Tom, thanks for the belligerent and casually sexist first post. Good example of where a lot of opposition to Warren is coming from.

Fortunately, as the real independents have learned more about Warren, her approval rating has only increased. And as voters actually look at Brown's record -- not whether he's 20% or 30% "independent," but the actual votes he's cast with the GOP and Wall Street and against jobs, women and the middle class -- his numbers have tanked. People can see that Brown's votes just don't back up his promises.

Voters are tuning in, and they're voting for their pocketbooks and their principles. That's why Warren has pulled ahead and it's why she's going to win in November.

How did those polls work out for Marsha Coakley ;)

"principles" -> like being for the middle class while sticking it to the children of the middle class (pad her pocket at the expense of 1 trillion $ in student debt)? or the poor little guys who were screwed by the large corps she "represented"? or ???

Alan, I didn't see Tom's statement as sexist in the least. Were she a man, we'd still be sick of his crying. Ms. Warren refusal to answer questions about her law pratice, are greatly concerning. More so than the Cheroke thing.

Dirk, page 1 of the Democrat playbook is to yell racism or sexism when you are being correctly challenged and have no answer.
I love her ad that says Brown has no proof Warren got special treatment for claiming Indian. Of course he doesn't. Harvard and the rest won't release the documents she signed. Brown should ask for an investigation into Harvard's receiving federal dollars. That is based on having a diverse faculty and they claimed she was one of those. So either Liz benefited or Harvard benefited. Where is Martha Coakley?

Of course the school "benefited" from hiring Elizabeth Warren. She's the foremost expert in her field, tremendously respected by students, colleagues and throughout the fields of consumer rights and bankruptcy law. The conservative Republican who hired her says race just didn't come into it. That's a message the birther crowd just refuses to hear.

Bob, thanks for the reminder about page 1: When Brown's staff led supporters in war whoops and the tomahawk chop, that was racist. Racist and stupid.

So all Atlanta Brave fans and Florida Seminoles fans and alumni are racist? Really? They do the chop all the time. Stupid? Yes. Racist? No.

Then why will he not release a copy of her application? So Harvard made up that she was American Indian? So Harvard made up that she was American Indian and certified to the federal government they were diverse because she had high cheek bones? You really believe that?
BTW - She was never the foremost anything.

Bob, I didn't call any sports fans racist. I called the decision to mock Warren with a racially loaded gesture racist. A decision by the same guys who injected race into this campaign in the first place. Or were they rooting for the Braves?

At least we agree it was stupid.

Here's a thought: Perhaps one reason the right wing is so captivated by the percentage of Warren's native american ancestry is that it's a chance to vent a lot of resentment about affirmative action without feeling like racist.

But two things keep getting in the way: First, the inconvenient fact that Elizabeth Warren didn't benefit from affirmative action; and second, the right wing's self-defeating tendency to act like racists even when they think they're not.

Alan, I have been accused of being a racist all my life by liberal pukes and black racists who knew nothing of me except I grew up in South Boston. People who actually know me (many close black friends) have never heard me utter a racist utterance in the 40+ years they have known me. I have friends of all races, religions and nationalities. Unlike the Democrats of today, I listened to MLK and I do not judge by color of skin but content of their character!

Your thought is wrong. It is the white guilt liberals that are trying to over compensate for their racism. I know many catholic democrats and they are some of the most closet racist people I hope to even come across. Look in the mirror and stop trying to project. The left has taken ANY disagreement about anything and twisted it into a racist or sexist attack. Nice strawman on affirmative action. I won't dignify it with a response.

Your assumptions on Warren benefiting are just that. Ask yourself this simple question... If Warren didn't self identify as Native American, where did Harvard get the idea of listing her as such? Did they just make it up? Someone did and they got large amounts of federal money because she was identified to the federal government as a Native American. I know lying is OK in Democrat circles but come on!

