Ad tells Obama: No more blank checks

The conservative group Crossroads GPS began running it’s latest ad on Friday, “No More Blank Checks”. The ad ends by directing viewers to a No More Blank Checks web site, which contains an excellent collection of information on President Obama’s detrimental effect on the economy.

 

Background on Crossroads GPS (and American Crossroads)

The Wall Street Journal ran an article in March 2011 describing Crossroads GPS and its sister organization American Crossroads: “founded last year with the help of Republicans Karl Rove and Ed Gillespie have set a goal of raising $120 million in the effort to defeat President Barack Obama, win a GOP majority in the Senate and protect the party’s grip on the House in the 2012 election.”

Crossroads GPS and American Crossroads helped conservatives reach parity in the 2010 elections with labor unions and other Democratic-leaning groups (like MoveOn.org) that for years had led in campaign fund raising. Crossroads GPS and American Crossroads raised $71 million in 2010, second to the $90 million spent by just one of the public employee unions, AFSCME.

 

Post to Twitter Post to Facebook Post to LinkedIn Post to Reddit

Posted by at 07:27 | Posted in 2012 Election, Economy | 102 Comments |Email This Post Email This Post |Print This Post Print This Post
  • Bob Clark

    The Senate seems in reach because something like 22 Democrat Senators are up for re-election and only 6 to 8 GOP Senators are up for re-election (if I recall correctly).  2012 is Big.  Mostly because the Supreme Court tilts 5 to 4 conservative currently, and Kennedy and Thomas (conservatives picked decades ago) aren’t getting any younger.  It would be nice to get Bama out of the big house but if this should not happen, it is critical to win back the Senate to block lib nominees to the High Court.

    • Eagle

       This to me seems to be the main problem with the USA nowadays. Its all about the party,power grabbing and ego’s and not what is best for the country but ones team errr i mean party.

       As dire as things are in this country and will be, its all about the Donkey & the Elephant and not the eagle! If you all would try being Americans first and not politically affiliated grandstanders, you just might remember you have more in common than you thought! Country first, party second!!!

      • Hemmings Clifford

        You hit right on the head.

    • Hemmings Clifford

      ITS never gonna happen the gop is to radical for prime time and u knw it.

  • Founding Fathers

    Where was this group’s ads about the blank checks the Bush administration had in Afghanistan and Iraq, and the blank checks for companies like Blackwater and Haliburton?

    • just doing the math

      Remember, this is a conservative web site. It will always be the “liberals” fault.
      Clinton had a budget surplus (yes, he did raise taxes) that Bush junior managed
      to wipe out by lowering taxes, and like you said by the blank checks written for wars that seem to have no end. Yes, 2012 is big. I won’t be voting GOP. The GOP has no concept of shared sacrifice. It is about “I got mine so the heck with you”

      • R Johnson

        Where can i PICK UP MIND FROM YOU ?

    • Ronglynn

      The group did not exist during Bush’s Administration.

      • Founding Fathers

        Proving my point.

        When Bush was spending like a drunken sailor (and, earlier, when Reagan was spending like a drunken sailor) to enrich his cronies, there was barely a peep out of the right.

        With Obama spending money to help clean up the mess created by 8 years of Bush, the right wants to clamp down on spending.

        Hypocrites.

        • american

          because obama has spent more than bush and reagan combined

          • David Appell

            Utterly false. So obviously wrong this can only be called a lie.

          • Founding Fathers

            Even if you count the first year of an administration as belonging to that administration, “american”‘s claim is false.

            On January 20th, 2001, total federal debt was $5.7 trillion. 8 years later, when Bush left office, it was $10.6 trillion, or $4.9 trillion higher.

            The current total federal debt is $14.3 trillion, so it has increased $3.7 trillion during Obama’s term of office.

            Bear in mind that Bush inherited a budget with little or no deficit, and Obama inherited an economic disaster.

            By the way, the total federal debt when Reagan took office was under $1 trillion, and was over $2.6 trillion when he left (and Bush I added another $1.4 trillion or so).

            As a percentage, RWR is the modern champ of increasing the national debt.

