Betty you don't know what you are talking about. There aren't any profits, small business owners are squeezed to the max with no help from the White House administration, just an expectation for me taxes and regulations.

Betty, who signed the initial bailout to auto companies in December of 2008? In case you can't remember that would have been George W. Bush. He signed that bailout because, "With the market not yet functioning, I had to safeguard American workers and families from widespread collapse. I also had my successor in mind. I decided to treat him the way I would like to have been treated if I were in his position".
I believe that any governor in this state would have to do something to try and change the course of this state. Yet, I would agree that his plan is a little to aggresive. This state has the third highest tax on business in the country, so very little industries would look at this state as a good place to set up shop. But did he have to slash the tax rate to the extreme that he did at the cost of so many others? This is the problem I struggle with.

I have family that qualify as small business in construction. Good paying jobs but he is hiring ohioans and hoosiers because that is where the work is. These states figured it out earlier than us and are seeing some growth. We have stifled the small biz owner and entire industries for too long. BTW many small owners are scred to death of upcoming obama care that all obama croonies will get exempt from.

Why i gods name would a small business owner go through the trouble of putting on more employees, when any profits they make from those employees will be just taken (taxed) and giving to someone else.
Liberals always talk about company creating jobs as if that's is the reason they are in business, get a clue, people go into business to make money not to make jobs. Because they are trying to make money they create jobs. If they are hindered by regulations, taxes and every other stupid social programs someone can think of to take away their profits from there own hard work and risk taking then you won't have new jobs. You can't have it both ways showing contempt for private sector and then asking them to risk their own time and money to hire someone.

Ahhhh, finally someone I can agree with. Thank you.

Herb, we are talking about 'Labor Day', which has essentially turned into a 'party and picnic day for the USA , at least according to modern times as noted below.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Labor_Day
The time for Labor Day as a holiday has passed, it's task as a holiday is finished.
The sweat shops are gone. Prove me wrong. Move Labor Day to sometime in May like the rest of the world , that's Obama's goal anyway, to emulate Europe.
We should make better use of the Sept 'Day slot' and use it for something more useful, such as 'Voting Day', or...wait, why not 'Tea Party Day'? At least the party part will coincide with what it is now used for, for most of us anyway.

As for bringing jobs and companies to MI, the low cost option that would send a message to the rest of the country would be changing MI to a 'Right to Work ' state.
Costs nothing, folk can still join a union if they have a mind to, and it sends a clear message that has been successful for many other states, can't argue with the job numbers, way more jobs available in 'right to work ' states.

Really, Lee? The sweatshops are gone? O Frabjous Day! You'd best go spread the joyous word to the Garment District in NYC, to the Maquiladoras on our side of the U.S.-Mexico border, and to the nasty meatpacking and poultry processing plants in Alabama and Arkansas. That should keep you busy for a while, and you might even learn a thing or two that wasn't pre-digested and spoon-fed to you from talk radio, Fox News and World Net Daily. But until they abolish Labor Day, I suggest you volunteer to put in a full shift each year on the first Monday in September. That'll show the rest of us!!

Your middle class life style came about because of a surplus of jobs created by a free market system that used to reward hard work and risk taking. We have become a country that looks at someone who is successful as someone who lied and cheated there way there. If we allow people to benefit from hard work and risk taking then jobs will be created, not by social program put on place to redistribute wealth, and punish attempt to get a head in life not simple to work for someone else.

Thank you Clare. I agree.

Clare, I think you pose a great question. However, I would probably include all of the people in this country. First, I believe that politicans need to take responsiblity for their actions and not be influenced by any lobbyist. Second, we need to do something about the trade agreements we have with other countries. Clinton signed NAFTA and trade agreements with China that poked holes in our ship and we have been sinking every since. This was backed by both parties. The problem is Mexico (who now has many US jobs, does not reciprocate. They buy very little of our goods and what they buy is to make products we in the US purchase. The same is true with China. The problem is how do we change this? George Bush tried unsuccessfully to charge tariffs on steel imports from other countries and he was met with threats of boycotts from Japan and other countries. I believe that until we do something about trade, no politican will ever be able to get our economy out of the dumps.

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/video/2011/09/05/jimmy_hoffa_at_obama_event_on_gop_lets_take_these_

Keeping comment language clean's going to be tough given Teamster president Jimmy Hoffa's own Labor Day warm-up commentary:

Teamsters President Jimmy Hoffa had some profane, combative words for Republicans while warming up the crowd for President Obama in Detroit, Michigan on Monday.

"We got to keep an eye on the battle that we face: The war on workers. And you see it everywhere, it is the Tea Party. And you know, there is only one way to beat and win that war. The one thing about working people is we like a good fight. And you know what? They've got a war, they got a war with us and there's only going to be one winner. It's going to be the workers of Michigan, and America. We're going to win that war," Jimmy Hoffa said to a heavily union crowd.

"President Obama, this is your army. We are ready to march. Let's take these son of bitches out and give America back to an America where we belong," Hoffa added.

