Hank Williams Jr. after his treatment because of his analogy about Boehner and Obama on the Fox & Friends show, which culminated in him fired by the NFL released this song called "Keep the Change".

I like it.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature...&v=cDvBmWOf8m0

He is such an outdated red neck, but the song is catchy.

Thanks Rich,

We need entertainers that tell the truth. I cannot wait until this nightmare called B. Hussein Obama hits the golf links permanently.

His correct title is President Obama.

Originally Posted by captg

His correct title is President Obama.

I agree, but you will never hear that from the hate-mongering right wingers here.

Originally Posted by DaleMN

I agree, but you will never hear that from the hate-mongering right wingers here.

I know. I'm guessing it because of the way you always say "President Bush" when you spoke of the former president.

Also, a very rare political post from my buddy CaptG

Don't be such a stranger G!!

Originally Posted by captg

His correct title is President Obama.

Yea, like we were so accustomed to hearing "President Bush." Obama will never be my president. He is clueless and the United States is like a ship without a rudder.

I cannot wait until this nightmare, the so called President B. Hussein Obama hits the golf links permanently...
is that better?

Originally Posted by KatzPajamas

I cannot wait until this nightmare, the so called President B. Hussein Obama hits the golf links permanently...
is that better?

I sure wish it was different, but the bunch of seekers and naysayers who had the debate in New Hampshire tonight sure didn't have any ideas that sounded particularly compelling. One guy had a 59-point plan that was sleep-producing even before one got to a couple dozen points. Another guy said he'll tell us his plans later this week. Another kept repeating "9-9-9", a proposal that the people who evaluate such plans say won't even come close to balancing the budget.

They must really think their "base" is really dumb...or not paying attention.

Originally Posted by Villages Kahuna

I sure wish it was different, but the bunch of seekers and naysayers who had the debate in New Hampshire tonight sure didn't have any ideas that sounded particularly compelling. One guy had a 59-point plan that was sleep-producing even before one got to a couple dozen points. Another guy said he'll tell us his plans later this week. Another kept repeating "9-9-9", a proposal that the people who evaluate such plans say won't even come close to balancing the budget.

They must really think their "base" is really dumb...or not paying attention.

OK, I'm guessing you don't respect Herman Cain. Why else would you derisively refer to him as "another guy". Anyone who wants to discredit Herman Cain's proposal will assume the worst will happen under his plan to devalue it's effectiveness. It's no secret that the mainstream media is not in his corner. (Brother, can you give me a big....."Duhhh!!";.......Amen)

Maybe you can listen to this other guy (I mean Herman Cain, himself) tell you about his plan himself. Maybe he'll inspire you.

http://video.foxbusiness.com/v/11989...ylist_id=87057

Originally Posted by Villages Kahuna

I sure wish it was different, but the bunch of seekers and naysayers who had the debate in New Hampshire tonight sure didn't have any ideas that sounded particularly compelling. One guy had a 59-point plan that was sleep-producing even before one got to a couple dozen points. Another guy said he'll tell us his plans later this week. Another kept repeating "9-9-9", a proposal that the people who evaluate such plans say won't even come close to balancing the budget.

They must really think their "base" is really dumb...or not paying attention.

Who are the people you refer to that evaluate such plans? Are they democrats? Socialists? Do they have names so that their neutrality, non-partisan judgement can be validated? Please.....please..... don't come back with your favorite source the New York Times.

Does the Obama administration using its Cloward-Piven strategy to bankrupt America and pave the way for pure socialism and redistribution of wealth through big government, appeal more to your ideology then what you pessimistically "wish was different?"

From Wikipedia: "The Cloward–Piven strategy is a political strategy outlined in 1966 by American sociologists and political activists Richard Cloward (1926–2001) and Frances Fox Piven (b. 1932) that called for overloading the U.S. public welfare system in order to precipitate a crisis that would lead to a replacement of the welfare system with a national system of "a guaranteed annual income and thus an end to poverty".

By the way, Francis Fox Piven is still in the mix. I saw her on prime time news speaking in support of the "Occupy Wall Street" group in all her Marxist glory. Incidentally, Communist Party USA also supports the "occupiers".

