If the economy and jobs are the real issues, why has Rep. Akin not been introducing bill after bill directly addressing them in his 12 years in the House?

Why did Rep. Akin miss 85% of his votes in his last quarter in Congress?

Now, now, "Sensible" - cut Mr. Akin some slack; after all, he DID get three (3) measures signed during his twelve (12) years in office. Have you forgotten the renamng of thosse three County Post Offices?
They did benefit the economy sorta-kinda; didn't that lead to a job-creation, however brief, for a signpainter to change the outside names?

Ah yes, those three (3) County PO measures. He had to introduce each three times before they made it into law.

He introduced Pledge Protection Acts in 2002, 2004, 2005, and 2007. And Parent's Right to Know Acts in 2003, 2005, 2007, and 2009. And the "No Taxation Without Representation Amendment" (not to be confused with voting rights in the District of Columbia) in '06. None of those passed.

And some here might have liked his proclamation of 2008 at "The National Year of the Bible". And his "Supporting the goals of the Ten Commandments Commission" resolution. Neither made it out of committee.

But we're distracting ourselves. What has Rep. Akin introduced for the economy and jobs?

Now, now, "Sensible" - did you forget he could not even get his measure saluting the 2011 Cardinals World Series victory out of the House?
Hmmm - I'll bet some GOP reps are closet White Sox fans - ya think?
Now, there is a representative with some clout!

I guess his next goal is to introduce some measure that will be titled "Charles Darwin Was Born In Kenya And Cannot Be A Legitimate Scientist."

Jo Beck wrote;
"6:22 am on Monday, September 10, 2012
Great news! We are behind Akin 100%"

The article says only 60% of GOP stalwarts stand behind Akin ...This is equivalent to a Shunning of Akin, considering the nature of partisan unity, to full-fledged GOP hysteria on display here.

Anyone but McCaskill.

Can a discussion about Rep. Akin not end up about abortion?

Hey there, "Paul Revere" - put down your tricorned for a minute and tell me: "What is "our 'religion'"? Is there a "religion" that was recognized and promulgated by the public schools that is now "lost?"

Now, in your screed, did you not forget that McCaskill has taken a sub rosa liking to the White Sox, just to show her support for her Leader?
Pass it on...

Which religion is "our" religion? I'm so confused.
After being raised Catholic and then following Baptists, I realized I was really a Buddhist. NOW what do I do?
State Tree: Flowering Dogwood
State Flower: White Hawthorne Blossom
State Reptile: 3 Toed Box Turtle
State Religion: ummmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmm

Tom:
I'll honor Gregg's "keep on topic".
Just watch my answers at any topic that hints toward the generally accepted standards of "Public Education". (It's costs and robbery of religious beliefs
.
This AKIN poll has major political ramifications.
(Losing the Senate? Should any mention of "GOD" be shouted down? What today's liberalism really means to America.)
AKIN may still lose. But, that is not what the ultimate political ramifications of the issue will lead to.
I would make a plea to all "Legitimate" Catholic's.
Politically, any Catholic that votes for McCaskill is a vote against "GOD".
If they want to place their "Body-rights" above "GOD" given rights, then , so be it.

Political ramifications do not happen overnight or over 1 year.
I will expound at a more appropriate topic.

Attaboy PaulRevere/Colbert.

I distrust those people who know so well what God wants them to do because I notice it always coincides with their own desires.

Not sure how it's confusing.
You can enjoy whichever religion you like, Judaism, Christianity, Islam, Buddhism, the teachings of Hare Krishna or Sun Myung Moon, Satanism, Liberalism, etc. You have that freedom in this country.
This country was built on "Christian" values. That's one of the reasons you have religious freedom, I encourage you to try and exercise any of those religious options in a Muslim nation.
There are many interpretations of "God", and likely about as many religions in the world as there are people, and here, you are free to explore them.
Either way, the subject has gotten way too far into our political discussions, except where government is trying to supercede the rights of those groups.
So, whether "our" religion is an accurate portrayal or not, this is a "Christian Nation", the history does not change.

The country was built on "values". Despite what you may think, Christians and non-Christians share similar values when it come to work ethos, belief in freedom or equality. There is no mention of God or Jesus Christ in the Constitution. Not all of the framers were even believers. The teachings of Christ are certainly a good model for living a just life, but one does not have to be a Christian to follow those teachings. E Plurbus Unum, "from many, one", the original motto of our great nation sounds inclusive of all to me. In a cosmopolitan country, the majority is a fluid thing. The Founding Fathers had the foresight to see and embrace that. Even if the bedrock values of the Constitution WERE based in Christianity, it must be acknowledged that Christianity itself has basis in ancient Sumarian and Judaic texts.

Gee, Devon - your claim that this is a "Christian Nation" is so reassuring to other faith beliefs that thought that they, too, were Americans.
How eucumenical - not!