          • Hemmings Clifford

            TO bail us out  of a hole bush left us in. It takes a dem to clean up the mess

          • HOMER

            Bush left over ten trillion dollars in debt while Obama has spent  a little over three trillion dollars of the fourteen trillion dollars of debt. The debt ceiling was raised seven times for Bush totaling fourteen trillion dollars. Now you need to get a brain.

        • Ronglynn

          Why aren’t the Democrats screaming about Obama’s spending which is a whole lot more than Bush’s. Or it that Bush’s fault too.

          • David Appell

            Because many people think that government spending is needed to pull the US economy out of its slump — since there is insufficient consumer demand — and that now isn’t the time to attack the debt. (The time was in 2000 when there was a surplus, but instead your guy decided “it’s the people’s money” and reduced taxes of rich people.)

        • just doing the math

          Exactly.

    • Ronglynn

      The group did not exist during Bush’s Administration.

    • Hemmings Clifford

      OR those bush taxes cut he gave with no thought of the future ,we cant trust the gop with our money.

  • HoboJoe

    He will never listen.

  • Stillhoping

    Remember, this is the first man to occupy the White House since Carter who actually cares about the earth and the less fortunate peoples on it.
    He is the best president ever.

    • Anonymous

      Stillhoping dummy? Your worthless joke of a President is going too be GONE after 2013.  He cares? For what dummy? Another book deal?
          

      • Hemmings Clifford

        U should aim ur anger at the right pres BUSH he was a real dummy.

    • Ronglynn

      That’s the best laugh I have had for a long while. Yes, he is the best president ever. He is greater than George Washington, Abraham Lincoln, and FDR all rolled together. Thank you God for sending Obama, Our Savior to us.

  • David Appell

    Where were these ads during the Bush administration, which saw a debt increase of $4.9 trillion (86%)??

    • Founding Fathers

      Or the Reagan administration, which saw the debt triple.

      • Ronglynn

        It does not matter. People have short memories. The voters will stick it to President Obama. Obama for the Debt he has ran up. It really has not helped and millions are out of work. Come Election Day, they will vote their pocketbooks and use President Obama as the scapegoat.

        • Founding Fathers

          I don’t know, we avoided another Great Depression, despite conditions being worse than at the start of the first one.

    • Ronglynn

      David: How much has the Debt increased during President Obama’s term? Please post the dollar amount when you find out. Thank, Ron

      • David Appell

        Since the day Obama was sworn in the debt has increased by $3.7 T (35%).

        But a president shouldn’t rightly be held responsible for a budget he inherits. If you assume that a president isn’t responsible for the first year of debt under his administration, but is responsible for the first year following his administration, then total debt under Bush was up $6.4 T (108%). For Obama, so far, up $2.0 T (16%)

        Federal deficit in the last 3 months is only $79 B.In the last 6 months, down to $327 B.

        • Ronglynn

          Obama is a not finished blowing money.

          • valley person

            Nor is Congress apparently, and it is they who have the power of the purse, not Obama. 

  • Rupert in Springfield

    This is a great ad because it hits home. Most people are worried about the economy and our country, but if you have kids you are scared to death for them. This is a message a lot of parents will identify with.

    The other thing that hits home is the retirement angle. I think in the back of their minds, many are beginning to worry if the entire concept of retirement will be taken as less of a given for most people as time goes on. This is a huge part of why we see such antipathy to government worker unions generous benefits packages. People are asking themselves – will I have to work until Im 70 so these guys can continue to retire in their 50’s?

    Obama’s spending is indefensible, the country knows it and you better belive the left knows it. Thats why they dont even bother to defend it anymore. A stimulus plan that even if you believe it produced jobs, did so at a cost of $278k per job according to Obamas own people, the chuckling about “woops, no shovel ready jobs”, and lots of time on the golf course don’t look good to the American people. “But what about Bush?” appears even more inane. Blaming Bush isn’t an economic plan. It hasn’t produced jobs in 2.5 years and, if thats the extent of the Democratic defense, will likely march a Republican straight into the White House next election.

    • David Appell

      The quoted jobs cost number is wrong.

      It takes the a plan that will extend over several years, creating many contracts and millions of jobs each year, and dividing it by the jobs created in just one of those years. It also ignores all the money that will be spend on materials, services, etc. Also, $300B of the stimulus went to tax relief.