Originally Posted by cabo35

Who are the people you refer to that evaluate such plans? Are they democrats? Socialists? Do they have names so that their neutrality, non-partisan judgement can be validated?...

First, maybe we should consider the 9-9-9 plan itself. Cain has explained that he was not the author of the plan alone, but that he had consulted with some of the top economists in the country. But when pressed by Chris Wallace on Fox News, he refused to provide any names, citing the need to "protect their confidentiality".

When Cain was unable to fill in any detail on his plan, Wallace stated that his staff at Fox News had analyzed the plan and that "It looks to us like under your plan, corporations and the wealthy will pay considerably less than they currently do, and lower-income people particularly, the 45 percent, roughly, of Americans who don’t pay income tax now will end up paying a lot more.”

Grover Norquist's Americans For Tax Reform (ATR) has also been somewhat critical of the plan. Ryan Ellis, ATR’s tax policy director, said Cain’s plan to tax more on the consumption side was a positive step. But Ellis also worried that, if a new national sales tax was implemented, Democrats would try to use it to expand the scope of the federal government.

Analysts from Bloomberg Financial News said that, based on 2010 information, 9-9-9 would have brought in close to $2 trillion, compared to the government’s actual collections of $2.2 trillion under the current taxation laws, actually increasing the deficit rather than reducing it.

So many have some serious questions about Cain's plan. Democrats, Socialists, un-named critics? No. There are some of those, for sure. But certainly Fox News, Grover Norquist and Bloomberg Financial can't be counted in that category of critics, even by the most right-leaning supporters of Cain.

As far as the "unnamed critics" who you wanted identified, doesn't the public have the right to know who Cain consulted with to come up with his plan? To have them speak to the economics of how the plan will work? To specify what the underlying assumptions are? So far, the 9-9-9 plan is nothing more than 32 bullet points on Cain's website, most of which are glittering generalities like,

• "Current circumstances call for bolder action",

• "Amidst a backdrop of the economic boom created by the Phase 1 Enhanced Plan, I will begin the process of educating the American people...",

• "Pro-growth economic policies equal a strong dollar policy" and,

• "It would make it possible to end the IRS as we know it."

C'mon, if the public supports someone running for POTUS who presents no more detail than this as the foundation for his fiscal policy, we're going to deserve what we get.

Like I said, some of the candidates must think we're not listening. Maybe some of us aren't

Originally Posted by Villages Kahuna

First, maybe we should consider the 9-9-9 plan itself. Cain has explained that he was not the author of the plan alone, but that he had consulted with some of the top economists in the country. But when pressed by Chris Wallace on Fox News, he refused to provide any names, citing the need to "protect their confidentiality".

When Cain was unable to fill in any detail on his plan, Wallace stated that his staff at Fox News had analyzed the plan and that "It looks to us like under your plan, corporations and the wealthy will pay considerably less than they currently do, and lower-income people particularly, the 45 percent, roughly, of Americans who don’t pay income tax now will end up paying a lot more.”

Grover Norquist's Americans For Tax Reform (ATR) has also been somewhat critical of the plan. Ryan Ellis, ATR’s tax policy director, said Cain’s plan to tax more on the consumption side was a positive step. But Ellis also worried that, if a new national sales tax was implemented, Democrats would try to use it to expand the scope of the federal government.

Analysts from Bloomberg Financial News said that, based on 2010 information, 9-9-9 would have brought in close to $2 trillion, compared to the government’s actual collections of $2.2 trillion under the current taxation laws, actually increasing the deficit rather than reducing it.

So many have some serious questions about Cain's plan. Democrats, Socialists, un-named critics? No. There are some of those, for sure. But certainly Fox News, Grover Norquist and Bloomberg Financial can't be counted in that category of critics, even by the most right-leaning supporters of Cain.