A Christian nation built on religious freedom.
That's why you're not very bright, the 2 are not mutually exculsive, as they would be in Muslim nation.
Christian nation, is exactly what is reassuring to other religions. Christianity & a nation built on those principals assures them they will be able to practice their religion, instead of being persecuted (like you are trying to do) or killed. Christianity does not believe in publicly executing anyone who believes differently than they do, as in Muslim nations. It's in Christian nations that those same people are allowed to publicly worship, in their own way. They are even, in some cases, handing out flowers at the airport.
Your argument only indicates your misunderstanding. Please try to comprehend a statement before you attempt to turn it into something else. You're embarrassing yourself.

If that were true, AIAJ, then people in this country, who aren't Christian, wouldn't be trying to take away religious (Christian in this case) rights in the name of the highest tax-increase in history.
Christians are the only ones at the moment fighting to protect religious rights (of all religions), Democrats (regardless of religion) are trying to allow big government to overrule those Constitutional rights.

Do you have any idea how many Americans you insulted with each one of these sentences?

"people in this country, who aren't Christian, wouldn't be trying to take away religious (Christian in this case) rights"

"Christians are the only ones at the moment fighting to protect religious rights"

"Democrats (regardless of religion) are trying to allow big government to overrule those Constitutional rights."

Not just non-Christians, not just Democrats. Each sentence, by itself.

I'd ask to you explain your reasoning, but I don't care to read any more of your baseless, thoughtless generalizations.

Please go back and learn why our nation was founded. Huge hint: it was NOT to be your "Christian nation".

Oh, Devon, Devon, Devon - I wilt and wither beneath your clever, yet un-Xtian, remarks and characterizations.
But you already know that I was not contrasting an "Xtian nation" with a "Muslim nation;" at least I hope you were able to draw that conclusion.
As far as not executing non-believers...I guess you've never heard of the Inquisition or, for that, matter, Salem way back when?
Please read some history and etiquette before you, as in your words, "embarrass yourself."

Tom Maher:
"One Nation Under GOD"
That is our Religion. That is how ALL public schools taught me to start my day.
That is how all young children , for just a minute, were taught that there is a moral standard that prayer teaches all people.
Something we all shared from home. Over 98% of our Public school was of "Christian family values" . that's Religion to me.
(Until an agenda of "take away freeedom " started).
That agenda is the feedom of choice. Taking away the financial ability to attend the school of choice for the sake of "Atheist rights" is well in motion.
Let the cost of public school be borne by the 90% christians and watch that Faith melt away right before their eyes. All in the name of "equal rights".
YES! There was a "religion that was recognized by Public schools".

Oh brave "PaulRevere," thou of courageous anonymity...
So - you are saying that there is no room for atheists in this country?
So - you are saying that only "Xtian values" built this country and not those of other (or no) religious belief systems?
So - you are also averring that before the Pledge was modified in 1954, all children were Godless? What about all who were in school before then? What about your parents - were they deprived of God in schools because the phrase was absent from the Pledge? Did they somehow manage to turn out OK?
So - you were saying that, at one time, "here was religion that was recognized by Public schools." Would that have been OK if that "public school" religion had been Judaism? Would that have been OK if that "public school religion" had been Catholicism? Gee - just WHY do I think you would not candidly disagree with that?
Religion has NO place in politics or government or public schools.
Ethics, yes; but not religion of any stripe.

TOM Maher:
I did not say "there is no room for Atheist in this country"
I do say I don't want to PAY for your room. Pay for your own education, and I'll pay for mine.
I recalled personal history, not dated history. We have contrary definitions of "education".
One does not have to go to history to witness uncontrollable public school "mixed" moral principles. Children being told that "it's ok to have a mother-mother or Father-father"? Teaching them to have safe-sex while their parents try to teach otherwise are just two examples of public schools now outside the definition of "EDUCATION".
You sir, want to ignore that. So be it. If you have followed ALL of my posts, you will note that I have one goal and proposition.
I speak to all Catholics and other parents who send their children to non-public schools.
We already PAY for accredited Missouri Education.
Public school is YOUR CHOICE, it is no longer MY CHOICE. so do not expect others to build and pay for something we no longer view as "education". Our public schools have turned into "day-care centers" and low moral standards. (secular).
(sex-education seminars). They are producing a very low percentage of "moral"
adults to society. You may not agree with that , but that may be because you prefer the change. Just make my Public school education support disappear.
Build your own "education" system with your own money, would you?
That's my agenda.

@PaulRevere: When I read your comments, the absurdity reminds me of the parody site "Christwire", or Steven Colbert. The public education system surely has many flaws,but the point of them was never to instill religious values in students. It is simply designed to give the most basic tools to create productive citizens. It is YOUR job to instill whatever morals and religious values you choose. If children explore other ideas, are yours so weak that they crumble when brought to the light?
I have no children, yet that does not excuse me from paying my share of school taxes, as it benefits society at large and ultimately me personally if children are equipped to "learn how to learn" and think critically on their own. Missouri is not a secluded island, there is a very large world that students will be entering. Why do you wish to leave them unprepared?
None of which has anything to do with Atkin's being electable. If he were a strong, effective leader, his statement would be dismissed as a gaffe. He is neither strong nor effective, so he get's dismissed as a goof.

Very well put, son. (Akin is a, Oh my, we really must do something about your name.)