Warren should focus on what she did in the debate - focus on Browns voting record, the republican platform and how his record reflects him falling in line with the republican party on the "important" issues. It really is that simple because the actions speak for themselves. Likewise she should focus on her actions and what she intends to do.

One of my neighbors actually has a sign on their yard "Vote Democrat". That takes guts.. Lets add it up: 3 speakers of the House - indicted, how many grand juries are in session right now investigating our politicians? We used to have the best probation department in the country, but now - well not so much. And to find out how it was used as poltical dumping ground for relatives and friends, thats what a one party state does.

I'm afraid this state is still full of people that just for D, but I really think as the younger generations get to voting age, as time goes by we'll see that go away. I hope anyways.

Patricia, didn't you hear? It was because of 16 years of Republican Governors in a state where Republicans have 16% of the elected officials!

Only in Massachusetts Diana. RINO is the best a conservative can do in this state of Moonbats that vote for a murderer and philanderer for 40+ years because of his last name and continue to vote lock, stock and barrel for the party that had 3 consecutive Speakers indicted and convicted!
If you look at Brownie's record, it is pretty much an independent vote similar to Joe Lieberman. He sides with the Republican's on a majority of votes but unlike the rest of the Massachusetts Congressional delegation he goes against party and votes what he believes is best.
It is why in only 2 years, he has been able to get authored legislation passed in a Democratically controlled Senate. Look at some of our House members who have never gotten anything passed even when the Democrats controlled both houses. Take off your D blinders and you may notice he is much more main stream than Warren or any other Massachusetts delegate to the US Congress. Which, for clear thinkers, is a good thing because it is the only way they will break the stalemate in DC.

well said Bob, moonbats are circling over head, hold onto your scalp! I am with you!

I'm fully familiar with Brown's record. I disapprove.

But I do love that I can come here for the sort of respectful discussion of issues that can only be had with people who use words like "lemmings," "moonbats" and "facists." It certainly lends intellectual heft to your arguments.

Diana, but you are a lemming. In the voter ID discussion all you kept repeating was that voter ID requirements are unconstitutional. They are not and never have been yet you keep spouting the democrat mantra. I would love to have a fact based adult debate. The Massachusetts DNC's strategy is "to keep saying Brown is a Republican". So what? Everyone knows he is a Republican. Explain to us how Liz Warren would be better. Stop with the "because I will fight for you" trash too. Tell us in detail. The fact is that Warren is as qualified to be Senator as Obama was to be POTUS and look what that got us!

Diana, I totally agree. Have you noticed how Scott Brown, always refers to himself, as Independent? Did he change his political affiliation in the middle of the campaign?

Why do people who don't know what words mean get to vote?

OK, he cancels out the vote of this person.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=tpAOwJvTOio

Is that you mittens? We know you don't want to get caught again talkin bad about the 47%!

why are people who ignore lies from politicians allowed to vote?

for #3 (dictatorial ), look-up our dear leaders czars, going around congress to get his way on immigrants, lack of transparency (which was a HUGE promise; "bills will be on-line for x number of days before being voted on"; not even all in congress had time to read the > 2000 page Mr 0 care bill), ...

can't you even somewhat agree transparency is a BROKEN promise?

Oh and Mrs W mad it clear (5 or 6 times?) that she hopes to get in on Mr 0's coat tails.

Fascism: A philosophy or system of government that advocates or exercises a dictatorship OF the extreme right,typically through the merging of state and business leadership,together with an ideology of belligerent nationalism.
Socialism:A social system in which the producers possess both political POWER and the means of producing and distributing goods.
Capitalism: An economic system characterized by freedom of the market with increasing concentration of private and corporate ownership of production and distribution means,proportionate to increasing accumulation and reinvestment of profits.
Diana: never go into a battle of wits unarmed. Herein endeth the lesson. Your typical Liberal prose shines through.You can always tell a liberal...you just can't tell them much.

