Posted on 07/15/2010 5:39:03 AM PDT by STONEWALLS
America's economy is failing to produce jobs, increase growth or raise confidence, and it will likely get even worse next year. Our federal government's spending has increased to $3.7 trillion this year from $2.98 trillion in 2008. Publicly held national debt is up by $2.4 trillion in less than two years, to about 63% percent of GDP from 40%, and is expected to reach 70% by 2012. Add in the unemployment rate, which has remained above 9.4% for over a year, and America is clearly failing economically.
Next January the economy will be further depressed by increasing tax rates. The top income tax rate will rise to 39.6% from 35%, and the phase-out of itemized deductions and personal exemptions will effectively lift the top bracket to about 40.8%. On New Year's Day the tax on dividends is scheduled to go up to 39.6% from 15%, and come 2013, ObamaCare will add another 3.8%.
Other bad public policies will further drag down the economy. ObamaCare will increase individual costs and expand the deficit. Failing energy policies, from Washington's inept response to the Deepwater Horizon oil spill to its effort to limit tapping America's oil supplies, will drive up our use of imported foreign oil beyond the current 67% of our country's oil consumption.
(Excerpt) Read more at online.wsj.com ...
It worked so well the last time. /s
At least we know where she was hatched.
when they (hill and bill) think the time is right the come in on a white horse to save the day...
I’m always amused by those who think Hillary would be any different than Obama.
Yep. The lesser of two evils is still EVIL! :)
While I shudder at the thought of Hilary in the WH, I believe she would do less damage than the current Marxist-racist-muslim-tax hiking-job killing-”Punish Success, Reward Failure” Commie-in-Chief from Kenya.
So we go from one pseudo-intellectual, Alinsky dilettante to a dyed-in-the-wool 40 year disciple of Alinsky. Yeah, that’d be just great for the future of the Republic.
But I would not put it past her to try.
Typical liberal bait-and-switch: "Uh, OK, you got us; so you found out that you hate bullshit. OK, we get it. But you're gonna love horseshit...
“Yep. The lesser of two evils is still EVIL! :)”
Thanks for reminding us of that! This is the very best the Democrats have to offer? Hill (and Bill by default) or more Obama?
I can’t think of a better argument to flush ALL of the career politicians, and go back to what the founders intended with regard to national service by citizens.
I'd still like to see the internals on that. 35% unfavorable for the Hildebeast? Where? Cuba?
I don’t know how Evita can successfully campaign for the nomination of her party since, to win, she would have to effectively distance herself from the ‘President’, his administration and policies… in both of which she has been intimately associated and demonstrated tacit compliance.
How could she get traction as a different or a better choice if she owes and holds her position at the continued bounty of the incumbent?
Also, no minority voter on earth would vote for her if “O” is in the running.... THAT has been repeatedly and painfully demonstrated and in a way which guarantees definite and literal repetition in future elections which field minority candidates
If she loses the nomination to him (and there is no one else she could lose it to), there goes her opportunity for continued largesse from any “O” administration.
What options does she have?
America has endured a crash course in identifying Radical Populist/Statist/Communist political poseurs who promise the sun the moon and the stars … only to immediately fail and categorically betray.
What new mask can she wear which will further fool or charm potential supporters? Can she re invent herself AGAIN? Is there another Evita in there who is unlike the others we have met or who is a better choice than the recent parade of flawed and treasonous Liberal jerks America is rapidly (finally) learning to avoid?
Every time a democrat has challenged a democrat incumbant president, that democrat incumbant president went on to lose to the republican.
This is disappointing, at best, I had hoped for better from the WSJ.
One of the biggest problems with our political system today is too many entrenched, stale politicians who know the system, but lack fresh ideas. Hillary is NOT a solution; she is another polarizing (albeit to a much lesser degree than zero) liberal who will do little to manage the country well other than capitalizing on some of the worst of zero's ideas and keep this country lurching to the left.
By now, liberals know how much they can get away with and the voters will let them. zero has shown them that communism is within their grasp, all they have to do is reach out and take it!! The voters have shown that, despite the outrage, we are unwilling to descend en mass on Washington with tar andf feathers or pistols at the ready. We have given up our passion and traded it in for apathy and an unrealistic belief that the corrupt and broken system we have today will somehow save us from the guaranteed future we have if we do nothing but cast votes that will likely end up either being "lost" or corrupted by electronic voting machines that have no audit trails or accountability. After all, bits is bits.
I would hope that by 2012, the Dems can do a little better than run a retread like HitLIARy against zero and whomever we conservatives select. As things stand today, America cannot continue on this path, but I don't see a fork in the road ahead for us to take that provides better options for this country.
That’s some bad craziness right there. Rush, if anything, helped place the current islamic blight in the white house. Of course, mindless republicans helped as well. Why the h*ll do we need communist islamics when we have “conservative” groups full of swarming insects?
Does anyone remember which one died from walking into the propeller of his plane? I can’t even find this on the internet, but I know for sure it happened.
YEah, blame Rush. What a crock.
Rush was simply making the best of a bad hand. Momentum was moving toward McCain, which was an obvious disaster. Under the circumstances, to sow as much discord as one could among the Democrats made perfect sense. Obama was gaining momentum when Rush started Operation Chaos. Operation Chaos did not lead to Obama winning over Hillary. It was an effort to blunt the degree to which Obama won going away, to take him down a notch, give him a hurdle to overcome.
And you blame Rush for Obama winning in the general election? Operation Chaos was during the primaries, when Obama had already clearly defeated Hillary.
so the author of a larger, more intrusive national health care plan will be better for the deficit and spending? Good Lord these old country-clubber republicans need to be put out to pasture.
No it didn’t. He had it won. Operation Chaos just stretched out the primary.
I hadn’t thought about this in a while, but Limbaugh totally effed up with that Operatin Chaos nonsense. He contributed in getting Obama into power.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.