McCain, Obama jab on jobs

Blah, blah, blah, blah, blah.

Our Day of Reckoning has come folks. The American Empire is crumbling. Get used to it and take steps to protect whatever wealth you have.

McCain is kidding himself if he thinks his "message" of pretty much staying the course and locking in Bush's failed tax cuts are the solution. It's obvious that Obama's plan is to move forward with clean energy and a healthcare plan that works for ALL Americans, not just those who can afford insurance. Tax cuts for the richest 1% do not spur "small businesses", it helps rich moguls and CEOs. These CEOs do not run "small" businesses. McCain and his fear-mongering will not work. NOT THIS TIME.

What a joke.

McCain has already stated that he knows nothing about the economy. Those were HIS words! So why in the world should we believe him now? Sorry, but Bush's tax cuts did nothing for ordinary Americans and McCain (who was aginst the tax cuts at first but is somehow NOW for them lol) wants to continue the same economic policies.

While I have reservations about Obama, his plan to cut taxes for those who need it more and his plan to change energy policy and create jobs in AMERICA by doing so is very smart and ambitious. By moving away from oil and forcing car manufactuers and energy companies here in America to produce new energy efficient cars and begin to move away from oil, manufacturing jobs will increase and the money they make will be spent right here on our soil helping OUR economy. Right now by relying on oil, we are doing nothing but lining the pockets of Iran, Russia and other hostile nations that want us gone.

Could someone please remind Mr. McCain that the Republicans have been at the helm for the past eight years. If Republican tax cuts were so beneficial why is there an increase in the unemployed?

100% agree with McCain. Regardless of what side you are on (I am a liberal), McCain's views on the economy are much more sound than Obama's.

Could someone please remind Mr. McCain that the Republicans have been the majority for most of the past eight years? Their so called tax cuts seem to have increased the unemployed instead of creating jobs. Both parties are so removed from the everyday reality of their constituents. Mr. Obama is closer to knowing how difficult it has gotten but I worry he may "forget" when in office.

We need to start losing thousands and thousands of jobs from the bloated government payrolls so the legitimate producers and employers in America can lower their tax drain and rebuild their businessses. All government bureaus exist solely to grow and reproduce, like rats and vermin.

When we finally defeat the idiotic sucking at the taxpayers' expense to get ''My Rights" by all the non contributers, including defense contractors as well as social service scammers, we can restart our country.

You can not " take from he who has the ability to produce, and give to he who has the ability to need" without destroying both. The producer will give up and the needer will complain. All rights have an expense component.

Republicans have absolutely not been the majority for the last 8 years. If you do your research the Democrats have led Congress for at least 8 years. Start putting the blame where it belongs.

The bush tax cuts are not responsible for the current unemployment. Clinton was not responsible for the economic expansion in the 1990's. The ecomomy has highs and lows and the president at the time gets way too much credit or way too much blame.

let's recognize the fact that the president doesn't have that much control to make changes to an "living" economy. Stangant oil production with higher demand fuels oil prices, our personal spend but not save habits lessens our ability to whether these lows, people buying homes they can't afford screws up the housing market... this are what is screwing up the economy. Everyone should look at themselvles before dumping over the elected officials.

McCain and Obama are just pandering and when one becomes president they will have all thier little advisors tell them what to do. The economy is going to be fine and maybe a rough patch will get some people in the country back on the track of working hard and not feeling entitled to things they haven't earned.

By the way.... do people listen when Obama mentions what he considers "rich"?? Its scary stuff.

In one of his campaign speeches a few months ago, Obama referred to a family making $75,000.00/year as well to do. He apparently has no concept of the cost of living. These people will not get a tax cut. One of Hillary's first complaints when she became senator was that her staff of 60 was not sufficient. This is where our money is going. The bureaucracy is bloated, government workers who do not work for their pay. etc., all who take money from the taxpayer. And how about the benefits given to those who have not earned them. McCain is on the right track. Keep your hard earned money.
Speaking of energy self reliance, the wind mills Christy Mihos is installing over the gas pumps at the Cape are neat and producing energy. I would like to see Christy provide more information.

wrong sharon, wrong. the democrats won congress back very recently, around the time of the mark foley scandal. i suppose you're next going to tell us that the science on global warming is still up in the air...

until that time, Republicans had both Congress and the White House, hence the level of arrogance and infallibility that led us to this predicament.