My dear Mr. Revere, I am deeply sorry for having to break the news to you, but the purpose of public education is not to benefit you personally. It is to benefit our great society as a whole! Even if you or your children elect (I so love to use that word!) to not take advantage of our public education opportunities, you still have the duty (I say, privilege!) of funding those opportunities for all. Our great society has a long, long history of encouraging public education, reaching all the way back to the Northwest Ordinance of 1787. You remember that document, I trust.

Akin is a-
A liberal society ignores the cost of any service. Because it's hidden.
Need for a public school system, is to educate the poor and needy. That is a good cause , and I am 100% for that.
That was the public Education system of past. Not today!

You say----"I have no children, yet that does not excuse me from paying my share of school taxes, as it benefits society at large and ultimately me personally"
(well , you have no choice!)
Let me respond by changing just a 2 words--- "I HAVE children, yet that does not excuse me from paying my share of "accredited-EDUCATION", as it benefits society at large and ultimately me personally etc".

You are conditioned to automatically support an overpriced Service.
It has nothing to do with the "benefits of Education".
Because the benefits of Education are the same---Private or Public.
Maybe you would feel the affects of Public education real cost, IF YOU HAD TO PAY YOUR REAL SHARE --that Sir, is $10,000 per year in many school districts.

ARE YOU WILLING to write a $10,000 annual check for Public education today. That is YOUR fair share. Or would you rather wait until you actually have a child to educate?

Or are you so uninformed that public education is out of control, when compared to the same education available elsewhere.

Pay for real Public education cost. Go ahead, but I already have an "education cost".

Why should anybody pay twice for the same Service.????
Unless you are an Educator.

Sensible
What do I care who is offended by that? It's your ideology that makes those things true, not mine. I'm just pointing it out.
Nice PC-deflection though.

Susan B:
Public Education does Not "benefit society as a whole".

"ACCREDITED-EDUCATION" benefits society as a whole.

It could be Private or Trade school or whatever this State approves as "ACCREDITED EDUCATION".

I am sure the history of Education needs always recognized that there will always be those who need Financial help for a decent education.

So declaring "Public Education" as the education we should support ignores the COST factor of those who choose to Pay for "non-public school education"

Your household spending allocates so much for entertainment and food etc.
All households allocate so much for "EDUCATION".
You can offer No plausible reason why our Society should "Force" any parent to 1st allocate to "Public Education" and take that money away from a choice.
This whole country would be irate, as they are indirectly paying $10,000 per child to pay for Public schools. You would not write a $10,000 for Public education and another $10,000 check for Non-public school Education.
Would you?!!!!!! So don't give me any 1700's history. I'm talking today.
(Teaching was a Vocation---Teaching today is a Racket)
Our whole public education cost today is "for the Teachers" (over 75%)

That is very simply "stealing Education dollars". That stealing education dollars is Directly responsible for stealing the financial ability of many families to send their children to their schools of choice.
That is why we need massive changes.

Dear, dear, dear.

Mr. Revere, call public education "ACCREDITED-EDUCATION" if you desire, as long you are not, what is the term, moving the post goals on me. Oh, oh, goalposts.

You missed my point. We ALL have the duty to fund education opportunities for all. That has nothing to do with YOUR choices. That is why they are called taxes!

If you don't like what the schools are teaching, you can vote in a different school board. But you still have to fund them. That is why they are called taxes!

If you choose to use private schools, buy a Hupmobile, travel the world by steamship or by rail, or whatever your heart desires, my best wishes to you, dear. Spend your money as you would like and enjoy your choices. After you pay your taxes, your money is yours alone.

I certainly do not want to pay for your private "schools" that would indoctrinate our precious young ones in ways that I certainly would not approve of. Heavens.

Can I opt out of some of my taxes? I don't much like what that rascal W. (William McKinley in my day, Dubya in yours) does with his foreign affairs and it hits me right in my pocketbook (to this very day!). Of course not.

@PaulRevere your argument makes NO sense. <I> pay all of my taxes, how am I NOT aware of how much I am spending. My CHOICE is to not have children, therefore the $10K or whatever I am spending is to bring YOUR ignorant children to a minimum standard. If YOU choose to "educate" aka indoctrinate them elsewhere it is incumbent upon YOU to finance that. I want the most dirt poor children to be articulate, able to read and write in English, versed in the basics of math and able to think critically. If YOU wish to inject theology, hocus pocus, Druidism, Droidism or whatever, that is your business and your place to finance. Just as I must finance the education of the ignorant unwashed masses despite not contributing my seed to the fray. Please. Try. To. Use. Logic.

Your post represents my sentiments also. thank you.

You're quite welcome.

"Of all the tyrannies that affect mankind, tyranny in religion is the worst."
---Thomas Paine

Quoted from the pen of William Braudis:

"It is quite easy to kill a baby, either by ripping it apart while still in the womb and throwing the pieces into the land fill, or better yet, . . . ."

William, in your sentence above, the conjunction "and" links the verbs "ripping" and "throwing"; therefore, by your own pen, you noted both as two steps within one means of killing. I know this is complicated as the means of murder here requires two actions. I understand why you're confused. It's an inelegant sentence to be sure, but one hopes the author has a sense of his own meaning.