    • David Appell

      Noticeably, the ad gives no reason to think that reducing the federal deficit now will create jobs or improve worker’s benefits. That’s because it won’t, and there is not even a theory hinting that it might. 

      It will instead eliminate a large spender (the govt) at a time when the economy’s problems are from a lack of demand. Reducing federal spending now will reduce demand even further and push the economy even further into a hole. 

      Republicans know this–economists from all over have been saying it. But they don’t care about the deficit, as witnessed by their utter lack of concern over it during the Bush administration (and the Bush 1 administration, and the Reagan administration). They are using the economic crisis as an craven excuse to cut the safety net, eliminate programs that go back to FDR, and further enrich their puppeteers.  

      Debt increase
      during Bush II: $4.90 trillion (+86%)

      • Rupert in Springfield.

        So your campaign strategy would be to keep running up the debt at the same clip you guys have for the last two years?

        That’s your plan?

        Good luck with that one.

        • David Appell

          I don’t know about campaign strategies, or have much faith in the intelligence of the average American voter, but yes, the plan IMO should be for more stimulus. That’s what solved the Great Depression — the Civilian Conservation Corps, etc, and the Mother of all Stimuli, WW II. Cutting the deficit now won’t increase demand one bit. 

          And by the way, governments have already been slashing jobs in the last year (https://krugman.blogs.nytimes.com/2011/07/08/austerity-usa/). The deficit has fallen too: to $79 B in the last 3 months, only only $327 B in the last 6 months. None of this has done anything for the economy. 

          Austerity does not work: See the UK today, or https://www.bis.org/events/conf110623/perotti.pdf, or https://www.imf.org/external/pubs/ft/wp/2011/wp11158.pdf

    • valley dude

      “but if you have kids you are scared to death for them.”

      Maybe you are. I’m not. I don’t make a habit of being scared to death unless there is something immediately threatening, like a bear entering my tent. But scaring people is god politics. Works for both sides.

      “People are asking themselves – will I have to work until Im 70 so these guys can continue to retire in their 50’s? ”

      People who ask that should ask themselves why they didn’t save more or invest better or gotten a better education or job. They shouldn’t begrudge others for their wise choices, which may have included agreeing to lower pay now for better retirement benefits later.

      “Obama’s spending is indefensible, the country knows it and you better belive the left knows it. ”

      A triple wrong statement. Congratulations.
      1) Its quite defensible. He has 2 wars still to manage, a stagnant economy to juice, and a whole lot of people reaching retirement age entitled to benefits previous Congresses and presidents agreed to.
      2) “The country” is not of one mind.
      3) “The left,” also not of one mind, generally is not opposed to current spending levels. And many on “the left” including yours truly, think current spending should be higher, not lower. Its clear the private sector has not yet recovered, inflation is flat, and interest rates are very low, making government borrowing nearly free. Read your Keynes.

      “even if you believe it produced jobs,”

      Its not a matter of “belief.” Its a matter of fact. Read the CBO analysis on this. And ask the next highway construction worker you see where his check came from.

      “did so at a cost of $278k per job according to Obamas own people”

      Nope. That deliberate misreading of the math was already debunked. Repeating a lie doesn’t make it true. stimulus funding paid for materials as well as labor, and much of it was in the form of tax cuts, not direct spending on projects to create jobs.

      “”woops, no shovel ready jobs”,”

      The facts are that there were 1,000 transportation projects underway by the summer of 09, 4,500 by September 2009 and 8,000 by February 2010. Currently there are about 14,000 transportation projects being build with
      money from the stimulus. So while it took longer to fully ramp up than Obama had hoped, there were in fact shovel ready projects.

      “Blaming Bush isn’t an economic plan. ”

      No, but its a reminder that the other guys made the mess, and their current prescriptions are for more of what caused it in the first place.

      “will likely march a Republican straight into the White House next election”

      As the song goes, “Expectations we have, will lead down that path where that devil discouragement lives.”

      Its a long way to November 2012. And Republicans appear poised to nominate either a corporate poster boy for laying people off or one of several wing nuts. You will need more than a stagnant economy to elect a Republican next year.

       

       

      • Rupert in Springfield

        >People who ask that should ask themselves why they didn’t save more or invest better or gotten a better education or job.