Sharon is mistaken. Republicans had the majority in Congress from 2000 to 2006. The Senate has been deadlocked by the Republicans throught this year.

The republical claim (which started with Adam Smith) that "lower taxes and less government" improve economies is as flawed as it is old. And it's become obvious over the past 30 years that the republicals themselves don't believe it. It's simply a way for them to rationalize their personal greed. In other words, tell yourself that your personal greed is helping other people by improving the economy, when ALL evidence points to exactly the opposite being true, in order to make yourself feel good about being greedy.

In 1981Ronald Reagan instituted what at that time were the largest tax cuts in history. The direct result of that action was the 1981-1982 recession, which still stands today as the longest and deepest recession since the Great Depression. He said while campaigning that his tricle-down economics would have us "writing in black ink in 1981." He TRIPLED Carter's deficit.

In 1991 the elder Bush, continuing the tricle-down economics of the past decade, was also facing a recession. It was only his breaking of his "read my lips" promise that pulled the economy out of it.

Bill Clinton worked with republicals to institute targeted tax cuts for lower and middle income Americans ONLY. He's the only president of the twentieth century not to have a recession on his watch.

In February of 2001 Curious George and his gang of republicals in Congress pushed through what are now the largest tax cuts in history. In March the U.S. economy was in recession, and the only thing that made it a short one was that housing stayed bouyant due to Greenspan controlling interest rates. Also, every single peer reviewed study that has come out since then has concluded that only the top 1% of Americans benefitted from the Richy Rich Tax Cuts.

King George II has never strayed from his assertion that "tax cuts improve the economy." But why, seven years after his tax cuts, have we never been out of a "recovery" from his first recession? And why are we, most likely, in a recession now? Because the claim that "tax cuts improve the economy" is a COMPLETE LIE!

Who then is repeating "the failed mistakes of the past?" We don't call him McSame for nothing!

Sharon, are you soft in the brain? The Democrats took over congress two years ago after 12 years of Republican control and 6 years of a Republican president. What "research" are you referring to exactly?

And as to McCain's economic policy, he doesn't have one. He's almost as ignorant on economic matters as he is on foreign policy. I can't wait for the town hall debates, when McCain's true ignorance can be revealed for all to see. He's truly a pretty dumb guy. I for one have had enough of dumb presidents.

"Republicans have absolutely not been the majority for the last 8 years. If you do your research the Democrats have led Congress for at least 8 years. Start putting the blame where it belongs."
Since 1995, both houses have been controlled by Republicans with the brief exception of a 2-year period when there was a tie in the Senate. This information is very public and very easy to find. Yeesh.

Sharon, maybe if YOU did your research, you'd see that the Republicans controlled Congress from 1994-2006. And since then Bush has vetoed the type of legislation that would help working people instead of people that just make money from their wealth.

If we think the economy is bad right now well it was worse when Bush got in because after the Democrats pay all their personal debts they handed Bush an empty checking account just before they left office.Now the economy is on track and they nominate a know nothing candidate about the economy so wheres the beef dems.I know the first four years if Obama become President the dems will spend like crazy on foolish investigation and money wasting surveys nothing more than pork barrels for their buddies until the next Administration and then hand them the same empty account.

McCain: "moving toward energy independence" ? Really?

Brazil did it. We haven't because we are run by the power and money of the oil companies and the lobbyist for Israel. Like Jamie said above, "Protect whatever wealth you have."

If we had invested in true energy independence 20 years ago the Middle East would be an after thought by now. They will be killing each other over there for the next 2,000 years. Read the book "John Adams". After the 'Revolutionary War" ended the King of England told the newly formed United States regarding the Pirate ships in the Middle East, "You cannot negotiate with them, they are not like us." So 230 years later we are still trying to "negotiate" with them? Forget about it. If we went to the friggin' Moon we can develop other sources of energy, and let the Middle East blow away in a sand storm. We can do better only if we have the GUTS to act on the future! I am so sick of US Citizens voting for President because they are AFRAID of something. Stand up and be strong you bunch of WIMPS!