P.S. Please identify your high school. I’m sure the alumni will be honored by your shared heritage.

Apparently Mr. Braudis (he of the brave rhetoric) has forgotten that Bain Capital (Yes, that Bain Capital.) holds majority interest in a company called Stericycle, which is one of the largest, if not the largest, company which disposes of aborted fetuses.
Of course, Mr. Romney is one of those "party bosses - right?"

Hey Maher..can you go any more left?
http://www.lifenews.com/2012/07/04/left-wing-blogs-falsely-attack-romney-on-abortion-stericycle/

Hey, oh brave (yet anonymous) It...can you go any more dexter? *
You are wrong.
* I cannot use "right" in this context, fearing that you might seize upon it as an endorsement of your position.
You are wrong.

Here's delicious irony: "A student ignorance. . . ."

Hey, Paul Revere, stop with the screaming on the horse already. Your voice is unintelligible. Something about the "Bribbish is crumbing."

Hey PaulRevere did you realize that we have mense critiquing our Comments. Oh my I is scared thda he wont alow us to rite anymor comments. Please note that in his photo he is either being frisk by the police or maybe it's some kind of kinky love.

Billy, click on the photo. It shows John McCain embracing George Bush. But, wait a moment, we are in agreement. (Didn't think I'd write that sentence today.) I, too, see an image of kink.

60 percent support of your own state GOP honchos, is pretty underwhelming...I think his campaign is in trouble when 40% of needed base does not want him running.

The tactic of GOP with Akin has once again sunk to framing it as battle of Good v. Evil... (as demonstrated in these comments). I do not think that will work.

Gregg:
I certainly applaud the poll. You should be applauded for doing it.
It is necessary as a follow up.
But, the "political ramifications" go beyond just today.
I suggest AKIN was condemned because of his "religious" beliefs. That is political ramifications.
That is what the media did. The poll confirms that the wimp Republican party could not recognize what was an obvious attempt to upgrade McCaskill to something she was not. The poll's "political ramifications" Are about "The religious right" and the denigration of people who stand for the "moral" teachings that AKIN represents.

James Mense: of course, has a poll of his own. That being to try and embarrass the
writers into oblivion. Let me guess! James must be an english Teacher who stands against everything the AKIN poll indicates.
Yes! GOD is the political whipping person that AKIN defends.
The mere mention of "GOD" is political ramification.
All polls and discussions in life have "political Ramifications".
You may not agree with that , but I do appreciate the freedom to comment.
James Mense wants to turn it into an English excercise.

Really, you can't expect serious topical discussion on anything political. Yes, the repetitive non-sensical comments can be easily ignored (or read for entertainment value) - however the highly inappropriate ones need to be removed.

I realize, then it becomes a 24/7 job to monitor these comment sections.

Just who in the Hell do you think you are ? True Veterans do not go around asking for handouts, of any kind. Some of my friends have gone through life without hands and / or legs and have received very little help from the Government. All of the younger people are all looking for a free ride, well I really hate to tell you this but there ain't no such thing as free as everything free has been paid for by someone (s). WW ll and Korea Vets got along without all of these handouts that you and your family can not do without. And yes it was not easy for many of them but they made it. Going to war for the defense and safety of America is a DUTY no more, no less.
Changing to be a democrat ? you have been a democrat all of your adult life as you beg for more Government handouts for yourself.

Well noted, Beav. It's appalling how folks, without thought or concern, parrot empty phrases such as "Support our troops" and "Let's not forget our heroes." Real support, actual remembrance and genuine regard would require this nation to provide the best medical treatment for our soldiers. But this costs money. No, the Republicans say, this costs too much. . . . Meanwhile, McCain, Romney, Ryan and the rest are anxious to start yet another war, this one in Iran. But, hey, blood is cheap, when it's not your son or your daughter bleeding.

Even cheaper are those empty phrases. As thoughtless and automatic as a memorized prayer.

Mensy ".... the Republicans say, this cost too much..." WRONG again... it was obama who said that our wounded should pay for their own treatments. You and your democrats and your democratic controlled medias buried that one very quickly.

Now tell us all, mensy, just what branch of the Military did you serve in since you know so much about the thinking of our brave wounded service personal.

U.S. Army

Thank you. Mense is a troubled soul and a trouble maker through his total misunderstand of facts.

Gregg,

I do not think reasonable discourse isw possible with many of the folks here!

Gregg,

I do not think reasonable discourse is possible with many of the folks here who hide behind a nom de Net.

So you would use a divisive President?
It is NOT Akin:
1) Issuing $4,000 checks to anyone who buys a Car (clunker program)
2) issuing $8,000 checks for anyone who buys a Home (1st time home)
3) Investing and Losing close to $1bil in energy start-ups (All losers-Bankrupted)
4) Paying unemployed for 2 years longer than the funds available (All Borrowed)
5) Forgiving workers to pay over $2,000 into the soc sec medicare funds (That are in need of Cash ) (Cost? over $500billion) All Lost
That is the payroll tax cut- which I call the soc sec-Medicare retirement CUT.
6) Asking the Treasury to keep the bond markets and stock markets pumped with printed dollars. (That, sir is future inflation) Printing money will increase the prices of everything you buy.
No ---it is OBAMA that will then declare that those Mean corporations are raising prices on the Poor public. Chuckling as he discovers the new way to raise taxes.
Let the Corporations do it for Him.
How uninformed you must be.

