Yea! We should get rid of that incombent Scott Brown. He's done nothing to bring in jobs either!

I'm having a very hard time visualizing Mr. Van Magness voting for Ms. Warren.

Hi Jason- Show me the numbers where a majority don't want Obama Care.
What is holding the economy back is the inaction from the majority of Republicans in the House of Representatives. Get rid of those incumbents, replacing them with Democrates and the economy has a chance to move forward- Nothing perplexing about that!!

George, see above for numbers. As for "inaction" from Republicans in the House. They've passed 2 budgets since the mid-term elections. Meanwhile your Democrat friends in the Senate have failed to even introduce a budget, let alone pass one, as they are REQUIRED BY LAW to do for the past 3 years. So who's really the inactive party?

Hi Karl
I thought it was up to the House of Representatives to propose Budgets? And when they propose JUNK the Senate rejects itI That's where the inactivity is- you have a bunch of incompetent people proposing Junk budgets. Time to get rid of them. They had their two years and did nothing for the country.

With regard to your table of polls on Obama Care the Rasmussen(sp?) one seems to predominate the negative list. I'll have to look further into his idology and method since he has only been doing polling for 10 years

The Senate is required to pass a budget resolution as their part of the budget process.

"The congressional budget process provides for the annual adoption of a concurrent
resolution on the budget to serve as a framework for the consideration of budgetary
legislation."

"Section 303(a) of the Budget Act prohibits any spending, revenue, or debt-limit
legislation for the upcoming fiscal year from being considered before a budget resolution has been adopted. The House, however, may consider annual appropriations bills after May 15 if a budget resolution has not been adopted by then."

www.senate.gov/reference/resources/pdf/98-472.pdf

E - It's up to you. But they get plenty of $$ from the Wall Street. So if I were you spend it on your wife or kids, dog or whatever!

Any time George, and my country's flag is up every day, because every day is Flag Day.

Hi Rob
Sorry to disappoint you, but no dissability check here. I have a nice corporate executive job that gives me the freedom to do pretty much what I want.
George

I love when guys like Rob make a feeble attempt at stereotyping. Classic stuff.

So who is the independent voice? Certainly not Tisie! He's running as a Republican and will vote 100% their way. Some choice we have. Have you checked if there is a REAL Independent running?

If you're looking for "an independent voice", you're going to want to look someplace other than Rick T., for he has always been in lockstep with his Republican clan.

Peter and George, do you even hear yourself? Lockstep with Republicans? He supports same-sex marriage, refused to sign Grover's tax pledge and is pro-choice. How on God's green earth is that in lockstep? Step away from the DNC talking points for a minute and you might actually bump into someone who can think on his own.

Hi E
I'll vote for Tierney because he's a Democrate and that's more in line with my views of politics. With regard to Tisei if he is truly an independent voice then he should run as an Independent !!

Karl
Not looking for someone who "thinks on there own" I want someone who knows what the people of Massachusetts and our District want and conforms to their desires.
I would like to thank you for the reference to the Budget process. As I suspected the do nothing Republicans in the House are holding the country hostage by not approving Obama's Budget. They have had months and months to review it and
have thus far not come to a reasonable resolution!

George,
Obama budget voted down in (Democrat-controlled) Senate 99-0
http://www.washingtontimes.com/blog/inside-politics/2012/may/16/obama-budget-defeated-99-0-senate/
"President Obama's budget suffered a second embarrassing defeat Wednesday, when senators voted 99-0 to reject it."

Obama budget fails 414-0 as Democrats bail
http://campaign2012.washingtonexaminer.com/blogs/beltway-confidential/obama-budget-fails-414-0-democrats-bail/452571
"In a rare show of unanimous bipartisanship, House Democrats and Republicans united in their opposition to President Obama's 2013 budget, which failed tonight with 414 votes against and zero in favor of the budget."

Not even Democrats voted for Obama's budget. That's how bad it was. Again, DNC talking points trip you up. Darn facts. They get you every time.

