Wait, was she just telling us why we shouldn't vote Republican?

You are living in a opposite world. Everything you believe Democrat leadership stand for, they have delivered the opposite.


We can thank the disappearing middle class and the poor being worse off from 6 years of the failed leadership.
But on the bright side the rich are richer, Thank to Democrat leadership.

Well if you like the disappearing middle class keep voting Democrat.

No sir, you are the one who claims the democrats had, and spent more money in the last 2 elections, and now that the republicans are the champion of the middle class (rather than it's most fervent enemy)....apparently because Faux told you so. I propose YOU are living in opposite land.
The middle class, along with nearly everyone else (not the top 1%), was screwed long and hard by the Bush administration and republican congress. True enough the democrats didn't stop them, nor did they fully solve the disaster they were left with 6 years ago. It was not, however, democratic policies that decimated the middle class, nor was it democratic policy that kept it that way, it is the obstructionist republicans insisting on continuing their own disastrous policies, and democrats never insisting on an actual filibuster (by republicans) to halt political progress, but accepting the mere threat of filibuster and giving up far too easily.
Claiming that the republicans have or will work FOR the middle class is either disingenuous or coming from the completely uninformed. (EDIT: please note that the economy has ALWAYS done better under democratic leadership than it has under republican leadership....every cycle in the last 50+ years, and the economy has been the republicans main issue that entire time.) Remember, it's proven repeatedly that those who listen to/watch "fox news" are consistently LESS informed than those who watch/listen to NOTHING. I think that's what's happened here.

EDIT: Love the new, totally appropriate 'sad clown king' avatar!

The middle class has been disappearing since trickle down economics was instituted under reagan. Tax rates on rich was 70% and he lowered it to 35%. Note: my numbers are off, but the change was that drastic.

Support for newt's point... https://www.americanprogressaction.org/issues/economy/news/2004/07/28/964/economic-prosperity-and-the-presidents/

..." it is the obstructionist republicans? Really???.

There were around 400 bills sitting on Harry Reids desk being blocked for consideration.

Republicans were shut out from damn near all discussion in the House and Senate.

Be that as it may the poor are poorer and the middle class have slipped downward also. Failed leadership.



Its Puddles the sad clown.

Things were great under Regan and under Clinton. I would say Clinton era went strong because of the internet The internet bubble burst and then Bush got in. Bush did not blame Clinton ( like OBAMA) for the mess he inherited.

Kennedy, It was post war every thing was going gang busters, Democrat or Republican did not matter who was in charge. This lasted up through Johnson then came the oil crisis which drag the economy down and 15%+ interest rates, Carter got caught up in this and became the worst president to that date. (Obama is now the worst).

Regan policies turn this around. Trickle down worked and still does.

But you still cant change the fact..

You are living in a opposite world. Everything you believe Democrat leadership stand for, they have delivered the opposite.


We can thank the disappearing middle class and the poor being worse off from 6 years of the failed leadership.
But on the bright side the rich are richer, Thank to Democrat leadership.

Well if you like the disappearing middle class keep voting Democrat.

In a word...yes. In more words, obstructionist republicans, and spineless democrats are who I blame.
Being behind or not putting forth issues that need consideration/committee is far different from actively denying votes on almost any legislation, which has been the republican MO since Obama was elected. They seemingly decided "Just say no" had to work for something, and since it wasn't drugs, perhaps it was politics.
Not true, they simply didn't get most of what they wanted when they held no power (that's how politics often works), on the other hand, as the minority they still managed to paralyze the democrats...so I must agree with your last statement, the poor are poorer and the middle class is also, and the democrats failed to effectively lead us out of the Bush fiasco. I have little love for democrats either, but less for republicans.
Yes, I recognized Puddles, and found the image appropriate. The old school mic is a dead giveaway.

@bobknight33 "Trickle down worked and still does."

If you mean shit trickles down your leg.

Regan destroyed America. It took a few decades.

This is amazing beat poetry. If only it made sense.

If i want to stop someone riding me, i don't think strengthening my back is the right direction

http://blogs.wsj.com/economics/2009/06/30/trickle-down-economics-fails-to-deliver-as-promised/

Article discussing the trickle-down idea. Refers to a paper from a respected uni which shows that there is little evidence to believe that it works, and if it does work it a) doesn't work as well as widely touted and b) hardly works at all.