As far as the "unnamed critics" who you wanted identified, doesn't the public have the right to know who Cain consulted with to come up with his plan? To have them speak to the economics of how the plan will work? To specify what the underlying assumptions are? So far, the 9-9-9 plan is nothing more than 32 bullet points on Cain's website, most of which are glittering generalities like,

• "Current circumstances call for bolder action",

• "Amidst a backdrop of the economic boom created by the Phase 1 Enhanced Plan, I will begin the process of educating the American people...",

• "Pro-growth economic policies equal a strong dollar policy" and,

• "It would make it possible to end the IRS as we know it."

C'mon, if the public supports someone running for POTUS who presents no more detail than this as the foundation for his fiscal policy, we're going to deserve what we get.

Like I said, some of the candidates must think we're not listening. Maybe some of us aren't

At least he is thinking and has a plan. Better then "Hope and Change."

Besides, a President cannot change the way we pay our taxes.

Originally Posted by Villages Kahuna

First, maybe we should consider the 9-9-9 plan itself. Cain has explained that he was not the author of the plan alone, but that he had consulted with some of the top economists in the country. But when pressed by Chris Wallace on Fox News, he refused to provide any names, citing the need to "protect their confidentiality".

When Cain was unable to fill in any detail on his plan, Wallace stated that his staff at Fox News had analyzed the plan and that "It looks to us like under your plan, corporations and the wealthy will pay considerably less than they currently do, and lower-income people particularly, the 45 percent, roughly, of Americans who don’t pay income tax now will end up paying a lot more.”

Grover Norquist's Americans For Tax Reform (ATR) has also been somewhat critical of the plan. Ryan Ellis, ATR’s tax policy director, said Cain’s plan to tax more on the consumption side was a positive step. But Ellis also worried that, if a new national sales tax was implemented, Democrats would try to use it to expand the scope of the federal government.

Analysts from Bloomberg Financial News said that, based on 2010 information, 9-9-9 would have brought in close to $2 trillion, compared to the government’s actual collections of $2.2 trillion under the current taxation laws, actually increasing the deficit rather than reducing it.

So many have some serious questions about Cain's plan. Democrats, Socialists, un-named critics? No. There are some of those, for sure. But certainly Fox News, Grover Norquist and Bloomberg Financial can't be counted in that category of critics, even by the most right-leaning supporters of Cain.

As far as the "unnamed critics" who you wanted identified, doesn't the public have the right to know who Cain consulted with to come up with his plan? To have them speak to the economics of how the plan will work? To specify what the underlying assumptions are? So far, the 9-9-9 plan is nothing more than 32 bullet points on Cain's website, most of which are glittering generalities like,

• "Current circumstances call for bolder action",

• "Amidst a backdrop of the economic boom created by the Phase 1 Enhanced Plan, I will begin the process of educating the American people...",

• "Pro-growth economic policies equal a strong dollar policy" and,

• "It would make it possible to end the IRS as we know it."

C'mon, if the public supports someone running for POTUS who presents no more detail than this as the foundation for his fiscal policy, we're going to deserve what we get.

Like I said, some of the candidates must think we're not listening. Maybe some of us aren't

VK, you have made a compelling case against Cain's 9-9-9 plan. You chose in your response to focus and trash but one candidates plan which is not consistent with your initial broadside. The Cain plan was arguably the evening's piñata for the other candidates as well.

Your initial post was critical of all the candidates and plans. What points about Romney's plan didn't you agree with? You said, "One guy had a 59-point plan that was sleep-producing even before one got to a couple dozen points." In fairness to your hit on Romney, the forum itself precluded a point by point explanation and discussion.

Further, you avoided any reference to the Obama administration's plan and my specific reference to the suggestion that Obamanomics are somewhat rooted in the Cloward-Piven strategy. You appear to be deliberately selective about what you respond to? To use your "listening" analogy, perhaps you have engaged "selective listening" to hear only what is consistent with your own biases.

If you don't see any redeeming value from the Republican candidates, does that mean you are a supporter of the current administration's economic policy? Your perspective as a respected and knowledgeable member of the banking community is always appreciated.

Do any of you realize that a 9% national sales tax would make our prices on goods in Florida at 15.5% added on in tax?

For example, if you buy a new car at $27,500, you will be paying $31,760 for that car ($4,260 in sales tax).