Paul Revere I said anyone who uses God as a divisive weapon. Anyone claiming their ideas ordained by God, or that God "spoke to them on this issue" or attempts to twist the Old testament into the words of Jesus Christ. Any of those things have little or nothing to do any of the 6 items you have listed. Please try to make a point relevant to the post you are commenting on.

My comments are right on topic. All in direct response to your 1st line.
You wrote: "You refuse to support anyone who uses "God" as a divisive weapon.
So I responded--You would therefore (Support) and use a DIVISIVE PRESIDENT.

Now Mr "A is a jerk", you obviously do not understand that if "GOD" can be a divisive weapon, Obama already is "a Divisive President"

I guess I must stop assuming that you know how divisive this President really is.
I only listed some points.

PaulRevere you miss my point entirely. Do I need to explain to you that the President is simply a man? I do not understand how you are construing to mean that a man, whether divisive, powerful, popular, evil, whatever the adjective or explicitive, is comparable to God. Do you have a comprehension problem, or are you an atheist?

Well ,I have always thought the President was "THE MESSIAH".
Doesn't that make him the God of the Left.?

"PaulRevere" - since you state "Well ,I have always thought the President was "THE MESSIAH"...since you did not specify "a" President, then that means you always thought "all" Presidents are "THE MESSIAH."
So - this means you lit candles in front of an image of Bill Clinton - right?
So - this means you lit candles in front of an image of Jimmy Carter - right?
So - this means you lit candles in front of an image of Lyndon Johnson - right?
So - this means you lit candles in front of an image of John Kennedy - right?
So - this means you lit candles in front of an image of Harry Truman - right?
So - this means you lit candles in front of an image of Franklin Roosevelt - right?

Dave:
Nice to hear your reasons for polled question.
The Akin incident was orchestrated and as expected, major Republican's hit the airwaves rather than calling Mr Akin for clarifications.
Listening to the shouts of Yes vs NO at the convention, I could only replace the question of "amend the Platform" to (Crucify Him). Those who favor say-------
Akin represents a roadblock to liberals and the media.
The Akin incident will actually unite many to vote for the "GOD" party.
McCaskill has turned her nose at Missouri's dislike of Obama's policies.
She ignores that Missouri voted against Obama 4 years ago.
Giving the Senate to Obama will destroy the God-Given rights of all Americans.

Come now, "Paul Revere" - the "'GOD' party""?
I guess that would be the National Socialist Party - right?
You remember - German soldiers in WWII had "Gott mit uns" on their belt buckles.

Perhaps you should try convincing the 40% of your co-horts, GOP loyalists, Romney and Ryan, that disagree with you about Akin - before you trot out the hackneyed
"traditional United States corresponding to its historical roots or a socialistic godless nation with open borders." and whatever that means.

Now, now, RDBet - I think he wants to go back to the 13 original states (historical roots, don't you know) and with slavery, no emancipation for women, etc.

Well Tom:
I should have said the "ILLIGITIMATE GOD" party.

So, you are saying Se. Atkin used to crap his pants and then had his head slammed into a wall? Because that would explain many of his statements. It also helps to explain why a large number of his base supporters don't support him. He has handed in crappy work too often, time to let him know he isn't special, and get him OFF the public dole.

Go find a suitable job, Rep. Atkin. Your time on Public Assistance is up.

Rich, shouldn't it be up to the parents to teach their children that if they want something they have to work for it and they aren't entitled to anything. That is that I am trying to teach my son I am not leaving it up to the schools to teach my son that if you want something you work for it.

Drew's Mom, you are exactly right. Unfortunately, many of these parents have bought into the mentality I described in my previous post. In addition, I can't tell you how many times parents dump there responsibilities onto the teachers as they run off to tennis lessons, bridge and of course their jobs. I once had a second grade student hand me a drawing and say, "Do you like it"? I said, "Do you want me to tell you it's good, or do you want me to tell you the truth?" He said, "The truth". I said, "It's okay. There are some good things about it and some things you need to work on. Do you want to try again?" He tried again and his second effort was much better.

I don't know about you, Drew's Mom, but I'm so happy there are guys like Rich out there willing to cut the crap and finally tell all those 7 year olds that their drawings suck. Have you seen this stuff? Finally! Someone with the balls to say, "You call this a dog, loser? Try again." In fact, balls are probably the answer in general. I think we can expect nothing but a nation of pansies until we get rid of all these candy-toting, ribbon-wielding woman teachers, always thinking with their ovaries and not their tiny little woman brains.

THAT is why unemployment has risen? Give me a break!
Your statement is an opinion - not a fact.

Tom: (This comment does not apply to "Teachers" and Educators and Government employees because your future is Bright.)