I also read another article from more recent than 2009 from some kind of financial group on or associated strongly with Wall Street itself that concluded even the wealthy see more spending power if their money is more evenly spread; they may have less money in a mathematical sense, but their money will be worth more and provide more because the flow of the economy is so much more active. I'll keep looking and edit if i find it.

Eisenhower explained the rape of the country that was about to ensue... so it seems a little off target to blame bush, clinton or any modern leader. They all certainly SUCK and are part of it. Arguing between Bush or Obama like that clown above is a waste of time. Bush did suck WAYYYYY more of course...

Maybe she needs an inhalator, or a...a breathalyzer.

Some lady came up to me on the street yesterday talking just like this. I gave her a dollar.

Perhaps in your mind, not mine. I have consistently said Carter was my favorite recent president, just the least popular. He did what he saw as right (and in my eyes he was correct at nearly every turn, like adopting solar BEFORE it's too late, and using less oil and gas by turning down your thermostat and putting on a sweater if it's cold inside for military, economic, and ecologic reasons), and was called wishy washy for it. He was a nuclear submarine commander, HARD CORE military, yet he was called weak on the military/defense (rather than insightful). I also disagree that Obama was the worst, in my lifetime Bush caused WAY more damage to our country, Obama has taken 6 years to dig out of the Bush hole, so he's no hero for me either...but he's certainly not the villain you wish to label him...we haven't even had a domestic terrorist attack on his watch.

Regan policies include raising taxes on the rich and limiting military spending (true, not by choice or often, but he did do both) If that's what you mean, perhaps you're correct...but I think you mean his trickle down economics, which were a clear proven disastrous failure and didn't even work for the rich...it made the top few % more dollars, but less wealth in the end because those dollars were worth far less, as @dannym3141 said above.

Odd, you have no trouble changing facts....why can't I? ;-)

Does anyone else recall her 'ridiculing' a democrat (maybe Obama?) for using a teleprompter in 08, or was that someone else?

Is Tina Fey on tour!? Where can I get tickets?

Explaining how trickle down works in the real world

When you say .." I have consistently said Carter was my favorite recent president.." That all I need to know how lost you are with reality.

The president provides leadership for USA and for the world. The world looks to us for stability and he provider of help when others are in need.

I didn't know what to think of Ron Paul idea about being a non interventionist. Obama has lifted the hand of interventionism off Arab nations and now we have a shit storm of assassins and killers who desire to kill everyone. Everyone knows this But OBAMA who for what ever reason fails to see this world danger. Now it will take the world decades to fight is battle. Sure these might have had a shitty American backed leader but their peoples were not mass murdered on wholesale levels like ISIS is doing.

We had domestic terrorist attacks. Fort Hood shooting (13 killed) , Boston bombing, and the car bomb that was defused in NYC. Many more stopped. There will be more blood shed on our soil in the name of ALLAH. This is a world wide problem.

Obama is the worst because of this and on domestic side he is a failure because he is steadfast with my way or the highway approach. 6 years and still a shitty economy, real employment is hovering just below 10%, IF you lost you job today do you think you would be able to get another straight away at the same pay? I don't

Salaries have continued to stagnate over last 20 years but under this leadership salaries have lost 4K.

Democrats got a historic spanking this recent midterm and Obama still thinks he can do what ever he thinks. He is delusional.

Times did get better with Regan and Clinton, The Bushes sucked.



History will be the judge, we are just spectators.