Mr. Obama, now charging hard through a particularly ugly news cycle, apparently forgot to hold union boss Hoffa and himself to the lofty civility standards he so solemnly invoked at January's memorial to the Tucson shooting victims:

"But at a time when our discourse has become so sharply polarized – at a time when we are far too eager to lay the blame for all that ails the world at the feet of those who think differently than we do – it's important for us to pause for a moment and make sure that we are talking with each other in a way that heals, not a way that wounds."

Hey Clara, your link failed. An apt metaphor for all of your...for lack of a better word let's call them "arguments." You're going to play the civility card? On James P. Hoffa? Apparently you have a lot of time on your hands. If only you could spend them more productively than parsing speeches for the naughty bits, then expressing fake outrage over what you find. I was there, and Mr. Hoffa could have been a LOT more profane than the one mild term he used at the very end of his speech. Fortunately, you don't have to take my word -- the Freep has the transcript. If he was uncivil, no one near me was upset by it. But just to be sure, if he ever decides to run for public office -- he's 70, so he's running out of time -- you be sure to hold him accountable for his language yesterday.

Clare, I couldn't agree with you more. It isn't just about Hoffa's one little dirty word. It is the hypocritical point that Obama himself called for civility after the Arizona shootings. How many times did Hoffa suggest war with the tea party? War, battle field, take them out. I guess it is ok if it comes out of the mouth of a democrat. Your inclusion of President Obama's speech after the Arizona shootings makes you question if he was speaking to both parties or just the one that did not agree with him or his party. If it were Michelle Bachman or any other republicans that made that speech there would have been an outcry for their attempt to provoke violence. Who needs to go to the freep to read it..I heard it out of the horse's mouth.

"The rest of us"?

I can't tell you what to do. But when I make a point, I try to have the courage to stand on my point all by myself, rather than introduce imaginary friends into my narrative to try and strengthen my point with the illusion that there are throngs of people who agree with me. I don't need people to agree with me, if I feel strongly about an issue. It's either right, or it isn't.

And as for me, I support union representation. That's why we call it LABOR day. It makes me laugh the people who take off Labor day, and then sit around and slander the American worker with cheap, Karl Rove talking points.

Mark, Just curious did you watch the video? Maybe then you would realize the "us" in Matt's post.
Also there are alot of people that take Christmas off and don't believe in Christianity...maybe we should consider changing the holiday name to "a day off work for workers day"...kinda like they changed the Christmas break to winter break not to offend those that don't believe in Christ. Who's talking points would those be?

Well said Susie!

The right time to "blame the other guy" is when "the other guy" is actually at fault. I don't expect you to grasp that -- because like Michael, you completely failed to get the comparison I originally drew, choosing instead to take it personally.
For the record: I'm not a fan of throwing terms like "racist" around; I was never disrespectful of President Bush (just his policies); I have no need to resort to namecalling about Fox News or the Tea Party; and hey, I won't take umbrage or go into a fainting tizzy if you decide to tar me with that broad brush of yours.
Oh, and I didn't say it earlier so it's understandable you'd jump to a conclusion about me...but I am a veteran (U.S. Army, 1987-94), so I think I have a pretty good grasp of Memorial Day, thank you.

Herb, There is a time when you can blame the other person, but there is always a time to take personal responsiblity for your wrongs. I voted Democratic for the majority of my life. It is the democratic party that tout "they are for the working man". Sorry I am just not buying that. I believe it may have been true at one point in history. Clinton has never taken responsiblity for his part in NAFTA or trade agreements with China. He has never acknowledged his part in the housing market when he opened the floodgates for loans that people were unable to pay. Barney Frank never acknowledged his part in the housing bubble, instead he stood and said there was not a problem. Clearly there was! These are just a few examples. I believe as Americans we need to open our eyes to the failures of both parties.
You suggest you have no need to resort to namecalling about Fox News...yet in the above post you did it! You insulted Lee by suggesting his information is spoon-fed by Fox News. So it would be fair to say you are spoon-fed by MSNBC or any other democratic "newsworthy" source. Your brush appears to be a little broad as well. I personally don't give a hoot about what any of these sources say.
You may not see it, but maybe you should take a look at your posts and realize that you are continuously insulting other peoples intelligence in a very clever way. But hey if it makes you feel like a bigger person than go for it.

Everything you said is completely made up. "Interfered with private enterprise". "Caused job loss". "Lose inurance". All utter garbage. And I think Cindy knows it because she surely must be around people who belch out this crap all day. So obviously they have to spend at least some time figuring out ways to word this unsubstantiated rubbish in ways that they can't get caught or at least say it to people they're pretty sure won't check.

And I'm not even an Obama supporter!

This kind of drivel comes out of having a dogma first, then a narrative second that has to match the dogma whether its true or not.

The truth is, if Obama had enough spine to go ahead with half of the policies he CLAIMED he was going to go ahead with, we have made some progress. Instead we have to listen to this pap about how just doing away with government, and strangling foreigners solves everything.

And they couldn't even get her a mic to work right lol!

And I thought the song she sang was most appropriately titled for that get together!

Let's remember what policies are making it "this bad." Republican policies. Republicans prevented progressives from passing anything. Republicans have gotten every thing they've wanted, and when they didn't they just filibustered until they shut the goverment down completely.