FYI:
Over the past three decades Brazil has worked to create a viable alternative to gasoline. With its sugarcane-based fuel, the nation may become energy independent this year. Brazil’s ethanol program, which originated in the 1970s in response to the uncertainties of the oil market, has enjoyed intermittent success. Still, many Brazilians are driving “flexible fuel” cars that run on either ethanol or gasoline and allow the consumer to fill up with whichever option is cheaper – often ethanol. The US is taking small steps towards the use of ethanol, but its process, relying on corn, is lengthier and more expensive.

If we think the economy is bad right now well it was worse when Bush got in because after the Democrats pay all their personal debts they handed Bush an empty checking account just before they left office.Now the economy is on track and they nominate a know nothing candidate about the economy so wheres the beef dems.I know the first four years if Obama become President the dems will spend like crazy on foolish investigation and money wasting surveys nothing more than pork barrels for their buddies until the next Administration and then hand them the same empty account.

Sharon, don't know which country you've been living in, but the congress has been controlled by republicans six of the past eight years, and have aided Bush in passing the current tax cuts. To try to attempt to blame the party out of power is both evasive and false. Regardless of party affiliation, we are in a serious state as a nation, and we all need to take a good, hard look at our balance sheet, both the credit and debit side. In my view, there are elements of both idealogies which are both interesting and at the same time troubling. The question is, which option gives us the better path toward a more balanced policy, and is the most fair across the board? There will be pain felt by all of us, because we have let this slide for so long. And even though a president can't directly control all things economic, it is leadership that makes the difference. So let's have a sobering, deliberate debate on the current state of affairs, and choose wisely.

In response to: 'let's recognize the fact that the president doesn't have that much control to make changes to an "living" economy. '

Monetary policy and the availability of money is set by the adminstration and does have an impact on the economy. The President heads the Adminstration and appoints the Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve. This President shifted revenue from the Federal Government disproportionately to the highest earning taxpayers in this country, because reduced tax rates benefitted the higher income brackets more than the lower. The belief was that the money back into the economy would result in more investment into the economy by encouraging entrepreneurship and creating more and better paying jobs. This has not happened. McCain wants the same policy. Maybe he can go out and buy socks to stimulate the economy.

skmj...exactly how was a huge budget surplus an "empty account"? We are now much more massively in debt than we've ever been, thanks to W. Reaganomics is synonymous with running up debt. Only a Democrat can balance the budget.

And raising taxes on people who make more than $200k per year is fine by me. They are NOT middle class.

Finally, a President with a backbone will enact a gas-tax FLOOR guaranteeing that gas will never fall below $4/gallon. As we're seeing - this is the only way to curb Americans' appetite for foreign oil.

That is a real solution!

I won't even comment on Sharon's stupidity. Whatever barometer you want to look at, this country is in much worse shape than it was when Bush took over in 2000. We have no energy policy, our foreign policy is ridiculous, Bush cut taxes for the wealthy and at the same time waged a war that has cost us 800 billion dollars. As a result, we have a huge budget deficit and a weak dollar. The weak dollar and the fact that Iraq does not export oil anymore, has had an effect on oil prices. How anyone can vote for McCain is beyond me. I agree with Obama's policies regarding stopping tax cuts for the rich, more tax cuts should be given to the middle class and we definitely need an energy policy and a sound environmental policy. Bush has failed to address any of these issues for the last 7 years and anytime the democrats have tried to address these issues, Bush either vetoed their attempts or the republicans in Congress blocked them through filibustering.
When will Americans learn?

'skmj' is my absolute favorite poster on this message board, because every time he/she posts any kind of message whatsoever it's almost always 100% the opposite of reality.

I don't know what "empty checking account" you're talking about, but Bill Clinton was the only president in my lifetime to leave office with a budget surplus. Today, under bush, our national debt is $10 trillion, or thought of in a more terrifying way, $30,000 per every man, woman, and child in America. And it's growing faster than it ever has before. It is easily one of the most pressing crises that no one in this country is talking about.

Someone should tell John McCain that a leader with some balls (not an enlarged prostate) would remind Americans that at no time in our history before Bush did we ever cut taxes during a war.

Sorry that you do not understand politics. The Democrats were the majority when Bush started and when it ended, but not in the middle. If you all recall Bush went out and campaigned for three months so both the Senate and House would have the majority be Republican. That lasted until last year.

What all of you are forgetting is that Bush only is a small part of what goes on. If we really want change lets drop all incombants regardless of party and hire new blood. If the new blood will vote straight down the party lines, then do not vote them in. In other words let our votes tell the story. Do what was done in the movie Brewsters Millions. Vote none of the above.