I have yet to hear a logical reason people crap on Carter...they invariably just say 'Carter, if you don't understand why he sucked, I just can't talk to you', never ' Carter, this is why he sucked'.
EDIT: If it's all about leadership, stability, and helping, you must be conflicted that Tricky Dick is republican, huh? The Bushes can't help either. It's a wonder you can stick with your party, I quit the republicans when they quit being republican, before I could vote, during Regan.
Carter provided leadership in a responsible direction, but idiots desired placation rather than leadership and didn't follow. Regan placated his base, and we nearly had a depression. Carter started us on a non-interventionist foreign policy, because he personally understood the short and long term repercussions of intervening, now we've shit in their pot so hard and long that we CAN'T just go hands off anymore, we've already created our enemy. That said, it's like a junkie going cold turkey, it hurts them, may kill them, but if they survive they have a chance of life, if they don't stop, they die soon anyway. If we could find a good foreign policy methadone, we should use it at every turn and start worrying about us, IMO. If we had not installed our leaders and otherwise interfered in the first place, everyone would be better off, but that ship has sailed (in many cases because we didn't follow Carter's suggestion to stay out, I might add).
OK, got me with Boston. Ft Hood is a lone gunman, and those stopped prove my point. I think you know I meant foreign spawned terrorist attacks, but I grant I did not say that. But then you have to admit there were other successful attacks under Bush AFTER 9/11, like the guy who flew his plane into the IRS building in Texas.
Agreed, the spread of religion is always terrible, no matter which religion, some are worse than others at times, none are good. I could support outlawing organized religion, but grant that most would not.
Obama did not create radical Islam. If anyone did, it's Regan, by arming them to the teeth against the red menace, then just walking away.
I also disagree that Obama's the 'my way or the highway' guy/side. Please recall, "You're either with us or against us" is a republican slogan. The republicans stated before Obama was inaugurated that he was already the worst president ever, and their plan for the next 4-8 years was 'just say no' to everything, even to plans they designed, but they have never come up with any alternatives, just "not Obama's way" over and over, that's real 'not leading' as opposed to the type they accuse Obama of.
4.5 years of shitty economy, but trending up, not down even then.
Where I live, jobs have been an issue since Regan/Bush 1, so I don't think you want to point that finger here.
Not true, stagnant over the last 14+ years. They certainly went up in the 90's.
Once again, Bush economics caused the recession, salaries went down during the recession/depression. Salaries are on the way up now...not fast enough, granted, but up.
Obama has NEVER been able to do whatever he thinks/wants. That is delusional. Even when the democrats had the votes to do so, they didn't, because they suck donkey dicks. Happy? ;-)
Times were better for a special few under Regan, not most. Times got better for most everyone under Clinton.
We agree on your final point, the Bushes sucked, lets build on that and not make that mistake again.

Just to correct a few fantasies here...Carter completed qualification to run a diesel sub, he was never the commander of a nuclear sub. He was never the captain of any ship, apparently, except the ship of state, which he proceeded to drive onto the sandbar of malaise.

During Carter's single term in office, Iran became a fundamentalist terror state, Saddam began his coup that led to the Iran-Iraq war-Hostage crisis?? Hello?? He gave the Sandinista cash for their fun-in-the-sun-OH-He gave away the Panama Canal, right? Claimed that the Soviets were no longer a 'threat' and they marched right on into Afghanistan. He set-up foreign policy for the next wave of presidential failures and shills for the assholes who really run the show, you know them by their smell, the richest gadjillionaires in the world, who have stolen humanity's hope for anything but anarchy or global fascism and world-government control and surveillance-state, in the form of what the world is fast-becoming. Yeah, the old peanut farmer was was a real piece of work.

Wake up people, the United States presidency has been a ruse for close to fifty years.

Um...Ok.
The Iranian 'revolution' was a surprise to most, including the Iranians. Carter didn't cause it.
Iran/Iraq war wasn't our problem, or fault. Regan getting involved and backing Saddam ended with atrocities and the US/Iraq wars to remove him later...should have let Iran do the dirty work.
Panama was a lease, which ran out. You think we should have gone to war with Panama and stolen it? Oh man.
We should have let the soviets 'take' Afghanistan, otherwise known as the graveyard of empires. We certainly should have stayed the hell out of there ourselves. Often invaded, never held, that's Afghanistan.
I'll just ignore the rest of your post. It needs no reply....except to note that your attempted insult of 'peanut farmer' (a noble career itself) ignores that he's also a Nuclear Sub Executive Officer/commanding officer AND designer.

You are partially correct, I listed the rank of a top submarine officer incorrectly, but not his position, I'm not in the Navy. He was Executive Officer of the first nuclear sub, but only First Lieutenant of the diesel. EDIT: He "qualified for command" of the nuclear sub...probably why I thought "commander" but properly should have said "was in command". Shortly after being assigned to lead the nuclear sub trials, after helping design and build it, he led the American shut down of the Chalk River reactor, lest you continue to insinuate he was an 'armchair warrior' that never held command.
(record below)

◾17? DEC 1948 - 01 FEB 1951 -- Duty aboard USS Pomfret (SS-391) Billets Held: Communications Officer, Electronics Officer, Sonar Officer, Gunnery Officer, First Lieutenant, Electrical Officer, Supply Officer Qualifications: 4 Feb 1950 Qualified in Submarine


◾05 JUNE 1949 -- Promoted to Lieutenant (j.g.)