        Good, so if you ever, and I mean ever, rail against privatizing SS I will remind you of this little lapse.

        • valley dude

          What does privatizing SSI have to do with it? SSI is a backstop, not a full retirement plan. It provides about 40% of ones wage income. Most people will want more than that when they hit retirement, so need to invest in a pension or 401K. This is not exactly news. Those who rely entirely on SSI  either had few opportunities, poor education, or did not plan ahead. None of that argues for privatizing SSI. In fact it argues for the opposite since SSI is the only secure income most will get.

          The point you avoid is that government workers made a choice of a job that has a good pension. Others chose careers with lesser pensions. Envying one group for their choice is just sour grapes.

          • Ronglynn

            I made my choice with PERS and did I ever hit the jackpot. And I am not joking as I really did. It was all thanks due to a series of stupid decisions made by both Democrat and Republican politicans. I love all those guys now that I am retired. My wife gets a PERS check, too.

          • just doing the math

            It is like I said, when I see comments posted by people such as yourself.
            “Now that I got mine, heck with you” kind of mentality is what will get
            Obama re-elected. And you don’t do the conservative movement any justice
            by your comments. I just print and show folks, and then I say, this is how
            the right wing people think. This is proof, this is how they think, it is about
            what I have and what you do not have and I am going brag and be in your
            face. Thanks for the help and giving us moderates the evidence we need
            into the mindset of the right wing.

            Cheers.

          • LadyLibra

            “either had few opportunities, poor education, or did not plan ahead”
            Vally Dude, I actually agree with you a little, but what about those who become disabled before that ripe old age of (whatever the retirement age is)? You can’t collect life insurance (because your not dead), you can’t work (because your sick/injured) those people have to live off of just what SSID gives them. Now there are a few people like me who worked for a private company (thank god) that offered disability insurance and that I am sick enough to actually get it. So my high priced degree and the 6 IT certifications can’t do a darn thing for me since I’m sick. So opportunity is more a culprit than saying people just did not plan ahead JMHO

          • valley dude

            Good point. SSI is also a disability backstop, not just a retirement backstop.

        • just doing the math

          I have an answer to that one.

          Have you not been reading that those kids coming out of college with a “better
          education” are now saddled with huge debt, and cannot find a job? You make no sense! It does not matter if you have an advance degree, the jobs are not there.
          And, if our future generation cannot find a job with that “better education” how are they suppose to pay off their huge education debts AND save for retirement?

          And, I don’t know if you remember, those that were responsible and saved in their 401’s took a huge financial hit to their portfolios during the meltdown, with all investments taking a hit. How are they suppose to retire?

      • Ronglynn

        Please answer this question” Is there any ceiling to how much fiat money can be created before hyper-inflation kicks in? Secondly: Can we just create more and more dollars year after year? Please educate us.

      • Ronglynn

        Please answer this question” Is there any ceiling to how much fiat money can be created before hyper-inflation kicks in? Secondly: Can we just create more and more dollars year after year? Please educate us.

        • Founding Fathers

          We had the deficits > 15% for four years running during the Reagan administration, yet we had relatively low rates of inflation. If deficits caused inflation, THAT’S when we would have had hyperinflation.

        • David Appell

          QE isn’t the same as printing money — it’s more directed. Nor is hyperinflation of concern now — deflation is, as we’re in a liquidity trap. Inflation is currently running at about 3.5%/yr, up about 1 percentage point from the QEs. This slight increase in inflation is supposed to be good thing, stimulating demand.

        • valley dude

          “Is there any ceiling to how much fiat money can be created before hyper-inflation kicks in?”

          Sure there is. But no one knows what the ceiling might be. The amount of money in circulation is related to the productivity of the economy, which is dynamic, not static. Too little money in circulation results in a too slow economy, and too much results in a heated economy. Pick a number today and you will be wrong tomorrow. The Feds monitor money supply, interest rates, unemployment, and inflation. When unemployment is high, as it is now, and inflation is low, as it is now, and interest rates are at rock bottom, as they are now, they conclude correctly that at the moment there is too little money circulating to bring unemployment down. So they turn the money spigot up and watch what happens. Then they adjust. They have plenty of opportunity to keep adjusting and head off hyper inflation well before it ever sets in.  