We don't give breaks unless you answer the question.
How about telling us Why there are 23million people Not working in America.
Devon says it's because of High tax-rates "COMING".
Tell us why Corporations are not hiring as they hoard their Cash.
Maybe you should google "Affordable care act".
Become a Democratic genious for the 1st time as you will see hundreds of TAXES imposed on down to the "medical scooter 3.7% tax" on everyone who buys medical devices. (That includes every person in America).
You will learn that Obama-Health TAX will raise (Doubled) Medicare tax rates from 2.9% to 5.8% starting 2013or 2014 not sure of year.
That is on top of the 40% Obama wants. Go ahead--Make my day.
WARNING?-- in the words of Host (Michael Savage)-- You may suffer
"Psychological Nudity"

One should, in general, construct sentences that roughly follow the English language conventions normally used. It's so the rest of us can clearly understand the garbled thoughts Mr Revere is trying to articulate. What is has to do with Rep. Atkin, I cannot fathom. I do know this; when one "Googles" a subject, the tendency is to look to sites with opinions and conclusions which support their own opinion, and to discard other data as "slanted". Further, when presented with hard evidence refuting one's already "supported" opinion, the average person hardens their stance, furtively searching for holes in the other person's data.
I'll keep it simple. You and Mr. Seddon are wrong.
If you wish to use a term such as "genius" as an attempt to insult someone, please be aware of how to spell it.

Yes Tom, the highest corporate tax-rate in the world is part of the reason for high unemployment. It's unbelievable how you can't understand that driving employers either out of business, or out of the country, effects the number of jobs. Simple economics. Simple fact.
The rest, those are criminal acts, NOT committed by Akin, but by his opponent.

Where is your proof that we are wrong? I do research for a living, that's how I know you don't do any. It's also why you SAY we are wrong, but don't bother to illustrate how.
I understand you have to keep it simple, anytime someone gives you facts, you seem to get confused, and have to attack the messenger (without changing, interpreting, or even acknowledging those facts). You'd think cause & effect would be simple enough concepts, along with backing up your statements, but each is apparently over your head.
So..... Hop on "Google" & find the "link" that states that these things didn't happen. Find the link that states that NAFTA, over-regulation & the highest corporate tax-rate in the world (as of April & more coming) doesn't drive companies to do business elsewhere & doesn't effect unemployment.

Devon, stand by your man Akin - because Romney and Ryan and many prominent republicans are not.

But to take your tangent on about corporate taxation-(I know why bother, you will just head to another tangent) but here are two facts to consider:
Corporate Income taxes only account for 5.5% of Federal budget revenues.
http://www.concordcoalition.org/learn/budget/federal-budget-pie-charts

And Marxist Obama has proposed cutting federal tax rates on corporations.
http://articles.latimes.com/2012/feb/22/business/la-fi-obama-corporate-tax-20120223

I'm outta here. Enjoy.

I wonder how much it was 20 or so years ago, before we began chasing-away all of the business....

The second sentence. "which companies should pay more to make up the difference — remains elusive in an election year." = "Incentives" & "Penalties" = Tax-inequality. Who pays this %, who pays that %... It's discriminatory & divisive.

Since you missed it, here's what he also proposed....
$989 billion in new taxes over the next 10 years, starting in 2011, most are tax increases on individuals.
1) On people making more than $250,000.
$338 billion – Bush tax cuts expire
$179 billlion – eliminate itemized deduction
$118 billion – capital gains tax hike
Total: $636 billion/10 years

2) Businesses:
$17 billion – Reinstate Superfund taxes
$24 billion – tax carried-interest as income
$5 billion – codify "economic substance doctrine"
$61 billion – repeal LIFO
$210 billion – international enforcement, reform deferral, other tax reform
$4 billion – information reporting for rental payments
$5.3 billion – excise tax on Gulf of Mexico oil and gas
$3.4 billion – repeal expensing of tangible drilling costs
$62 million – repeal deduction for tertiary injectants
$49 million – repeal passive loss exception for working interests in oil and natural gas properties
$13 billion – repeal manufacturing tax deduction for oil and natural gas companies
$1 billion – increase to 7 years geological and geophysical amortization period for independent producers
$882 million – eliminate advanced earned income tax credit
Total: $353 billion/10 years.

PS, Akin isn't necessarily my guy, I'm just pointing out that he doesn't have the background of criminal activity under the umbrella of Democratic-Immunity.

The aggregate of the top 100 US corporations in 2010, with $5 trillion in revenue, $500 billion in pre-tax profit was taxed at 10%. Granted, some did come in at the highest tax rate, but most came in far lower. I also submit this link, I do not vouch for the credibility of the author, nor would I vouch for any "internet blog" . http://jonathanturley.org/2012/09/09/who-really-creates-jobs/

One number?
What about payroll taxes, what about the cost of 10 new regulations per day, what about sales taxes, capital gaines (set to go from 21% to over 35% next year), or the hundreds of other government imposed expenses on small business ...............?
Thousands of businesses have been taxed to the point of leaving the country.
Here's how & why....
This has become a mainstay (even a theme) of any speech your lovely Maxine Waters gives....
"we’re gonna tax them out of existence.”
It started with the banks (that she said were not in trouble, btw) that she personally helped FORCE into bad loans, forcing them to lose money at her very hand.
This is how liberal politicians see taxes, as a punishment (in this case, punishment for HER ideology FAILING - because it had to be someone else's fault, right?), a means to drive businesses out of existence, as well as a means of controlling which businesses survive & which do not.
Get that? She failed, but wants to (with anger & venom) penalize someone else for it, in this case, the ones her own failure had already crippled.
This is a common-theme among "do-gooders" who are economically clueless.