Mark, thanks for clearing that up. The liberal mind, twist the story so it fits their agenda.
As for you diana, How long have you lived in malden?
And what private school did you attend on the south shore?

fred, I've lived in Malden for thirty years, and went to Malden High. Seem to have gotten a little bit more out of it than you did, though.

mark, the only lesson I've ever learned from the likes of you is that nothing I say is going to make any difference until the lithium kicks in and subdues your irrational rage. Have a nice day!

Oh Diana
I like you more and more every post. You remind me of an old dog i had. her name was Snarky.

Fascism is national socialism. Communism is international socialism. Notice the common word, socialism. Neither could be considered on the political Right in the American tradition. Conservatism, or what was commonly known as Classic Liberalism, is the furthest thing from Fascism. Fascism and Woodrow Wilson's Progressivism are much closer and share intellectual roots and common political philosophers and philosophies. Modern Liberalism is descended from Wilson's Progressivism. So who are the Fascists again?

"All within the state, nothing outside the state, nothing against the state." –Benito Mussolini

If you think THAT statement puts Fascism on the political Right, then you have no idea what Conservatism in America is all about.

If you want to learn something about the political Left in this country other than Leftist propaganda, I recommend you pick up "Liberal Fascism" by Jonah Goldberg. But then again you seem too comfortable in mindlessly following Dear Leader.

Kevin N, take a look at the Patriot Post.There you will see articles by some very talented,smart people.You'll see information not found in the lame-stream media.The (D)s want to scare you into voting for them so they can live like fat cats while their constituents are useless idiots.Try getting a real reply from Ed Markey sometime.I gave up.

Will the patriot post tell me the details of the republican tax plan? I would like to know which loopholes and deductions they plan to eliminate. Leading up to an election, they have suddenly stopped mentioning specifics and I find that scary.

haven't you heard Mr 0 state he'd like a crack at the tax code or are you just counting on him to do NOTHING more? imagine Mr 0, Harry and Nancy raiding your take home pay, I think Mitt is far more qualified

also the rates would be lowered and some deductions taken/modified, I would hope that after a certain income level the deductions you speak of would be phased out, but as you said that is all guessing/wishes (no matter the next president)

Vincent - Thank you for your response. Unfortunately, my vote will not be determined by who any Patch poster thinks is most qualified. I am interested in knowing the Republican plan for the tax deductions that are most valued by middle class American families. If they provide a platform that promises to keep them intact then I will support their candidates. I am not interested in labels and lessons on fascism or socialism. I do not care about who is native american or black or mormon. I do not care if gays get married and join the military. I care about the Republican plan to drastically increase the annual taxes paid by my family. They need to make it clear they will not if they want my vote.

OK, please educate us, what do you expect from Mr 0 on "annual taxes paid"? thanks

I did not think i was trying to offer any education, I am sincerely interested in a firm clarification by Scott Brown as to his stance on these two tax deductions. I expect my personal tax burden to remain the same under the current administration. I believe that a Republican president and congress would lead to higher taxes for me. This is probably reversed for individuals making over 250K per year which is unfortunate, but I would prefer that if taxes are raised on a group that it not be my group.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-wIfI2whjiM&feature=youtube_gdata_player

Kevin, I believe Mr. Romney plans on making the specifics clear AFTER he gets elected. I hope that helps.

Kevin,
this is recent:

http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2012-09-25/want-details-of-mitt-romney-s-tax-plan-just-listen-.html

lots of info to be read, watch out for the "studies" that make silly assumptions their intention is to worry folks and keep Mr 0 in the WH.

best of luck

Vincent - Thank you for that link. This is precisely what scares me.
"If you were expecting him to say he would ax the mortgage-interest deduction and the exclusion for employer-provided health care -- two of the costliest tax expenditures -- don't hold your breath. Romney intends to eliminate loopholes for certain classes, not certain classes of loopholes."
He did not say that he would ax the mortgage deduction but he has not ruled it out. The Republican party has long been on the fence onthis deduction and I fear that they are waiting on a big political victory before commiting. This is where Scott Brown becomes critical as any president would need congessional support. I will support Scott Brown if he makes it clear that he will protect the mortgage interest tax deduction regardless of any platform the Republican party takes.
Anyway, since politicians now focus on silly irrelevant social issues, I doubt I will get my answer before the election. I do appreciate your attempts to find some details.

