Walter,

It doesn't matter if Borat is American or not...he's president. And what "other side" has slashed jobs? Does business have some legal requirement to provide jobs? The First Kenyan has done nothing to encourage anything but his worthless "green" jobs. The only ones getting rich on those jobs are the people who looted this government money thrown down a rat-hole. The Harvard educated, affirmative action hire we have in charge right now has done nothing worthy of any adulation or support.

Come on, Porter, be real. Government does not create anything so all government employees are feeding off the taxpayer. The government is bloated and needs to be trimmed. Where we need jobs are in the private sector...that's real job creation, or loss, whatever the case. More state and local government jobs is just a bigger drain on the real means of creating wealth. I can't believe you actually wrote that.

I'm not saying it was a mistake to trim state and local government payrolls. But only a child would expect to do so and see unemployment stable or lowered.

Government is shrinking, taxes are low. Just look at the stats. The conservatives won, and now they whine non-stop because they weren't the ones that benefited form it. It is, in fact, hilarious.

I can't believe I have to explain this to you, Porter.
Collingswood hires a few more workers to clean the park. Who is paying those people, Porter, and where is the money coming from? Are they actually creating any wealth?
On the other hand, a new shoe store opens in Collingswood and hires a few sales-people. This is generating real income and wealth.
For you to make the argument you did about unemployment and pointing to state and local government layoffs as the problem is ludicrous.
To rephrase what Reagan said, "More state and local government hiring isn't the solution to unemployment, that kind of hiring is the problem.
What we need are real jobs where the employees are actually generating their own income not being paid by you and me by raising our taxes.

Paul, where did I say that it was wrong to trim payrolls? Where did I say that state and local governments should be ramping up hiring?

I'm saying the by-product of that decision - in the short-term - is a higher unemployment rate. These are typically older people with narrower skill sets, so they're not likely to get re-hired anytime soon.

You can't have it both ways. To be pleased with the trimming of government fat while simultaneously complaining about the unemployment rate strikes me as disingenuous.

But we have Medicare and Social Security recipients whining about government spending, so maybe I shouldn't be surprised.

Look, Porter, when government was hiring the White House tried to tout employment numbers that were the direct result of more public sector jobs with no actual growth or job creation in the private sector; a complete sham. We're not going anywhere with that kind of hiring we're just piling up more debt. I do not question your statements about trimming government, rather I take umbrage at your conclusion that cutting government jobs and the subsequent complaints about unemployment are related to one another. The complaint is that unemployment is high and is not coming down. To try to fudge those numbers by not counting people who have given up looking for employment or associating cutting government with rising unemployment is slight of hand, pure and simple.

Gonna be a year where some trend gets bucked. Typically, it is impossible for a guy with a negative favorability rating to get elected, and Romney's are in the toilet. Obama is now above water. But I think you are correct about the unemployment stat. Will be interesting to see which will hold true.

My take at the start of the Obama term is that he was George HW Bush, he was dealt a tough hand and was going to have to do things that annoyed people - resulting in one term.

Now I see him as George W Bush - an embattled guy who people generally liked that was lucky enough to run against a candidate in Kerry than people tended to dislike.

I think Porterincollingswood has been smoking something.

What you are looking at with Obama is a guy in panic. Most candidates get their base locked up and then move to the center if they need to. Obama is still catering to these loonies because he has yet to secure them. The whole class warfare nonsense and his college tour are proof of this. This is more like 1988 when Mike Dukakis would only do speeches within Massachusetts and only at colleges. On top of this he can't even fill a venue. Believe me, Obama is like a soldier that gets hit with a high powered rifle and doesn't even know it...he's toast unless, last minute, they find the body of the Lindbergh baby in Romney's trunk.

....said the birther whacko.

No problem, we'll just give everybody government jobs and food stamps and then claim 100% employment. Hey, San-Fran-Nan LollaPeLoser said that every dollar of food stamps infuses a $1.79 into the economy. With that kind of math we can make the economy look like whatever we want it to look like. Do we actually have to give that woman a paycheck for what she does?

Actually, Bob Dole (R-KAN) said the same thing when he led the charge to make food stamps more available. Because it made his core constituents - farmers - tons of money.

No wonder I had such a hard time pulling the lever for Bob Dole:-)

It's always about the money...

Nah, you're right, tons of sane, rational people refer to the President as "the First Kenyan."

How's that denial thing working out for you?

So let me get this straight "David Vaccaro." You want the first black president of the United States to go back to Africa? That's a real forward-thinking agenda.

Socialist. Anti-Capitalism. Yet...

Dow over 13,000.
Wall Street - record profits.
Oil Industry - record profits.

Hates rich people, financiers. Yet...

Supported Wall Street bailout.
Refuses to jail any Wall Street execs despite the legal standing to do so and the evidence to succeed in doing so.

You are full of resentment, just because you have put yourself in a less-than-ideal position in a transforming economy. Don't blame the POTUS for your poor life choices, Dave.

David Vaccaro

12:03 am on Tuesday, May 8, 2012

Bill Duhart

11:52 pm on Monday, May 7, 2012

So let me get this straight "David Vaccaro." You want the first black president of the United States to go back to Africa? That's a real forward-thinking agenda.

