Governors gone wild! Partisan bickering torpedoes bipartisan meeting

A bipartisan group of governors appeared outside the White House on Monday to present a united front on economic growth and other issues, but the press conference ultimately deteriorated into bickering between Republicans and Democrats.

On the heels of the National Governors Association’s meeting with President Obama, state leaders led by Oklahoma Gov. Mary Fallin, a Republican, and Colorado Gov. John Hickenlooper, a Democrat, addressed reporters for about 15 minutes, first speaking about all the areas on which they agree.

But near the end of the press conference, Louisiana Gov. Bobby Jindal, a Republican, launched into a sharp attack on the administration over its push to raise the nation’s minimum wage to $10.10. Mr. Jindal was then accused one by one of his Democratic counterparts of making “the most insane statement I’ve ever heard.”

The president “did mention the minimum wage repeatedly to us. What I worry about is that this president, the White House, seems to be waving the white flag of surrender. Under five years of this administration the Obama economy is now the minimum wage economy. I think we can do better than that,” Mr. Jindal said.

28 Comments - what are your thoughts?

  • bamissfa says:

    the economy is very weak still.
    u don’t raise taxes, fees, or minimum wage during a recession.

    in spite of reports of under 7% unemployment it is a lie because the fed gov manipulates that figure.

  • Jeanne Stotler says:

    I’m 82 years old, I’ve seen many increases in minum wage and have yet to see where it helps, we were living well, we paid less than 12,000 for a 3 bedroom house in 1954, our gas was .21 a gallon, my husband’s take home about 70.oo a week, a new Buick cost about 8,000. 1972, my husband had a TIA, amild stroke for you lay people, ER, 1 week in the hospital cardiac ward, cost less than$1,000 today ER alone is over $2,000, when we have COL , min wage, etc, we also get increase in prices on everything. Milk was less than a dollar a gallon, now7 is $4.00 and predicted to be ten a gallon, who will suffer most?, children of middle class families.

    1. bamissfa says:

      you’re right Jeanne! if the gov would get OUT of the subsidy biz let the market work best with 0 interference.

      medical is high because there are middle man insurance. If you ask your dr how much if you pay in cash the fee is so much less.

      1. Jeanne Stotler says:

        I’ve done this for my son who has no Insurance, just point out what Medicare pays and offer that.

      2. I Seigel says:

        It would be GREAT if the gov would get OUT of the subsidy biz, as you say. Let’s start with the HUGE subsidies to the oil companies and the agribusinesses. Then let’s eliminate the subsidies to everyone who lives in a flood zone – coastlines, river valleys, etc – that get subsidized flood insurance.

        1. BH says:

          If we went to the “Fair Tax”, which is basically a sales tax on everything, thus eliminating all other taxes, American goods could go down in retail price. (There’s about 20% taxes embedded in all products made in the US). It would also make imported products more expensive, thus leveling the playing field. This gets rid of your hated exemptions to the oil companies (by the way, they are the same exemptions available to all companies).

          1. I Seigel says:

            The “Fair Tax” might be a good idea. I would like to hear an intelligent debate with knowledgeable people about it, because I don’t know that much about it yet. But will the politicians leading us today be able to have that debate? It doesn’t seem like it.
            I do take issue with your statement that the oil company exemptions are the same ones available to all companies. Huh? How do you figure that? Are you saying that the same subsidies that ExxonMobile gets are the same ones that Office Depot could get? Or Sears? Or Jack’s Corner Shoe Repair store? I kinda doubt it.

          2. BH says:

            Maybe I should have been more specific on tax deductions. I should have said “same as any other producer of goods” i.e., manufacturer. A company making furniture may need to install another bin to contain saw dust. The cost of that bin is a deductible cost. If an oil company drills a well, those costs are deductible. It’s a cost of doing business. Each industry will have items that are unique to it, but similar in scope to what other industries get. In a fair tax system, those deductions go away, but so does corporate tax. The reality is that companies don’t pay taxes, their customers do. If this 20% of embedded tax is eliminated from their sale price for the Fair Tax, retail prices go down on American goods. Even when you add the Fair Tax back in, the US public comes out ahead. Foreign goods cost more thus making US goods more competitive.

          3. I Seigel says:

            You bring up some interesting points.

            1. “The reality is that companies don’t pay taxes, their customers do”. I think you probably meant that companies pay taxes, but they pass on those costs to their customers, so, in effect, they don’t pay taxes. Is that right?

            Well, if the Citizens United ruling is followed to its logical conclusion, and companies and organizations are “people” that have the rights of free speech, etc., then isn’t it logical to assume that companies should pay taxes like people do?

            2. I don’t know specifically that the cost of drilling a well is tax-deductible, and you’re probably right. But the subsidies I’m talking about are the huge amounts for R&D that oil companies – and maybe pharmaceuticals – get. Then they come up with their products – supported in large part by federal dollars – and then charge exorbitant prices, which are protected by federal laws like those for Intellectual Property and patents.

            3. In my experience, and maybe yours too, taxes never seem to go down. I doubt that your statement, “If this 20% of embedded tax is eliminated from their sale price for the Fair Tax, retail prices go down on American goods.” is true. If the “embedded tax were eliminated, the company would find some way of continuing to soak the public, either by maintaining the price – thereby giving their CEOs and shareholders a huge windfall profit (like the oil companies had several years ago) – or downsizing their packaging (like General Mills and Kelloggs have done) to make it APPEAR that they’re holding down the price but, in reality, they’re just charging you the same price for less stuff. It would be great if I’m wrong in my conclusion, though.

