bogus attribution, the facts it posits about contributions to the Obama campaign are wrong: The bulk of the money raised by the Obama campaign via donations has come from contributions of $200 or larger, not contributions of "$10 to $25 or so," and campaigns must, by federal law, identify "all PACs and party committees that give them contributions, and they must identify individuals who give them more than $200 in an election cycle." 

 

 

I have a sick baby here, so I will do more research after she goes home. Let's start with this Snopes fact...

Deliver us from EVIL....

When I first read this email from MoveOn I did not read it as something funny but Flying Juniors comment made me go back and reread and check the MoveOn email again. This is what they said that I left out.....


 It's too bad antitrust laws only cover mergers between corporations because these days it seems as though the Republican Party itself has become just another arm of the biggest multinational corporations.

The GOP barely even pretend to represent the interests of voters anymore. Well that got us thinking: what does this near merger actually look like?

The best way to stop these corporate front groups from stealing our election is to make sure as many people as possible know they're trying to do it—and we created this chart as a fun way to spread the word. Can you help?

Hover over the elements of the takeover plan to find out more. And be sure to tell your friends about RepubliCorp's big plans:

Tweet

The Cabal of Multinational Corporations is pleased to formally announce RepubliCorp^TM, a new combined entity following our complete merger with the Republican Party.
RepubliCorp^TM combines the ethics-free campaigning savvy of the GOP with the limit-free spending power of Corporate America^TM. This merger is precisely timed: With the recent Citizens United ruling finally placing the United States Government on the open market, RepubliCorp^TM is now perfectly positioned to lead our hostile takeover bid, currently scheduled for completion on November 2^nd 2010.
See below for the restructuring plan for the takeover bid, designed to maximize the impressive array of assets which are now—or soon will be—wholly owned subsidiaries of RepubliCorp^TM:

Established Subsidiaries

Republican National Committee

Public Relations

This unit has a proud track record of mass-marketing corporate priorities and training our political associates to serve us in government. Unfortunately, funding transparency laws and the GOP’s visible contempt for the American people will pose a serious challenge to this unit until all campaign finance regulations are repealed and the GOP’s image is sanitized. Of course, these are two of RepubliCorp’s^TM top priorities for 2011.

US National Chamber of Commerce

Revenue Generation and Political Enforcement

This unit has an unparalleled capacity to funnel hundreds of millions of dollars to corporate candidates and lobbying operations. While recent accusations of tax fraud, money laundering, and soliciting donations from foreign corporations have posed minor setbacks, these will be quickly resolved following our US Government takeover.

Fox News

Communications

Left unchecked, an informed electorate poses a serious risk to our long-term interests. Thankfully, this unit has demonstrated a best-in-class ability to ensure a healthy climate of constant fear, driven by unquestioned RepubliCorp^TM talking points, perfect for achieving and maintaining our full ownership of the US Government.

Republican Governors Association

HR and Development

Funded by other subsidiaries such as Fox News and major oil companies, the recent merger will allow full integration of this growing campaign asset into the RepubliCorp^TM family.

New Business Units

We’re proud to bolster our hostile takeover bid with an outstanding set of new divisions, led by the very best in the field political manipulation.

Americans for Prosperity (AFP)

Founded in 2004 by Oil and Gas billionaires the Koch Brothers, AFP is the industry-leading expert in converting corporate funds into the appearance of grassroots support. The well-financed force behind the “tea party” apparatus, AFP will ensure RepubliCorp^TM appears to be on the side of “the people” for years to come.

American Crossroads

While protesting that he doesn’t, Karl Rove (see staff profile) will lead this unit with a healthy $60 million budget. Unfettered by principles and funded by billionaires, this unit’s deceptive and negative advertising will considerably strengthen our takeover bid.