People need to understand that change is tough and people in general and creatures of habit. Think about it, you brush your teeth in the same sequence in the morning as you shower. It is the same in voting. Most do not know who runs other than the president and vice president. Thus when it is time to vote, they check the box that is labeled incombant. Think about it.

The rising cost of gas is not the Republican fault its the Democrat Party manipulation for the sole purpose of selling Obama to the public for their vote.They are the majority in Congress and they are the first people that knows the flows of the dollar fix it to their purpose and then tell us its the President and his administration.Its old politics and bet you they will hang Obama upside down and left him alone while rats rush to their holes.

So much for having a so-called "conservative" running things lately... if you look at his spending you would never guess that. I remember the days when the term "Republican" meant you were in favor of small gov't, less gov't intrusion and more privacy. Is it me or have they gone complete 180 from that??? From Terri Sciavo to our phone calls being tapped and the massive deficits we're racking up with our spending.

If Republicans are supposed to make gov't smaller.... what's happening? Talk about identity issues. Lincoln would be ashamed to see happened to his party.

by the way.. I'm a democrat and I probably know more about what makes a conservative a conservative than most of the so-called republicans who post their rants on here.

skmj, do you honestly beleive the stuff you say: "rising cost of gas is not the Republican fault its the Democrat Party manipulation for the sole purpose of selling Obama to the public for their vote.They are the majority in Congress and they are the first people that knows the flows of the dollar fix it to their purpose." There's a myriad of reasons that have nothing to do with politics: 1. Expanding markets in Asia have caused an increase in demand, 2. Americans are rushing to trade-in gas guzzling SUVs to lower demand but not at an appreciable rate, 3. the value of the dollar sucks (the Canadian dollar is actually worth more than ours) meaning we need to spend more for the same product because our currency is tanking... I could go on, but you honestly don't offer a very intelligent conversation. Please try to keep politics out of the discussion when it has little to do with the issue.

Anyone who blames the Bush tax cuts for the jobs numbers is either ignorant, purposely dihonest, or perhaps a little of both.

The real story here is unemployment among entry-level workers to the employment system. In summer, teenagers and college students enter the marketplace looking for seasonal and part-time work. This accounts for the significant rise in job-seekers and the 0.4% increase in unemployment. Otherwise, an overall job loss of 49,000 jobs would account for a 0.0004% increase in a market of 138 million workers.

Why have these new job seekers found it difficult to get jobs? One reason is that Congress made jobs costlier just in time for this economic slowdown. Congress raised the minimum wage last year by seventy cents an hour, from $5.15 to $5.85. It will rise again in July to $6.55 an hour, and next year will hit $7.25 per hour. That makes entry-level labor as much as 27% more expensive this summer, when consumers have already slowed down their spending. The natural loss of work from the slowdown amplifies the effect of the minimum-wage increase, because businesses now cannot afford to raise prices to maintain their entry-level positions.

Obama's battlecry of "continuing the failed economic policies of George Bush" is nothing but a fallacy backed up by about as much intellectual heft as anyone can find on this poseur's resume.

Anyone who blames the Bush tax cuts for the jobs numbers is either ignorant, purposely dihonest, or perhaps a little of both.

The real story here is unemployment among entry-level workers to the employment system. In summer, teenagers and college students enter the marketplace looking for seasonal and part-time work. This accounts for the significant rise in job-seekers and the 0.4% increase in unemployment. Otherwise, an overall job loss of 49,000 jobs would account for a 0.0004% increase in a market of 138 million workers.

Why have these new job seekers found it difficult to get jobs? One reason is that Congress made jobs costlier just in time for this economic slowdown. Congress raised the minimum wage last year by seventy cents an hour, from $5.15 to $5.85. It will rise again in July to $6.55 an hour, and next year will hit $7.25 per hour. That makes entry-level labor as much as 27% more expensive this summer, when consumers have already slowed down their spending. The natural loss of work from the slowdown amplifies the effect of the minimum-wage increase, because businesses now cannot afford to raise prices to maintain their entry-level positions.

Obama's battlecry of "continuing the failed economic policies of George Bush" is nothing but a fallacy backed up by about as much intellectual heft as anyone can find on this poseur's resume.

wow... skmj, exactly where are you typing these posts from... Pluto? You appear to know virtually nothing about what has transpired here politically or economically for decades. Good move using the verbiage "hang Obama"... that will lend to your credibility.