I still don't get it, but that does not matter, it is your vote.

What scares me is that Mrs W hopes to get in on Mr 0's coat tails (along with her convenient "help the little guy" lies) and then vote 100% with the D agenda and the reality of the past 4 years do not support that:

- bad economic data still rolling in
- the fiscal cliff (Mr 0 has shown no leadership)
- the debt (Mr 0 has shown no leadership) "that is irresponsible, it's unpatriotic" ...
- foreign policy (soft power / reset in the middle east has been a failure) the wheels are coming off the Libya story, the problem is that the lame-street media is blocking for Mr 0
- the number of broken promises
- no senate budget
- Mr 0 is more a divider in chief than commander in chief (due to the need to scramble, lie, deceive and do anything needed to get 4 more years)
- ...

A full blown disaster!

Kevin, too late! The Democrats beat them to the child deduction. In 2008 I got a $2,000 deduction. Last year I got an $800 deduction. And no I am not in the 1%!

Kevin, did you see the debate and SB's thoughts on the mortgage interest deduction last night?

Mark, you propose an intriguing distinction. I'd like to hear more about the difference between dictatorships of the extreme right and dictatorships by the extreme right. Is one preferable to the other? Some examples might help.

We are waiting for your answer. Please answer Mark

As an independent who has been leaning right, it's people like you Mark that make me want to jump left. I find extremists on both sides repulsive, but I must say the far right seem to resort more towards name calling and holier than thou attitudes. Please be careful stepping down off of that high horse of yours.

My comment was directed to diana. Why do peole get to vote who do not work or pay taxes?

I dunno, fred. Why do people get to vote who collect the majority of their income from the government? Say... section 8 landlords?

And on a more serious note, because the Constitution says that they do. Why do you hate America, fred?

Who cares If she checked the Box or not and whats the big deal if she's an Indian or not. It's what she stands for thats what counts. Is that all they can find? Shows you how small minded Brown's team is. Brown's a snake and wants to wear 2 hats one for us and one for Washington. I'll take Warren any day!

Who cares if she checked the box? Seriously?? Personal integrity should be considered THE MOST IMPORTANT quality of our leaders, regardless of their political leanings. As much as I disagree with Obama's policies, I feel he at least has integrity. Warren does not, from what I have seen from and about her.

Sorry mark, I had better things to do yesterday than bang my head against the crazy, and your definitions of "fact" and "logic" are as suspect as any of the others you've offered.

Also, I'm not the one who's frothing at the mouth, dear. I worry about your blood pressure.

Oh Mark, don't let old snarky get to you. She seems like a nice lady, but she learned nothing at MHS. I was there before the liberals came in and tainted education. She must have got roped in with that liberal propoganda.

Wasn't Mitt on McCain's short list but deemed not worthy in favor of Sarah?

They left out believers in Supply Side Economics and Morton Friedman. But I would say this certainly reminds me of the extreme Republican party. Alas, what happened?

Sorry, if you don't like sources being cited, Kevin. I'll make sure to dumb things down for everyone next time. After all, anti-intellectualism is the prevailing factor in gaining control of the masses and I wouldn't want to get in the way of that.

Strizi, Facts? How about not obeying the Constitution? Obama should be hung for treason.Fast & Furious? Bowing down to foreign leaders? "I'll have more flexibility after the election". He and the rest of the Liberal useful idiots are out to bankrupt this country financially and morally.You morons have been drinking the Kool-Aid way too long.Try actually taking some personal responsibility.You and Diana sound like a couple of section 8 welfare slugs who think the working class owe you something.A couple of real Navin R.Johnsons! When did a liberal ever want facts? Facts get in the way of their arguement.