George, keep up with the facts/news before you shoot from the hips. Following is directly from the Washington Times, May 16, 2012:
"President Obama's budget suffered a second embarrassing defeat Wednesday, when senators voted 99-0 to reject it. Coupled with the House's rejection in March, 414-0, that means Mr. Obama's budget has failed to win a single vote in support this year". Got it...??? Not ONE VOTE, Republican OR DEMOCRAT....not even Nancy Pelosi or Harry Reid. Wow, must have been a real winner! In my opinion, sounds like lack of strong leadership from the White House when they cannot get even ONE vote from their liberal legislative friends. Just for the record, the PRESIDENT is the one who first submits a budget, contrary to your prior statement as well that Budgets start in the House. Looks like the "JUNK" budget (your words) you allude to started in the OBAMA WHITE HOUSE. Again, your facts are all wrong. Why am I responding to such nonsense ????? And no, I will not vote for "high cheekbones" Warren, who says "she will help Washington get it straight"....and she cannot even get her heritage straight? Hmmm......

E,
Instead of CNN talking points, Karl enlightens all of us uninformed folks with his Reading Republican Town Committee mantras and cut and pastes from such independent sources like redstate.com and FOX.
Here's one of Karl's classic nuggets from awhile back...he claims that teachers do in fact receive bonuses (much like some folks in the private sector), they are called stipends...Hellooo..........

George, Republicans are for something. You just don't agree with what they're for. For instance, this Republican is for limited government with Constitutionally-enumerated powers. For individual liberty AND responsibility. With that responsibility comes a moral obligation to help those in need, without government coercion (confiscatory, redistributive tax policies). For equality under the law. For equal opportunity, not government-mandated equal outcome. For a free market, free from cronyism, where millions of individuals make individual determinations on what and when to spend money on. Not government-controlled, centrally-planned economic/industrial policy that picks winners and losers.

Now we can debate these issues in good faith, or we can continue to snipe at each other (see: Peter), and use general banalities like "abuse the middle class" and "evil corporations". By all means, defend your positions and beliefs, as I will mine. But at least offer some substantiation for your positions and accusations.

And I will even concede to raising taxes...IF, and only IF, every penny goes to debt reduction. Every. Single. Penny. Because I don't want to leave $16 trillion in debt to my kids and their kids. Because it's the greatest generational theft in the history of the world. And it's also just morally repugnant to me as a parent.

Yes, he most certainly did. (That's why I can't stand him.)

However:
Jan. 20, 2009: $10,626,877,048,913
June 14, 2012: $15,784,249,348,462

So in 3 1/2 years the current president has increased the debt by roughly the same amount ($5 trillion) that the previous president did in 8 years.

Regardless of party affiliation, these numbers are barf-worthy. And squeezing more tax revenue out of the private sector will not make that number go down significantly. The federal government is spending too much money. Period. The argument should be about what gets cut and by how much.

So reform the tax code. Don't just raise the rate. Because GE will still end up paying zero in taxes.

I guess this is where we part: I favor a strong civil society that looks after itself, isn't mandated to buy insurance that we don't want or need, has local control over education, with a government that treats everyone as equal under the law, secures the borders defending our sovereignty, provides for the common defense and promotes (not provides) the general welfare. Our Founders' vision of a free society, not Bismarck's vision of a welfare state.

Hi George,
Wrong again. The House passed a 2013 Budget on March 28, 2012 by a margin of 228-191. It has never been brought up by the Senate (Harry Reid refuses to bring it up). And do not bring up the GE tax situation unless you know a lot about it. Don't just throw rocks.

So your plan for increasing the wealth of the nation is to tax more of that wealth away from those who earn it? Where will this money come into the country from, specifically? If you raise investment taxes you are discouraging the investment. Government investment in emerging technologies? Hello, Solyndra et al anyone?

Are you saying beaurocrats in Washington know best how to educate our children? When are people going to realize that not only do one-size-fits-all solutions never work, but they waste TONS of money!!!

George, we elected representatives to represent our interests, not to do "what's right for the people", but to do right for the country. Believe it or not there is a difference. The 2 million+ bureaucrats populating the federal government are not elected and are unaccountable to the people, hence the havoc perpetuated on our economy and personal property rights by the EPA.

As for "how you get there is local" is no longer local since the governor decided that we would follow the national common core standards (which were bankrolled by the Gates Foundation BTW). So Brandon is correct in saying the functionaries at the Department of Education in D.C. will now set the curriculum for Reading's school district. Indeed, we just had to approve a budget with additional funding for the district to revamp the curriculum to the national standards. Which seems kind of silly since Massachusetts students were leading the nation with our own state standards.