◾01 FEB 1951 - 10 NOV 1951 -- Duty with Shipbuilding and Naval Inspector of Ordnance, Groton, CT as prospective Engineering Officer of the USS K-1 during precommissioning fitting out of the submarine.


◾10 NOV 1951 - 16 OCT 1952 -- Duty aboard USS K-1(SSK-1) Billets Held: Executive Officer, Engineering Officer, Operations Officer, Gunnery Officer, Electronics Repair Officer Qualifications: Qualified for Command of Submarine Remarks: Submarine was new construction, first vessel of its class


◾01 JUNE 1952 -- Promoted to Lieutenant


◾16 OCT 1952 - 08 OCT 1953 -- Duty with US Atomic Energy Commission (Division of Reactor Development, Schenectady Operations Office) From 3 NOV 1952 to 1 MAR 1953 he served on temporary duty with Naval Reactors Branch, US Atomic Energy Commission, Washington, D.C. "assisting in the design and development of nuclear propulsion plants for naval vessels." From 1 MAR 1953 to 8 OCT 1953 he was under instruction to become an engineering officer for a nuclear power plant. He also assisted in setting up on-the-job training for the enlisted men being instructed in nuclear propulsion for the USS Seawolf (SSN575).


On December 12, 1952, an accident with the experimental NRX reactor at Atomic Energy of Canada's Chalk River Laboratories caused a partial meltdown. The resulting explosion caused millions of liters of radioactive water to flood the reactor building's basement, and the reactor's core was no longer usable.[7] Carter was ordered to Chalk River, joining other American and Canadian service personnel. He was the officer in charge of the U.S. team assisting in the shutdown of the Chalk River Nuclear Reactor.[8] The painstaking process required each team member, including Carter, to don protective gear, and be lowered individually into the reactor to disassemble it for minutes at a time. During and after his presidency, Carter indicated that his experience at Chalk River shaped his views on nuclear power and nuclear weapons, including his decision not to pursue completion of the neutron bomb.[9]

Assume a great deal? Imagine you know about how governments are supposed to operate on paper in contrast to how they are manipulated by men with power? Insult people much here on this site with obsessive tomes? Been reading some of your comments here-Damn son, how's it feel to hijack a website?

I feel like she may have done this on a few occasions, but here's one from 2013:

"Mr. President, we admit it, you won. Accept it. Now step away from the teleprompter and do your job."
http://insider.foxnews.com/2013/03/16/video-sarah-palins-speech-at-cpac-2013-president-obama-step-up-away-from-the-teleprompter-and-do-your-job

*related=http://videosift.com/video/Jon-Stewart-Picks-Apart-Palin-GOP-Incoherent-Speeches

Jon Stewart Picks Apart Palin & GOP Incoherent Speeches has been added as a related post - related requested by eric3579.

I think this is a clear demonstration of the right-wing mindset.

If you have trouble forming ideas, can't complete a rational sentence, and generally fake your way through life because you're too stupid to actually accomplish anything, you are probably a Republican.

Hey, there are some people around here who fit that exact description!

I keep coming across report after report (from respected financial and economic institutions all over the world) that discredit trickle-down economics. For example http://warincontext.org/2014/12/09/oecd-reports-on-the-failure-of-trickle-down-economics/

But i simply can't find the one i was looking for. However if you google "report failure of trickle down" you get report after report from myriad different experts - including one report by the Congressional Research Service, a bipartisan think tank established a century ago to give information to Congress without spin or political bias, which was covered up by the Republicans.

It is widely accepted that trickle down economics doesn't work amongst those who are in a position to judge.

trickle down has been the prevailing economic policy for the last thirty years and it does not work. This is also the same time period that the middle class has been disappearing not just the last 6 years.

Carter and Clinton are the last two presidents to have budget surpluses. Republicans preach about being fiscally responsible, but the record shows they aren't. Had we followed Carters course, we would be energy independent and it's possible we would have avoided wars with Iraq twice and Afghanistan. Think of what we could have done with all the money that would have been saved. Trillions of dollars.

LOL!

Nice try deflecting from the point of this video:

Sarah Palin is an idiot. Period. And this should be something conservatives, liberals, and moderates from both parties should be able to agree on without any hesitation.

I don't understand why the GOP allows this moron to speak in any kind of event like this. It's absolutely mind boggling.

Sarah Palin living in liberal's heads, rent free!

*fail

Adding video to channels (Fail) - requested by MrFisk.