Mark, I hope you're out knocking on doors for Scott Brown and Mitt Romney every day. Your ugly hate would drive Karl Rove to vote against them, just to avoid agreeing with you on anything.

Mark, Mark, Mark...you still have offered nothing but name calling. You're so called definitions are a farce. You don't know how to debate. You only know how to yell. Bowing to leaders? That's a bullshit argument, Obama's done nothing that other's have not done. The Republicans are making a stink over F&F but the guy who's leading the way, Issa, is himself a crook. Interesting that you seem to know who I am. "The working class" owes me something? Are you the only one who works 60 hours a week drives a 1999 Oldsmobile and scrimps just to pay his bills. Get off your horse. You are just someone who yells for attention. Probably on welfare, (which is not a crime, nor actually a flaw in your character, I just thought I would make assumptions like you.)

You're sweet Ed, but don't worry on my account, I'm quite used to it. It seems to get especially virulent on the Liz Warren threads. Fear of smart women, and all. ;)

As a woman I say that women should not be treated differently in a debate -or anything for that matter. If she or you feel as a woman, she should be treated differently, I guess that would be sexist.

Get your own, ya socialist!

No mark, Fascism is where the State merges with the corporations, which this is quite different from Socialism (better read again about Socialism), and this is what the United States has been marching toward for about one century, and is getting to it exponentially.

Excuse me, but isn't Warren a Democrat, and isn't the prime role of the Democratic party to get Democratic candidates elected?

So just to clarify, as a woman and a single parent, you're concerned about Warren's "lack of integrity" regarding unspecified "issues," but not so much about Brown's lies in a currently running commercial where he claims to be pro-choice and support equal pay, in direct opposition to his actual votes on those issues. Peculiarly, you also prefer him precisely because you perceive him as being better at being insincere (shmoozing) than she is.

Okey dokey then.

To her supporters on this page,,. Do you make 350k for teaching one class? If so, then I guess she does have your back.. Warren whines about kids being crushed by student loans and debt.. but she is part of the problem! In order for Harvard to pay her salary,, guess where it comes from, those poor kids paying outrageous tuition. What about not disclosing that her daughter was head of the agency trying to lure people on special assistance to come one down and vote? And the fact she isn't even licensed to practice law in Massachusetts but yet her firm collect over 200k from the mesothelioma lawsuit. She is a walking contradiction with very poor judgement. She exhibits everything that is wrong with politiicians.. she doesn't think the rules apply to her. I'd like to know how an out of touch house flipper from Oklahoma that rakes in close to 1M a year has my best interest at heart.. or even gets it. The box will be checked.. for Scott Brown.

Apparently Warren isn't ENOUGH of a socialist for some people, who feel she should have accepted less than the usual compensation for her work.

And really... "lure people on special assistance to come one(sic) down and vote." Um... people on special assistance have the exact same right to vote that you do. You don't like it, find some other country.

Scott Brown's record of filibusters and anti-fair wage legislation is the reason he and his supporters want to turn this campaign into a fight over race. Who cares whether or not Elizabeth Warren looks Native American or not? Do Romney supporters *really* care how much Warren earns and are they going to vote for the candidate with the lowest income?

"...Brown's record includes votes against the American Jobs Act of 2011 (S. 1660, Senate Vote #160, 10/11/11), the Rebuild America Jobs Act (S. 1769, Senate Vote 195, 11/3/11), and the Teachers and First Responders Back to Work Act of 2011 (S.1723, Senate Vote 177, 10/20/11). These three bills amounted to an estimated 33,000 jobs at stake for the Commonwealth of Massachusetts, and Brown voted against them all."

http://www.golocalworcester.com/politics/

Mike, The American Jobs Act of 2011 was voted against by a large number of Senate Democrats. It was unworkable. They have since, with Brown's bi-partisan mind set, passed several sections that did help a little.
Rebuild America Jobs Act - Was defeated with 2 Democrats voting against while the same day a Republican jobs bill was voted down 47-53. I expect you are not happy with Kerry on that one?
Teachers and First Responders Back to Work Act - would saddle the local communities with a bill to pay or lay them off next year. With fewer people paying taxes, we cannot afford to add public payroll without cutting somewhere else. It is a simple issue of economics. It was a pander bill to rile up the unions and get them to intimidate as they always do.

well said Bob!