          “Can we just create more and more dollars year after year? ”

          Yes, we can create more and more electronic or paper dollars year upon year as long as productivity keeps increasing. If productivity goes south, then more dollars will eventually become inflationary. If people keep jamming money under mattresses, then creating more money is sensible.

          “Please educate us. ”
          Sorry, I’m not getting paid enough here for that thankless task. Take econ 101 at any local community college, or save the tuition and just buy the textbook and read it.  You can even check one out of your local library. Macro economics is about managing the money supply to get or maintain desirable aggregate outcomes.

  • David Appell

    > Blaming Bush isn’t an economic plan.

    No, it’s not a plan, but it is a fact. Bush’s spending, irresponsible tax cuts, wanton wars and regulatory failures created one of the worst economic crises in our country’s history. It will take years and years to climb out of it, if we ever can. His administration cratered the economy at a time when the country was on an historical brink and the rest of the world is gearing up for a new century, and it shoved the US towards a probable permanent decline. Bush 2 will clearly be widely seen as one of the worst presidents in American history. In the meantime there will be lots more agony and suffering as voters thrash about for someone–anyone–to blame for the theft of what America once was.

    • Rupert in Springfield

      Doesn’t matter if it’s a fact or not – That’s what you guys don’t get.

      No one cares about Bush anymore. Obama was elected to solve problems, not complain about them.

      No one buys your logic. Try and muster up some semblance of a scientific approach to this:

      Even is we accept your premise – That Bush represented some ultimate incarnation of evil on earth, is responsible for all things bad, and his spending was horrible, every dime of it wasted – OK? got it? even if we accept that as totally true – that in no way forms a basis that somehow now it is the Democrats turn to spend with wild abandon and if all Bush’s spending was bad, somehow all of Obamas spending is now good. I mean it just doesn’t make sense.

      Got it now?  Bush being bad for spending a lot doesnt make your guy good for spending even more. No one is buying that argument. No one ever did really. That’s why Obama was in trouble on the stimulus and health care from day one with the public.

      I was just doing the booth thing at Oregon Country Fair. Even the OCF crowd have largely given up the endless “it’s all Bush’s fault” puppet shows and music fests.

      When 50,000 drug addled hippies can finally give up the parades with Cheney as Satan and burning Bush in effigy, its time for the rest of the left to move on as well.

      Got it now? People aren’t buying that overspending now fixes overspending then.

      • valley dude

        “Doesn’t matter if it’s a fact or not – That’s what you guys don’t get.”

        That should be your theme song Rupert. Facts don’t matter. Global warming, economics, failed conservative administrations…its all just water under the bridge eh?

        You wish.

        “Even is we accept your premise – That Bush represented some ultimate incarnation of evil on earth…”

        Of course since no one said that, no one here has that premise. Bush was a failed president who implemented the entire wish list of conservatives. He cut taxes primarily on the rich on the premise this would stimulate the economy. It didn’t work. He conducted a beligerent, paranoid foreign policy that relied on teh military rather than diplomacy. It didn’t work. And he deregulated or ignored regulating industry, particularly the financial industry. That didn’t work out so well either.

        Instead of learning from these mistakes, you and your party want to double down and do even more of what got us into this mess. That will be Obama’s campaign. He can run and probably win on a mediocre economy because your side has no clue how to do anything any better.  All he has to do is remind the voters that every policy the opposition is advocating was already done under Bush junior. You need to hope memories are very short indeed.

        “Democrats turn to spend with wild abandon…”

        Only they aren’t doing that. Maintaining existing programs, like SSI and Medicare are not spending with wild abandon. Phasing slowly out of wars started by Bush is not spending with wild abandon, its acting responsibly. Domestic discretionary spending outside of emergency measures to stop the bleeding of the downturn has barely budged. Taxes have been cut to their lowest levels in 40 years. These are facts. Oh but wait….”doesn’t matter if its a fact or not.”

        How silly of us to think otherwise. 

        • Ronglynn

          Valley Person: You a smart person, but think about reality as how people operate in the General Public. You are absolutely right that facts do matter. The problem is perception. Too many of us do not really sort through the facts when we vote. If things are very negative such as a serious economic downturn, then people are going to be looking for someone to blame. Sure, President Bush did a crappy job, but he is long gone. By Election Day, if things don’t improve, President Obama willl get the blame for everything and the voters will take out their wrath on him. Fair or not, that is human nature.