Here's another gem from the ideology of the left, as defined by Miss Waters...
“Guess what this liberal would be all about? This liberal would be about socializing … uh, umm. … Would be about, basically, taking over, and the government running all of your companies.”
How is it none of you have a problem with these types of asinine quotes?
Just a quote? Really? What about student loans? Yep, a perfect example that Maxine is going to get exactly what she wants, if those who follow her & her ideology without the slightest understanding of it, don't wake up.
How many more do you want?

Devon,
You completely whiffed on this comment above:
"a country with already the highest corporate tax-rate in the world (which, by the way is the reason why unemployment has gone from 5.5% to 8.4%), "

Your big tangent is misquided, to say the least. I should have pointed out your misinformation earlier, but you keep the zingers coming so fast that I lose interest.

I already pointed out what a relatively small role corporate taxes play in federal revenues. And how Obama proposes to cut corporate taxes.

Here's another chart showing decrease of corporate taxes in US history - the tax burden on corps are near an all-time low:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Corporate_Income_Tax_as_a_Share_of_GDP,_1946_-_2009.gif

And starting with the recession - chart showing jobs going down, and corporate profits going up, and then a commentary thereon:
http://www.theatlantic.com/business/archive/2010/07/corporate-profits-are-up-because-of-the-unemployment-crisis/60477/

So much for supply side economics - eh?

And you are welcome for cleaning up after you. But don't expect it again -the next times you comment in error (and I am sure there will be many) - you are on your own.

Sorry RD, Not only are you going back to one number, when there are MANY numbers to consider. I showed you before when you attempted to claim that Obama wanted to lower corporate taxes, where his stance is on raising or lowering taxes.

http://www.usnews.com/opinion/blogs/economic-intelligence/2012/04/02/worlds-highest-corporate-tax-rate-hurts-us-economically

http://taxfoundation.org/article/countdown-over-were-1

http://www.moneynews.com/StreetTalk/US-Corporate-Tax-Rate/2012/04/02/id/434548

http://finance.yahoo.com/blogs/breakout/u-companies-not-pay-world-highest-taxes-rate-152854532.html

http://blog.heritage.org/2012/03/30/no-fooling-u-s-now-has-highest-corporate-tax-rate-in-the-world/

http://articles.businessinsider.com/2012-04-02/markets/31273366_1_oecd-corporate-tax-rate-percentage-points

You make being perpetually-wrong somehow an artform...
The perfect liberal, I guess, but remind me not to hire you as custodian.

In closing, I can assume you:
1) Are not a teacher
2) Are not interested in knowing the massive TAXES hitting this country.
3) Will not give your opinion on why unemployment has now reached 23 million people.

In closing, I can presume you:
1) Are NOT a teacher;
2) Are not interested in taxation rules which ignore the "1%";
3) Did not comprehend my earlier post.

I closing:
I will tell, all of you young intelluelects YOU BETTER HOPE AND PRAY THAT OBAMA AND THE DEMOCRATS ARE THROWN OUT OF THE GOVERNMENT FOR YOUR SAKE. NO TAX ON THE MIDDLE CLASS, RIGHT ? WRONG obama IS SET TO TAX THE HELL OUT OF YOU. POSSIBLY YOU ARE TOO YOUNG MENTALLY TO UNDERSTAND " FEES " AND " VALUE ADDED " ? WELL YOU BETTER, AND BEFORE NOVEMBER, THESE ARE INDIRECT TAXES ON YOU, THE MIDDLE CLASS, AND YES THEY ARE DIRECT TAX INCREASES ON ALL. AND ANOTHER DEFINITION FOR YOU, 99% AND 1%, FOR YOU WHO TALK STUPID, ALL OF YOU IN THE 99% CLASS, YOU PAY IN 60% OF ALL TAXES COLLECTED BY THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT SO GUESS WHO IS PAYING THE 40% ..... OH YES, THAT STINKING LOW LIFE 1%'ers. THE VERY PEOPLE THAT YOU AND obama ARE CHASING OUT OF THE UNITED STATES. WITH THE ELECTRONICS AVAILABLE TODAY RUNNING A COMPANY FROM FROM THOUSANDS MILES AWAY IS NO LONGER A BIG DEAL. NOW, AS THESE DIRTY ROTTEN MILLIONAIRES MOVE OUT OF THE UNITED STATES GUESS WHO WILL NEED TO MAKE UP THAT MISSING 1%'ers, OH YES IT WILL BE YOU DEAR BROTHER AND SISTERS. obamas BANKRUPTING, obama CARE, WILL COST EACH OF YOU GREATLY. obama AND A DEMOCRAT CONTROLLED SENATE WILL KILL THE UNITED STATES AND CONVERT IT INTO A SOCIALIST COUNTRY WITHIN FOURS YEARS WITH obama THE SUPREME COMMANDER. Ya, GO AHEAD AND LAUGH, WE UNDERSTAND THAT THE MOST OF YOU YOUNG PEOPLE WILL NEVER UNDERSTAND THIS.