American Action Network

RepubliCorp^TM was proud to hire disgraced politicians Norm Coleman, Haley Barbour and Jeb Bush to run this division. AAN is posed to spend $25 million on attack ads in 2010, and is fully immune from disclosure thanks to Citizens United and the Senate's fortuitous failure to pass the DISCLOSE Act.

Americans for Job Security

This unit has faced troublesome allegations in the past of hiding its revenue and illegally funding corporate money into deceptive electioneering. Despite that, this unit soldiers on, running political strategy for the narrow self-interest of our donors. Thankfully, once our takeover is complete, this highly effective branch of RepubliCorp^TM will be able to advance our interests without fear of accountability.

Planned Acquisitions

U.S. House of Representatives

U.S. Senate

U.S. Supreme Court

White House (2012)

Staff Profiles

RepubliCorp^TM shareholders can be confident that our hostile take over bid for the US Government is in the hands of an all-star team of executives who are passionate about transferring power from voters to corporations—and have the track record to back it up.

Rep. John Boehner

CEO-Designate, Government Division

As the top Congressional Republican, Mr. Boehner is a life-long pioneer in bringing corporate power deep into government. He set the new standard in 1996 when he when he physically distributed checks from tobacco lobbyists to Republicans on the floor of the US House of Representatives. Just imagine what his leadership can do for RepubliCorp^TM once the takeover is complete.

Rupert Murdoch

Vice President For Corporate Communications

Mr. Murdoch is not just a principle investor in RepubliCorp^TM but a passionate advocate of replacing journalism with corporate PR. He will now fully devote his considerable talent to our hostile takeover bid for the US Government, and ensure voters are sufficiently frightened and misinformed to avoid any interference from below.

Karl Rove

Marketing Director

A legend who needs no introduction, ‘The Prince of Darkness’ has proven the boundary between politics and governance is just an antiquated formality by bringing the same fear-mongering, divisive agenda into George W Bush’s Whitehouse as he made famous on the campaign trail. RepubliCorp^TM shareholders can rest easy knowing our takeover bid and future administration plans for the US Government are in Mr. Rove’s experienced hands.

Rand Paul

Diversity and Equal Employment Solutions

Cumbersome laws promoting diversity and equal employment opportunity have long bedeviled many of our private sector subsidiaries. Following our government takeover, Mr. Paul will be retained at the ‘Senator’ level and lead the effort to eliminate these tiring restrictions. With a long track record of outspoken opposition to key provisions of the civil rights Act, Mr. Paul is clearly the right executive for this delicate task.

Sarah Palin

Director of Outreach and Incitement

Until our R&D engineers at Diebold are able to perfect the Fully Automated Voting System, individual voters still pose a potentially threatening externality to our takeover bid. And nothing disturbs voters like facts. That’s why RepubliCorp^TM is proud to retain Ms. Palin, the world’s leading authority on the replacement of facts with folksy talking points and Facebook posts. Ms. Palin’s legendary ability to neutralize voters though inciting and misdirecting anger while obfuscating our activities makes her an irreplaceable addition to our senior executive team.

Thomas J. Donohue

Executive Vice President for Fundraising and Arm-Twisting

Mr. Donohue’s excellent leadership of the US Chamber of Commerce makes him an invaluable asset to the takeover bid leadership staff. He has demonstrated a prodigious talent for converting corporate wealth into unrivaled DC influence, and a healthy penchant for money laundering and deceptive smear campaigning against politicians who refuse to join our business units. And the vast quantity of consumer dollars that secretly flow into US Chamber political coffers ensures a reliable revenue source even in a worst-case-scenario outbreak of voter awareness and outrage.

Michael Steele

Chief Morale Officer

Mr. Steele has raised all of our spirits over the past year as Chairman of our newly acquired GOP unit with his knee-slapping gaffes, lesbian bondage excursion scandals and astounding ability to retain a straight face despite his kind-hearted buffoonery. While we are confident of success, hostile government takeovers can be grueling affairs, and we are excited to have secured Mr. Steele a permanent slot on our senior team to keep the smiles coming.