          • valley dude

            The difference is whether we will have a so-so economy in 2012, or a failing one. And the difference is the public perception of who is responsible. While Obama may be the logical party, Republicans control the House, and they set the nations budget. If they want to run on cutting SSI and Medicare so that millionaires can keep their tax breaks, I’d say Obama will have an easy time getting re-elected in a so-so economy. In a really bad economy, he might still get re-elected if Republicans stick with that program. Its just not a majority program. Don’t confuse the Tea party with a majority of voters.

      • Ronglynn

        Rupert: You are right. Obama will get the blame for everything, even the stuff he did not do. By the time election day comes, people will be going, “George Who?”

      • LadyLibra

        The problem with your theory is that you want an immediate fix for a problem that took 8 years to create. It is akin to a new mother losing all of her baby weight when she has the baby? So not realistic! it took her 9 months to put it on and it’s going to take time to get rid of it. the “right” side wants us to believe in “the trickle down effect” that has not worked in the past so it will not work right now. The only other question I have is why do the “right” side continue to do the same thing but expect a different result. In school I was taught that if you don’t want the same results you have to try something different JMHO

        • just doing the math

          Because, that is the definition of insanity, doing the same thing
          over and over again and expecting different results.

    • Rupert in Springfield

      Doesn’t matter if it’s a fact or not – That’s what you guys don’t get.

      No one cares about Bush anymore. Obama was elected to solve problems, not complain about them.

      No one buys your logic. Try and muster up some semblance of a scientific approach to this:

      Even is we accept your premise – That Bush represented some ultimate incarnation of evil on earth, is responsible for all things bad, and his spending was horrible, every dime of it wasted – OK? got it? even if we accept that as totally true – that in no way forms a basis that somehow now it is the Democrats turn to spend with wild abandon and if all Bush’s spending was bad, somehow all of Obamas spending is now good. I mean it just doesn’t make sense.

      Got it now?  Bush being bad for spending a lot doesnt make your guy good for spending even more. No one is buying that argument. No one ever did really. That’s why Obama was in trouble on the stimulus and health care from day one with the public.

      I was just doing the booth thing at Oregon Country Fair. Even the OCF crowd have largely given up the endless “it’s all Bush’s fault” puppet shows and music fests.

      When 50,000 drug addled hippies can finally give up the parades with Cheney as Satan and burning Bush in effigy, its time for the rest of the left to move on as well.

      Got it now? People aren’t buying that overspending now fixes overspending then.

  • HoboJoe

    Just stop the spending. We don’t need even half of what these idiots “provide”.
    What utter nonsense.
    A bunch of trough-feeding deadbeats sucking at the teat of Uncle Sam.
    Sad.
    Very sad.

    • valley dude

      Yes, those old tea party dodderers need to learn to get by on less. 

      • Ronglynn

        But I can’t be out of money, I still have checks!

        • Founding Fathers

          Government out of my Medicare and Social Security!

          Government out of my FDIC!

          Government out of my police and fire departments!

          • american

            exactly thats what the government should do. they should learn to priviatize those operations to help create jobs. our FOUNDING FATHERS warned us about large governments

          • David Appell

            Government hiring of fireman and police doesn’t create jobs? Instead you would rather a private corporation do it, with their foremost concern being profits that they would gain by minimizing expenses such as labor? 

          • Founding Fathers

            Not only that, David, but they would only offer protection to those who had paid for it ahead of time. In other words, a protection racket.

  • 3H

    Now this is what Obama should be doing:

    Robert Reich

    It’s at least a plan that will put money into the hands of people who will spend it and start moving the economy.

    • just doing the math

      Seventh;
      Place a temporary moratorium on H-1B visas and similar visas until the
      employment picture significantly improves for those born and educated
      in the US. (sorry, the moderate in me).

      Eighth;
      Put some teeth and money into existing already in place work
      force training programs. They are not currently being funded to meet
      the needs of the long term unemployed.

      Ninth;
      Put some real serious teeth into the already in place age discrimmination
      laws, for both the younger and older worker. There is blatant abuse
      by employers targeting these age groups; a steep fine would do two
      things, generate short term money, and stop the pattern.