Anyone... and I mean anyone who can say with a straight face that Bush has done well for our country, the current problems are steeped in Democratic influence and John McCain offers significant change.... is clinically insane.

So true Bones!

One correction however: Abe Lincoln was a Liberal! His main position was that of an abolitionist, which today the republicals would call a "tree-hugger." The republical party stopped being the party of Lincoln the moment Herbert Hoover was nominated. By the way... There's another president with the same old republical failed economic policies.

And shamrock's totally on the mark too... It's the typical republical delusional insanity that gave us Hoover's Great Depression, Eisenhower's TWO massive recessions, Reagan's nearly two year recession, the Bush I recession, and both of Curious George's recessions (including the present one).

Both are wrong, I like the tax cuts and oil prices were high when the republicans were in control of congress. Mostly because of the war. BUT since the democrats have taken control of congress in two years the gas prices have nearly doubled in half the time the republicans were in control. Now that the oil and fuel is up as high as it is, it is effecting businesses and people. WHY? democrats... They lead the charge everytime we want to try alternate sources. When it came to wind power off cape cod Kennedy and Kerry yelled not in my back yard. When it came to drilling in Alaska, Kasinich and Pelosi yelled it will hurt some goat no one has seen for 200 years. Of course now we have the whole of congress insisting we help all these people who have foreclosures. I feel bad for these people but helping these people devalues the dollar which adds to the cost of a barrel of oil.
Let the market work out the forclosures and hopefully next time people wont be so stupid or greedy. I don't feel I should have to give up my tax cut to help some fool who bought a house he knew right well he couldn't afford. This time we have no choice for president but at the end of the day a republican is always better. As for the deficit, take away the war, and the 43 natural disasters not including 9/11 that occured in the last 7 1/2 years and the deficit would be a 1/4 of what it is. Another parting thought about energy costs, The dems are doing it on purpose because if they can drive prices high enough and with the media's help, keep saying its George Bush's fault they hope to gain full majority in congress and executive branch. People need to remember it's congress who regulates and controls the purse strings. Since democrats have taken control in two years the spending has been more and fast not less

Will Obama admit he is a Socialist and wants to move money from the Middle class and the Upper Class and give it to the Lower Class? He will penalize those of us who obtain some part of the American Dream.

I don't know about anyone else but I'm just about ready to tap my 401K to make things meet. That means in addition to the penalties. I will have to pay on captial gains. If Hussien Obahma gets his way I'll be getting hammered. I'm not rich by any means, so for those in the same boat, think about how good you will feel when Obahma bends you over and says "give, you can afford it" when your cashing in your 401K or your online trading account that has a few skimpy dollars in it. Just to help pay of some bills, student loans because Sallie Mae is saying "cry me a river" when they are calling 3 -4 -5 times a day.

Former Senator, Phil Gramm, Texas (oil companies) McCain's primacy financial advisor was a major contributor to the current financial crisis.

Gasoline Prices
"In the long term, gasoline prices will soon continue their rapid rise, because those prices have little relationship to supply/demand factors (and) are being manipulated upward by energy traders," he said.
http://www.canada.com/montrealgazette/news/business/story.html?id=ecb962b7-7837-42f8-ad2c-f201d1a0f6bd

"In the long term, gasoline prices will soon continue their rapid rise, because those prices have little relationship to supply/demand factors (and) are being manipulated upward by energy traders," he said.

Foreclosure Phil
Years before Phil Gramm was a McCain campaign adviser and a lobbyist for a Swiss bank at the center of the housing credit crisis, he pulled a sly maneuver in the Senate that helped create today's subprime meltdown."
http://www.commondreams.org/archive/2008/05/29/9274

Phil Gramm, Bill Clinton, and the Sub-Prime Financial Mess
Listen to Michael Greenberger on NPR’s Fresh Air http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=89338743

How McCain's Top Economic Adviser Helped Create Subprime Meltdown
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2008/05/29/how-mccains-economic-advi_n_104054.html

Bear Stearns, Housing Subprime, Enron, Gas Prices - Former Senator Phil Gramm
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/03/23/business/23how.html?pagewanted=print

Something fishy is going on about gas prices.Isn't it fitting that this happen right now in the midst of election campaign and promises.I wouldn't be surprise if this is the democrats gang are behind this.