            4. Foreign goods would become more expensive if the companies had to pay the same wages and deal with the same environmental considerations as companies do here. But instead of allowing companies to pay American workers the same as they pay Indian or Indonesian or Vietnamese workers, why not try to make them pay those foreign workers more, and have to be concerned with toxic dumping in the air and water of those countries? It’s a very slow process, unfortunately, and it’s not the governments standing in the way, it’s the corporations protecting their obscene profits and CEO salaries. But that’s “free market” economics at work. As Sarah once said, “How’s that workin’ out for ya?”.

            I didn’t mean to end on a rude or flippant note, it just worked out that way…

  • Brer_Rabbit says:

    Don’t trust any politician, republican or democrat who claims to want to reduce unemployment or raise the wages of the low wage working class folks, who also supports the continuing flood of unskilled legal and illegal workers into the United States.

    There would not be a need for a minimum wage of $10.10 if wages were not being suppressed due to an over supply of labor caused by immigrant workers competing for American jobs. Unemployment and depressed wages are caused by a labor surplus. This surplus could be reduced by significantly reducing legal and illegal labor in the unskilled labor market but the STEM jobs as well.

    A large reduction of immigrant labor would also help reduce the income inequality problem that seems to be growing in the United States.

  • Ed Cunningham says:

    The headlines should have been,
    “Where Is The Circus? Here Come The Clowns!”

    1. chock says:

      The clowns are the leadership in both the republicans and democrats in Washington. They are self serving. When is Soros going to be arrested for anti-American activities?

      1. BH says:

        It won’t happen as long as Eric Holder is AG.

  • ray says:

    Remember, Democrats are proven liars. Obama 4 pinocchoes, then yesterday 4 more pinoccholes by the Wapost hardly a conservative leaning paper. Hillary, rice and Obama all lied about Benghazi for weeks. so why believe any of those Democrats, They are proven liars.

    1. Eugene Sevene says:

      Again I say, one does not have to be a hacker to do the research and find that those states that have Republican governors have lower unemployment rates and are better off financially than those states that have Democratic governors. AGAIN DO THE RESEARCH BEFORE YOU SPEAK and show everyone how stupid you are. Right on ray

    2. exHPB says:

      They’ve stopped lying about Benghazi?

      1. ray says:

        One should realize by now they never stop lying.

  • CforUS says:

    Whether or not Jindal should have made his comment is debatable, but an absolute fact of life today is that liberal/progressive/democrats have no tolerance whatsoever for anyone else’s opinion. If you don’t agree with them, you should sit in the corner with your mouth shut, or, be chastised for making “the most insane statement I’ve ever heard.” Everyone else is not allowed their opinion. “Conservative and silent no more.”

    1. I Seigel says:

      Have you ever watched an interview with Shill O’Reilly or Hannity? Ever notice how they ask a question and let their guests answer without interrupting them? Yeah, me neither.

      1. Eugene Sevene says:

        Have you ever watched the Malissa Harris Perry show on MSNBC when she allowed a conservative to speak giving their point of view? Neither have I, for there are no conservatives allowed on her show or any other MSNBC show.

        1. I Seigel says:

          You are exactly right. I was responding to CforUS’ post, in which he implied – or stated – that it’s the liberals/progressive/democrats who are the rude ones. Would you agree that both sides are to blame? Or are the conservatives blameless here?

      2. BH says:

        Well, why waste viewers time when the liberals start telling lies.

        1. I Seigel says:

          Why waste your time and mine by posting this? Empty blather.

          1. BH says:

            I guess the truth was painful to you, huh?

          2. Pam Dunn says:

            And you are a typical left winger idiot and troll that has NEVER watched the two shows you mentioned.

          3. I Seigel says:

            I’ll wait for Eugene to respond. He usually has something intelligent to contribute to the conversation. The 2 of you are the ones who know nothing about what you’re talking about, have nothing to contribute and are just your typical name-calling ranters. B O R I N G. I have watched all the FOX shows and the MSNBC shows, by the way. Have you? Or are your minds so closed to any ideas that aren’t spoon fed to you by Rush and Beck?

      3. CforUS says:

        Apples and oranges. My mistaken assumption was that we were discussing conversations taking place at the National Governors Association meeting. What occured there was a perfect example of what’s wrong with American politics. Not that it’s anything new, but these people don’t seem to be able to exercise any restraint when making inappropriate comments. Did Connecticut Gov. Dannel Malloy really need to say “That’s the most insane statement I’ve ever heard.”? Really?

        Your reply on the other hand has so little to do with this conversation. I am puzzled. The only thing you left out is “my dog can eat your dog.”

        1. I Seigel says:

          Sorry if I wasn’t clear in my original reply to you and that it left you puzzled.

          You wrote: “…but an absolute fact of life today is that liberal/progressive/democrats have no tolerance whatsoever for anyone else’s opinion.” My comment in reply was that no party has a lock on rudeness, and I used the example of interviews that O’Reilly, Hannity, et al have with progressives on their shows. I then asked if you would concede my point, that both sides could turn down the name-calling and rhetoric, or if you just wanted to maintain that it’s only the dems that are guilty of being blowhards?

          If you only want to blame one side, then there’s no basis for a discussion. If you can recognize that both sides contribute to the problem – as I do – then a reasonable discussion can take place. Otherwise, it’s just people like Pam here ranting and calling each other names, which really doesn’t lead anywhere (except for maybe an elevated BP).

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Keep the Fake News Media in check.

Don’t let the MSM censor your news as America becomes Great Again. Over 500,000 Americans receive our daily dose of life, liberty and pursuit of happiness along with Breaking News direct to their inbox—and you can too. Sign up to receive news and views from The 1776Coalition!

We know how important your privacy is and your information is SAFE with us. We’ll never sell
your email address and you can unsubscribe at any time directly from your inbox.
View our full privacy policy.