      Good ideas in the article, however, there is that GOP majority
      in the House, and they are simply resistant to any idea that helps,
      you know, what they like to fondly call us “The Ordinary American.”

  • Hemmigs Clifford

    How about nomore tax cuts.com. Please raise these damn taxes on yall rich sob asap.

  • SoberJohn

    This kind of ad is SO ignorant and so telling of the lies the Republicans tell America.  The taxes that Obama and others want are to tax the millionaires and billionaires that pay NO TAXES.  Get real, the middle class already is taxed at 34%, yet the fat cats do not want to pay any taxes.  STOP THE LYING and tell the TRUTH.  A flat tax is needed and will come one day when Americans realize the damage the Republicans have done over the last 14 years and how they want to continue to help the rich get richer at the expense of everyone else.  GET REAL!

  • Incognito24

    This comercial was so onesided and full of bull I almost threw up !! What a joke !! See this is what’s wrong with this country when disinformation is broadcasted to the uninformed people as facts.

    • wnd

      Not unlike hearing blowhard Dean soundoing off, eh, Pilgrimnito? 

  • Bvkarg

    Lies, Lies, Lies I’m changing my vote to Democrat because of this advertisement.
    I voted Republican in the past because of nominees on the Supreme Court &
    a terrorist attack, two wars, going from a surplus to a trillion dollar debt with bank
    bailouts later was it worth it?  Every time this ad airs I am more determined not to vote
    republican again

  • Campisi

    We r not paying for what Obama did, we are paying for Bush’s & Chaney’s blank check spending. It concerns I live surrounded by so many idiots who are so blind to the truth!

  • Guest

    Are ‘Conservative women’ as dumb as this ad portrays them to be?

  • Pbradshawmorrison

    This is just crap,  most americans were born at night,  but not last night!  

  • Em

    This ad is disgusting, I am not at all suprised Karl Rove is involved.  I just saw the ad and I had to know who was backing it because it was so obviously politically slanted.  I find it demeaning to the intelligence of Americans.  I think we need to go back to the drawing board altogether.  I am sick of all of it.  The government these days doesn’t care about people in the middle class,  why can’t we just admit this and move on.  

  • BindiGirl

    The ad is full of lies and misinformation typical of conservatives. If the average earning American (those earning less than $250,000/yr) believe any of the garbage spouted, you need to educate yourself about the party making EVERY effort in destroying the economy and the hard-working American AND small business owners. Whose taxes will be raised – NOT YOURS if you make less than $250,000/yr! Medicare cut? YUP – if the REPUBLICANS get their way. Wake up American – Republicans DO NOT have your best interests – or your grandchildrens interest – at heart. IT’s all about REVENUE for them…even some democrats! Can’t stand either party really.

  • Ronb

    are you STUPID, they Republicans and Tea Party want to take away all of your love one’s benefits, the RICH need to pay their fair share of taxes. Obama is a very GOOD president, it’s that Tea Party and Republicans that are trying to STOP him from doing what is right for the American citizens. This commercial is like the Tea Party and most Republicans full of sh****!
    STOP the HATE on President Obama!
    just a comment from a very concerned American citizen.

  • Pingback: Blue Coaster()

  • Pingback: stream movies()

  • Pingback: kangen water()

  • Pingback: get satellite tv()

  • Pingback: DIRECTV for your company()

  • Pingback: 3gp mobile porn()

  • Pingback: parking()

  • Pingback: stop parking()

  • Pingback: water ionizer loan()

  • Pingback: electrician apprentice()

  • Pingback: locksmiths lake zurich il()

  • Pingback: locksmith zachary()

  • Pingback: house blue()

  • Pingback: browse around this website()

  • Pingback: pay day loans()

  • Pingback: water ionizer payment plan()

  • Pingback: water ionizer()

  • Pingback: alkaline water()

  • Pingback: https://webkingz.camkingz.com/()

  • Pingback: read more()

Stay Tuned...

Stay up to date with the latest political news and commentary from Oregon Catalyst through daily email updates:

Prefer another subscription option? Subscribe to our RSS Feed, become a fan on Facebook, or follow us on Twitter.

Twitter Facebook

No Thanks (close this box)