Theoretically, there are positive aspects of tax breaks as well as the republicans idea of smaller government. The former, if distributed evenly amongst all classes would mean more money into the economy, the latter making government cost less and giving businesses more freedom to compete. Unfortunately what is true in theory does not always translate to reality. First the republicans tax breaks usually go to big business and not the middle class. Of course there's the drip down idea. If their expenses are reduced they can compete better and pass the savings to the consumer. However, if the can see their way clear to keeping this realized profit and not passing it on, many times, but not all, that's what they'll do. Which, brings us to big vs small government. There's a lot to be said for small IF businesses would not take greedy advantage of their new freedoms as a function of this, but all too often they will! Why? it's a new concept called human nature! We know this because we are all tempted at times to take advantage for exhorbitant monetary gain. Some do and some don't, but there's certainly enough that do to warrant overseeing. Business needs governmental supervision, laws, etc so even with the pitfalls (e.g., government waste) it's the best we can do. Small government with little government regulations just will not work economically and also safety wise and health wise. Yes there are flaws with big government, but it's safter than the conservative idea of the smaller the better.

Ever wonder why there are so many liberals teaching at colleges and universities?
It's because liberals are always looking for better ideas and are attracted to the learning and research that goes on at these institutions. They have wacky ideas like while pure capitalism works it has to be modified so that there exists a minimum of living conditions for all, independent of their capabilities. Like health care, a roof over their heads, basic food, etc. Of course, one might object to paying for others. It depends on your philosophy. If you look at others with just a little of the way you look at your family (kids, parents, etc), you are willing to sacrifice somehting, not too much, for those other americans less fortunate than you. But, as some of the extreme right might say, "Just another bleeding heart liberal!"

Here's something interesting about history and so true:

Humans originally existed as members of small bands of nomadic hunters/gatherers. They lived on deer in the mountains during the summer and would go to the coast and live on fish and lobster in the winter.

The two most important events in all of history were the invention of beer and the invention of the wheel. The wheel was invented to get man to the beer. These were the foundation of modern civilization and together were the catalyst for the splitting of humanity into two distinct subgroups:

1. Liberals, and
2. Conservatives.

Once beer was discovered, it required grain and that was the beginning of agriculture. Neither the glass bottle nor aluminum can were invented yet, so while our early humans were sitting around waiting for them to be invented, they just stayed close to the brewery. That's how villages were formed.

Some men spent their days tracking and killing animals to B-B-Q at night while they were drinking beer. This was the beginning of what is known as the Conservative movement.

Other men who were weaker and less skilled at hunting learned to live off the conservatives by showing up for the nightly B-B-Q's and doing the sewing, fetching, and hair dressing. This was the beginning of the Liberal movement.

Some of these liberal men eventually evolved into women. The rest became known as girlie-men. Some noteworthy liberal achievements include the domestication of cats, the invention of group therapy, group hugs, and the concept of Democratic voting to decide how to divide the meat and beer that conservatives provided.

Over the years conservatives came to be symbolized by the largest, most powerful land animal on earth, the elephant. Liberals are symbolized by the jackass.

Modern liberals like imported beer (with lime added), but most prefer white wine or imported bottled water. They eat raw fish but like their beef well done. Sushi, tofu, and French food are standard liberal fare. Another interesting evolutionary side note: most of their women have higher testosterone levels than their men. Most social workers, personal injury attorneys, journalists, dreamers in Hollywood and group therapists are liberals. Liberals invented the designated hitter rule because it wasn't fair to make the pitcher also bat.

Conservatives drink domestic beer, mostly Bud. They eat red meat and still provide for their women. Conservatives are big-game hunters, rodeo cowboys, lumberjacks, construction workers, firemen, medical doctors, police officers, corporate executives, athletes, Marines, airline pilots and generally anyone who works productively. Conservatives who own companies hire other conservatives who want to work for a living.

Liberals produce little or nothing. They like to govern the producers and decide what to do with the production. Liberals believe Europeans are more enlightened than Americans. That is why most of the liberals remained in Europe when conservatives were coming to America . They crept in after the Wild West was tamed and created a business of trying to get more for nothing.

Rick forgets that liberals are the ones who invented beer, the wheel, agriculture, E=MC^2, and the medication he takes, ...