Then you should be very concerned indeed about Brown's dishonesty when he outright lies about supporting causes which he has actually voted against. I mean, whether or not you support choice or fair wages, it's about disclosure and honesty, right?

Diana, how about the President who support equal pay but pays women in his WH less than the men?

Brown is a pathetic excuse for a Republican. He insists he're really an 'independant'.

BUT, Warren is an out-and-out socialist. She has no CLUE about our military or foreign affairs. It is truly frightening to think of this agenda-driven zealot casting votes on cabinet secretaries, ambasadors, judges, treaties, - or laws in general.

She would become Harry Reid's most reliable rubber-stamp - just like Tsongas and McGovernment are rubber stamps for Pelosi.

I hope this helps change your mind.

https://www.therealwarren.com/?gclid=CJLu-L7b3bICFedxOgodlFsABQ

Hope this helps.
Scott Browns votes in the Senate have been equally split between Republican and Democrats, check the record.
Warren is to Deval Patrick as Patrick is to Warren. If you like what Deval Patrick has done to Mass then Warren is your candidate.

It seems you got the memo instructing Republicans to do or say anything to distract from Brown's voting record.

All I did was post his voting record. Why on earth would anyone have a problem with that?

Wow, and escapee from the Democratic Voter Plantation!?! Doing her OWN THINKING??!! Somebody call Jesse and Al!

Well, yeah.... you might have to do some reading. I can't do everything for you people.

I'm also not really understanding the point of the "I met a poor/black/female person who supports Romney." anecdotes. So? If you met a waitress who happened to support Obama you'd no doubt be attributing her poverty to her stupidity and sense of entitlement, but since she supports Romney she's a paragon of noble suffering. Please don't insult my intelligence.

He said she was working three jobs to make ends meet. I'm pretty sure that's the definition of "poor".

I find it fascinating that in your fevered mind all the failings of people who agree with you can be attributed to the government. Seriously, you should be studied or something.

What do you suppose a male Professor gets paid to teach one class at Harvard Business School? More or less that 350k?

For the particularly notable ones likely more, especially with Mitt Romney's generous donations to the school.

Warren taught at Harvard Law, incidentally.

Do you think the likely more notable ones checked a box to get more or did they get more because they where male?

Where do you get your numbers, Ron? The majority of job growth (~4.5 million) since this administration took office has been in the private sector. Net growth in the public sector has been negative.

@Ron

Typical: "don't bother me with facts, I've made up my mind." Here are some facts you obviously want to ignore (it's from the Bureau of Labor Statistics)

28 consecutive months of private-sector job gains nationally, dating back to March 2010.

4.2 million jobs created in the private-sector during this same period, an increase of 4 percent.

22 months during which the number of government jobs declined, out of the last 28 months, including losses of government jobs the last four months and 10 out of the last 11 months.

576,000: Government jobs lost during this period, a decline of 2.6 percent.

Made them up, just like Lying Liz Warren and Howard Dean. I guess it depends on what you call private sector and what those jobs are for.

Would any jobs that GM adds be considered Private or Federal and why won't the Obama Administration sell back the 25% of GM that it owns?