And you are the editor here? Now where exactly did I say such a thing?

What I said was that Obama has the characteristics of a dictator, not those of a duly elected leader of a democracy. Why don't you offer an opinion on some of the claims I've made?

1) Obama has been criticized for his treatment of the Supreme court by both liberals and Conservatives. What do you think?

2) He has told his supporters that he's doing many things "under the radar". Do you think this consistent with his promise to have the most transparent administration ever? What's your opinion?

3) Obama has also expressed that he wishes he could just make the decisions he feels are necessary without the consent of the Congress. Does this sound like someone who understands the democratic process?

Instead of making false suggestions of racism, why not just answer these simple questions? Maybe once you've answered these questions I can accuse you of being an Obama apologist.

Watching you squirm and backtrack is even funnier than watching you live with the consequences of your decisions. Hilarious! Thanks for the laugh. Now I have to go to work so that your Social Security check gets cut. You're welcome!

What's even more hilarious is that you are supporting a guy - Romney - who will be little different than Obama. In fact, he's attacking Obama for cutting Medicare. He invented the individual mandate (not shocking when you consider that used to be a standard conservative principle) and is now rallying to defend Medicare from ANY cost cutting or reform.

So, I guess I'd say this...welcome to the Party, Comrade!

That's not necessarily conventional logic, at least as it's being practiced by out current administration. We were at the bottom of a hole after 2008 with about $10 trillion dollars in debt and Mr. Obama and company quickly dug deeper to the tune of $15+ billion (in only three years) promising that was the answer. Look, President Obama may or may not be a Kenyan but one thing that is beyond argument is that he is a full fledged Keynesian much to the demise of all of us. If he keeps digging at the rate he's done so far we will soon be coming out the other side in China if you know what I'm sayin'. I think you do!

Hey, I'm just happy that Romney appears to love America in the way that I do. There's no question that there are some inconsistencies with Romney's past positions but in a contest of understanding our system there isn't one. With Obama coming from such an un-American background what's the mystery? He had a mother of questionable sanity and a father I've described previously as someone dedicated to inseminating any woman he could outrun across the globe. His book "dreams of my father" should have had photos.

Why are you so cryptic with your warnings? Why not just tell me what you are referring to. You're starting to take on characteristics of editor Bill Duhart...seeing things that aren't there.

David, I don't necessarily have a problem with your terminology but I realize that others do thus I shy away from such terminology. For instance, we definitely know that Obama has roots in Kenya, it's an uncontested fact. Unfortunately, some people see a spy behind every rock and instead of accepting that comment at face value (given that he has family there and some people - not necessarily me - think that's his point of origin) it becomes a racist comment in their minds. Look, a lot worse things were said about George Bush but as soon as one mentions Obama's ties to Kenya, his possible ties to Islam because of his introduction to it at an early age, or any disagreement with his political and/or social policies, it becomes racism instead of it being seen for what it really is - disagreement. In fact, we were told that the reason we didn't vote more overwhelmingly for Obama in 2008 was because we were a bunch of racists. Forget the fact that I voted against Carter, Dukakis, Clinton, Gore, and Kerry because I disagree with the whole worldview of these people and Obama dwarfed most of them in his leaning to the left. It's not racism, it's a philosophical difference originating in a completely opposite understanding of the world. Get over it!

Aren't you a little old to be starting troll threads, Dave?

I think it's safe to say that the general black population is socially conservative and family oriented. Thus, we need to separate being anti-gay from being against the idea that gay-marriage should be sanctioned and favored by the state. The state has good reason to favor heterosexual marriage because that is our future. No marriage...no kids...no future. So, while the state should make allowances for heterosexual marriage there is no compelling reason to sanction gay marriage. This is not to say that gays should be denied civil rights, only that marriage is an institution between a man and a woman which generally results in children, and that is the future of us all, gay and straight.
Blacks in general appear to be against gay-marriage. The referendums are about gay-marriage and in no way should be construed as an attempt to deny civil rights. I don't know whether that translates into an anti-gay stance for blacks because I don't have enough information to make that connection.
One thing does seem true at this time and that is that the majority of black leadership, at least what the media shows us, are liberal and in that way are not representative of the black community in general. Once the black community tires of all the liberal rhetoric being spouted by their so-called leaders and throws them out the black community will bring forth some truly representative leadership and we will see how it goes from there. I, for one, wait in anticipation for that day.

Paul,

Once again I am in complete agreement with you.

I live in an area of New Jersey that doesn't have a large Black population but that is slowly changing and I believe for the better. Skin color doesn't determine someone being a good human being. I think Blacks have gotten the dirty end of the stick historically but everyone has got to push past it for things to improve. But to be somewhat critical, Blacks do seem to be fairly monolithic in some areas and in politics, I believe it doesn't serve them well. I sometimes wonder what those few percentage points of Black voters that pull the lever for Republicans must endure in doing so. Those people make me think there is hope that things may change.

I really brought up the perception, or perhaps the truthful notion that African Americans are more anti-gay than the general public to tweak the libs but also to point out that no one should be off limits for legitimate criticism. That too will help things improve.

Dave