Glenn Beck

Director, Conspiracy Unit

At RepubliCorp^TM we know that customer service comes first. And nothing interferes in our ability to serve our corporate customers like voters who demand know ‘what’s going on here.’ That’s why we've found Mr. Beck’s conspiracy unit to consistently yield amongst the highest ROI’s of any RepubliCorp^TM division. With just a healthy imagination, a common blackboard, famously flexible ethics, and the integrated support of our Fox News unit, Mr. Beck has provided millions of voters with carefully fabricated answers to their questions, expertly diverting their concerns and even enlisting them as inadvertent supporters of our takeover bid.

The Koch Brothers

Chief Investors, Shareholders, and Chairmen of the Board

Nothing proves the unofficial RepubliCorp^TM motto: ‘billionaires know best’ like the inspiring story of David and Charles Koch. These visionary brothers understand that hard work is the engine of progress, and no one will work hard if they think that once they become billionaires they will still be expected to pay taxes like regular suckers. As billionaires themselves, the Koch’s have selflessly contributed over $100 million to a series of RepubliCorp^TM campaigns to remove the yoke of reasonability from billionaires’ shoulders and thus unleash the hidden potential of this great nation. RepubliCorp^TM is humbled to have this duo as our chief investors, shareholders, and Chairmen of the Board.

Obama/Biden going head to head with a "witch"

 I wanna go!! President Obama and VP Joe Biden will be in Delaware next Friday campaigning. Some say why go to Delaware when Chris Coons is leading in the polls, he is double digits ahead of Christine O'Donnell. Well, Delaware LOVES Obama and Biden! O'Donnell is on the defensive with her ad "I'm not a witch", so sad, so very sad for her because she really is a witch ;-). OKAY, she's not a witch, but she will never be a Senator, thank God...

So why are the President and VP spending time in DE?  A party strategist says this..

 "Elevating O'Donnell as the face of the Tea Party isn't a bad thing," said the strategist. "Think about the tightening [in the polls] after she got nominated. The money that started rolling in. She's Sarah Palin. She causes people to pause and say, 'Whoa, this is who the Tea Party is. Do we really want to hand them the keys to the kingdom'."

While one prominent Democrat warned, "If you end up making women the object of ridicule it could end up a big mistake." This is not what the president intends on doing. O'Donnell has campaigned on a tea party platform and Pres.Obama is correct in making O'Donnell the face of the tea party. The women in Delaware, and around the country, do not want that kind of woman representing them in the Senate. Her views are not mainstream, but so radical as to take women's rights back to the 1800's!

From the NY Daily News...
Christine O'Donnell wants to know secrets.
The Tea-Party favorite and Republican Senate nominee said on Friday that she "would love" to sit on the Senate Foreign Relations Committee if she wins her race in November.
She acknowledged the desire while being interviewed on her stances on Pakistan, Afghanistan and Iran by Fox News' Greta Van Susteren, Congressional newspaper The Hill, reported.
When asked if she thinks it's inevitable that Iran will acquire nuclear weapons, O'Donnell said "You know, I don't know. I don't have access to the intelligence information that would help make that decision. Perhaps as a U.S. Senator sitting on the Foreign Relations Committee, I will…I would love that."
On Iran, she said the U.S. needs to strengthen its military, giving a shout out to former President Ronald Reagan.
"His foreign policy was summed up in four words—‘We win, they lose'. And he did that by not backing down, by not compromising, by strengthening our military and making it once again that the threat of military action, U.S. military action, had some teeth to it. Right now, it doesn't, and that's tragic."


The woman is hilarious. Some say do not make fun of these moron teabaggers, they are dangerous and can't be taken lightly. I say phooey! This woman will never be a Senator!  The Foreign Relations Committee??? LMFAO! How dare she demean our military! She is demeaning our military and our president during wartime! Is that allowed? I don't think so and she will not get away with this latest statement of absurdity!