Are they includeing the jobs to help welfare recipients register to vote? Deval approved 300K for OT for Warren's daughter's group to make sure those on welfare who are not registered get the necessary paperwork so they can vote. No idea why those people haven't been able to do this to date but I'm sure there are valid reasons, might be similar to reasons that Lying Liz couldn't keep up on her license to practice law in NJ and TX. Unfortunately Bill Gavin has missed the date to get the proper paperwork to our military overseas so they have the same rights. Will our Military voters not have a voice in the upcoming elections?

I'd imagine we can all agree that voice of our Mass Military members overseas should be counted as well as those on welfare?

@Ron

So, smarty, if you think these statistics have been made up, why don't you provide us with your "real" statistics, including the sources (if there are any, that is, Rush, maybe?)?

Furthermore, why include in your answer a tirade about voter registration, which has nothing to do with the employment stats? Really, Ron, your a poor debater.

and your a pour grammaticist.

I don't believe the numbers because everyone knows that numbers you can make any point, you just need to massage them to move the needle until you get the result you want. I don't believe the numbers that the Obama Administration claims because I don't believe they are able to tell the truth about anything when the truth is not as beautiful as the "Eye Candy" that he is.

Your smart enough to know that numbers can make anything look good, I can tell you are. What happens when people fall off the unemployment scale? Are they factored into any of the figures that are reported anywhere? I heard (no way of knowing the actual numbers but I'm sure you do) that close to 80M Americans between 18-65 are without work (either can't find work, can't afford the pay cut compared to the assistance they're getting or have stopped looking). If your private sector job numbers are correct than over the past 28 months less than 4 have been created. With so many people looking is 4% good?

Sorry about the voter registration tirade. Didn't mean to offend. As long as Lying Liz's daughter can get voting information out at home first. The Military can wait. They love BO anyway.

I will agree with you about this Quasi, you are correct. I am a poor debater, I admit it, I didn’t realize that I was in a debate with the undisputed Mass Debating Champ. You wear and represent the belt well Quasi.

Like I said, Ron, first, stay on the topic (no need to be a great debater for that). Second, if you have numbers, any numbers, which can bring some light on the subject, good, and let us on them. Personally, I might learn that I was wrong, having been fooled (once more) by my Government.

q-modo: The job #s are spun more than a spiders web, they start counting when convenient, ...

Real #s are:

- unemployment then 7.8% now 8.3%
- median income then $54,983 now $50,964
- gasoline / gal then $1.85 now $3.87
- national debt then $10.6 trillion now > $16 trillion
- food stamps then 28 million now 47 million
- ssi/disability then 7.4 million now 8.7 million
- Mr 0-care STEALS $716 billion from Medicare
- no plan to balance our budget (dirty Harry has not passed a budget in over 3 years! where is the criticism there?)
- Mr 0 cannot build a consensus on matters that matter, he is a divider in chief
- foreign policy in the middle east is in flames, new chant for Joe B "OSL is dead and al-Qaeda is ALIVE", Russia waits to hear what hush hush extra flexibility Mr 0 will have after the election
- GDP was just adjusted down, the economy is almost in a STALL (0 growth), in a good recovery it should be going UP
- ...

Mr 0 is in over his head, there is NO proof he'd do any different/better over the next 4 years.

I look forward to your attempt at spinning these numbers/points.

This from Clinton News Network

http://news.yahoo.com/blogs/ticket/fact-check-4-5-million-jobs-created-under-175621036--election.html

However, CNN fact-checked that claim and found it to be "not the whole picture." Instead, CNN found that there has been a net increase of just 300,000 nonfarm payroll jobs since Obama took office. And if you count government jobs, there are actually 400,000 fewer people working today than in January 2009.

When Democrats use the 4.5 million jobs number, they're referring to jobs created after the economy bottomed out in January 2010, one year after Obama took office. That time frame excludes the worst job losses, which took place in 2009, and which many Democrats argue were the result of Bush policies.

CNN concludes: "The figure of 4.5 million jobs is accurate if you look at the most favorable period and category for the administration. But overall, there are still fewer people working now than when Obama took office at the height of the recession."

crickets, typical!

2nd that