This is a conservative hell we're living with now. If it had been progressive policies ... we'd all be re-doing our kitchens right now.

Another one with a bad case of the vapors because a 70-year-old man used ONE mild profanity (not one of George Carlin's infamous "seven words"). Again, the transcript of James P. Hoffa's speech is up on the Freep web site.
If you have the gumption, try reading the actual words rather than receive your "wisdom" already pre-digested, complete with baked-in conclusions so you don't need to do any of that messy "thinking" you may have heard about.

If you did your homework, CC, you just got an F.
Control of Congress shifted to the Democrats after the 2006 election, meaning the final two years of President Bush's second term. Had "Dems controlled everything" before that, would we have Chief Justice John Roberts or Justice Samuel Alito (both confirmed in 2005)?
But the Democrats' hold on the Senate was only because two independents caucused with them (it was 49-49 otherwise). Of those two, Sen. Joe Lieberman (a former Democrat who lost his primary in '06, then won as an "independent" on the strength of GOP votes in Connecticut -- the actual Republican nominee only got 5%!) played both sides with extraordinary skill and cynicism, voting with Republicans often and threatening to switch parties even more often.
You want more? I got more. Let me know.

The dems have been non existent in all of this.

Republicans have blocked everything.

What we have is what republicans demanded. Live with the results.

Squeaky clean? No. Better than the other side? Oh, yes.
Your mileage may vary.

Which is why the 111th Congress made history as one of the most productive in modern history. The problem with having a near-supermajority was that the more conservative Democrats in the Senate felt empowered to side with the GOP minority in threatening filibusters unless legislation was changed to suit them. It's why the original stimulus bill was smaller than it needed to be (with a third of its cost being tax cuts! Never forget that!), why the Affordable Care Act was stalled for so many months -- remember the "Baucus Caucus?" -- and would up being less than it could have been, and why the financial reform law failed to hold those responsible for the 2008 crisis truly accountable.
Even its lame-duck session after the 2010 midterms was remarkable for what was passed: The START Treaty, repeal of DADT, the 9/11 first responder's health bill, and the extension of unemployment benefits, business tax credits and the income tax rate reductions of 2001 and 2003.
And for that entire two-year period, Republicans were never "simply in the audience" -- they were actively obstructing everything they could, every time they could.

Republican policies are what got us here. Republican policies are what Obama gave us more of. Republican policies are what happened to governments of elected officials overthrown by republicans like Dick Snyder and Scott Walker.

Republicans who are among the middle class foolishly worship billionaire CEOs because they have the bizarre mistaken belief that somehow if they're kind to them and get their middle class fellows to surrender as much wealth as possible to them they will one day be one of them.

If this top heavy, millionaire gorging, falling apart at the seams, bank failing, labor screwing, home foreclosing society is what you want more of ... keep on voting for republicans.

If you'd like a chance to explain how your conservative policies helped us ... sorry ... you had it.

Billions in tax cuts to billionaires. THAT was supposed to result in jobs. It never happened. All they did was take the money and run, and tell the middle class to go bag their @ss.

No thanks. You've demonstrated what conservative policies accomplish. Rich get rich ... and I know the rest.

Hmm. That sounds like hostage money to me. I don't care for your system of government run by hostage takers at all. And it's not the way it was intended to work either.

You actually wasted everyone's time by logging in, not to present an opinion, but to make a personal epithet about what you believe my television viewing habits are (incorrectly btw)?

I think I'm finished talking with you people. It's like a swarm of stupid.

It's a little late to suddenly give a crap about that now, phony hypocrite.

Yes. Talk IS cheap.

Nice to see you rolling out your "anyone can name call" 4 days AFTER you stood by silently and watched your teabaggish friends ripping other users viciously, and now suddenly have a conscience.

Nice.

Kidcat24, I think you may have forgot to look up some history as well :( the following is a cnn article from October 2000: The president has invited key lawmakers to the South Lawn to witness his signing of the U.S.-China Relations Act of 2000.The bill's passage by the Senate on September 19 capped years of negotiations with Beijing and intense lobbying by the Clinton administration, business and labor interests.
Clinton argued that bringing China into the global trade regime will help make Beijing a more responsible and accountable member of the world community.The legislation is the result of a nearly year-old agreement between the U.S. and China that would ease China's entry into the World Trade Organization. With WTO membership, China will make significant cuts in its tariffs, thus opening its markets to the products and investment of America and other countries.
You can read the entire article at: http://articles.cnn.com/2000-10-10/politics/clinton.pntr_1_wto-membership-china-global-trade-regime?_s=PM:ALLPOLITICS
I find it interesting that you mention Fox, however I watched Hoffa's comments on a local news station. However, I think the point was that Mr. Hoffa used wording that has been deemed to incite violence by the Democratic party.

Kidcat24

You must live in detroit

First thing is to vote out as many republicans as possible. Then everything else just kind of gets done. Because conservatism means "do nothing, change nothing, just jam up the system and grin." The politics of spoiled, deluded, uninformed children.