Hey intelluelects, you know he means it because he's yelling.

Abortion herb Rue is plentiful in Missouri this year.

PaulR Thanks for your help. I did that comment like obama run the U.S., over the past four years .... blind folded.

You have said this quite well Maureen, at least the first half of your Comment. The second portion I can not speak to as we have a very open Government in Saint Peters, to a very large extent though, I believe that all Governments have a degree of " behind closed doors " problems.

Preeclampsia is NOT a mechanism to protect women from unwanted babies with men they don't know. Please do not spread that myth. Akin was completely wrong in his assertion that a women's body works like that. Conception happens when an egg and sperm meet. The egg doesn't care how the sperm got there. If a rape victim doesn't get pregnant it is because it was not the optimum time in her fertility cycle to conceive, she has a preexisting condition that makes conception difficult or impossible or her attacker does not provide viable sperm that can complete the necessary trek.. There is absolutely no scientific or logical evidence to support his statement regarding conception during rape.

And how will Romneycare be different from Obamacare?

@Sensible...Romneycare starts with an "R" and bears the "Romney" stamp of approval. Atkin believes in "doesn't care" or he would not be wasting his time with nonsense legislation and his own interpretation of the Bible and instead focus on being a real leader. @ Robert please make note of the caps lock button on the left, I believe you have it on. Spell check is a better friend than cap lock.

Sensible: Romneycare does not exist for America. It was actually Ted Kennedy-care in Mass. state.(ONLY MASS RESIDENTS USE IT) Romney was the Governor and signed the Law pased by the Mass Congress. That Law is a disaster in Mass. (Romney knows that)
With that experience , Romney would completely discard Obamacare, because Romney knows that it will be a disater in All Of America.
Romneycare for the USA will actually be voted by the congress. It will be truly a bi-partisan DEM-GOP agreement for ALL the People, not just a few.

Need proof of how bad Obamacare is?
Well over 3,000 unions and favored Democrats are exempted from participating in Obamacare. Why did they opt-out. The rest of the People are all Forced to join and PAY THE TAX.
How's that for a major difference in Romneycare vs Obamacare.
How would you like to share Mass Monthly Health insurance premiums with Missouri's Health premiums.
Need some help! MASS individuals pay $33,000 per year for Health insurance.
Missouri individuals pay about $12,000 per year.
OBAMA CARE will cost every Missourian $20,000 more to share MASS Health insurance. That is why USA cannot have Universal Coverage for all states.
That would bankrupt Missouri residents.
AKIN has zero affect on any of that law. He is only one vote.
McCaskill will guarantee an eventual universal health tax that will cost YOU& Missouri taxpayers Billions. (especially when NY Calif average $36,000 premiums are shared)

NO to Claircare---The MO populus does NOT support BOcare, and she went AGAINST Missouri for the vote that carried the agenda item. NO TO MCCASKILL. under any circumstances.

@ AKIN IS A JERK----- all this going on, and your concern is a discretionary use of textual options? IF HE WANTS TO POST IN ALL CAPS, AND THAT THROWS YOU OFF, THEN PLEASE---DICTATE TO SOMEONE MORE SENSIBLE ABOUT THE SUBJECT MATTER; let them bear your viscerally based rant response to text type. Honestly, you give yourself away: Internationals who post with ESL often use all caps to insure accuracy. The style of text does not change their thought concept. So, chill good brother....love, maureen

How will whatever "Romneycare for the USA" is be different from Obamacare?

Rather than waste a media opportunity this week on "Meet the Press", why did Gov. Romney not tell us? This was one of the turning points in the campaign, I believe. He could have told us, but didn't.

"Romneycare for the USA will actually be voted by the congress." The Affordable Care Act wasn't?

" It will be truly a bi-partisan DEM-GOP agreement for ALL the People, not just a few." There is nothing to have stopped any member of the U.S. Congress from introducing such legislation, even after the Affordable Care Act became law. Show me.

"It was actually Ted Kennedy-care in Mass. state."

"Romney was the Governor and signed the Law pased by the Mass Congress."

So Sen. Kennedy forced Gov. Romney to sign? Or dId Gov. Romney think he was signing something else? Or?

Hello ANONYMOUS----Have you ever listened to "Sympathy for the Devil" by the Stones? It would be a brief, shallow comfort for you to hear the exact lyrics.

Good point, the original topic was Rep. Akin. Let's talk about his legislative record. What legislation has he introduced in 12 years that has been signed into law?

How's he do on the bipartisan front? Does he accomplish things with members of the other party? How about his own party?

Does he work hard for us? What percentage of votes did he miss in his last quarter in the House?

What has Rep. Akin done for small business?

"Let's talk about his legislative record." That always seems to end the conversation.

KSDK has scheduled a debate for Oct. 18. I wonder if I'll learn anything from that.

There's a lot more to a legislative record that those numbers. See comments near the beginning of this thread about the quality of those sponsored bills.

And missing 85% of his votes in one quarter? Really.