Vote

Rep. Michele Bachmann, head of the House Tea Party Caucus, tells Newsmax that the Federal Reserve’s plan to increase the money supply by buying government securities is a “huge mistake” that will boost inflation and amount to “stealing from the American people.”

The Minnesota Republican also declares that President Barack Obama wants to impose a “massive increase in taxes” by refusing to extend the Bush tax cuts for all Americans.

In a clear sign of voters’ disdain for President Barack Obama’s policies, several media personalities with no political experience, including Bill O’Reilly and Glenn Beck, would be within striking distance of defeating Obama in a head-to-head race, according to a new Newsmax/SurveyUSA poll.

Newsmax conducted the survey to find out how several well-known political and "dark-horse" celebrity figures, ranging from Secretary of State Hillary Clinton to businessmen Bill Gates and Warren Buffett to O’Reilly and Beck, would fare if they ran against Obama for the White House.

The survey of 1,000 registered voters was conducted Nov. 3-4, after Republicans won the House and gained six seats in the Senate in the midterm elections — results widely interpreted as a rejection of Obama and raising questions about his chances for re-election in 2012.

In the Newsmax poll, respondents were asked: “If there were an election for president of the United States today, and the only two names on the ballot were Bill O’Reilly and Barack Obama, whom would you vote for?” They also were asked that question with other leading media figures in place of O’Reilly.

Overall, O’Reilly got 46 percent of the vote and his fellow Fox News Channel host Beck received 45 percent.

Those percentages are remarkable considering that a prominent political figure, Sarah Palin, got 48 percent of the vote in the Newsmax poll.

O’Reilly even outpolled Obama among men with 52 percent of the vote, among Republicans (79 percent), and conservatives (82 percent).Beck tied Obama among men at 50 percent, and won among Republicans (78 percent) and conservatives (80 percent).

Both Beck and O’Reilly received 49 percent of the vote among white respondents.

great man with the mouth as Obama, but when it gets down to it.

updates on Ford, 2.5 billion dollar profit, Mallilo??? took over as CEO a few years back, thats the kinda guy you need in office, ONE guy turned that company around.....infiltrating India with our cars. and they really are building a qaulity product unlike what they have done in the past....not that fcn hard to do when you have a guiding light.

38th parrallel is creating some problems, the tension is building and somehow we sat around with todays intelligence which foiled us too in Iraq. this guy is a fcn nut.....more to come. I foresee some big problems with donkey dong kim

Trump is making noises about running - Mr. Art of the Deal has gone bankrupt a number of times, would anyone seriously want him as a leader? Beck? They couldn't make it through the year plus of scrutiny during the election process. Gates or Buffett would be a force. Buffett would probably win with 93% of the vote if he ran, he's one of those rare figures that seems to relate with working stiffs and wealthy, right and left.

When you look at it, you have to wonder why anyone seriously wants the job.

Eric, N. Korea certainly is a problem, talk about unpredictable. We've got 28,000 troops there, I just hope they stay safe.

Andy, perfectly written and explained, I agree with every word.

you know, if GM went under so would Ford who didnt take cash, the problem was the CEO of Ford encouraged the bailout due to its suppliers, if the suppliers of both companies went under so would the car companies. Unlike annheiser Bushes who sold out to the Belgians, Ford family held true and kept to the grindstone, recognized a problem and brought in a CEO from one of the airlines, Fords board balked a bit because he was a plane guy and his reply was you have 4000 parts in a car on the ground, Im use to 300,000 parts and to keep a plane flying......the rest is history

in fear of bankrupcy, debt may have been wiped out and suppliers to both Ford, GM and even Chyrsler, may have struggled and also went under because of lack of capital to sustaine, these companies could be the manufacturer of a simple bracket that could shut a line down and those were the fears of Mulillo. He was to at the round table insuring the bailout to prevent this from happening..
I can tell you first hand that Ford has come a long way and always tell these nip believers before you buy, go test drive a Ford, you will be surprised. basic economics, 2.5 billion in profits??? re-invest at local level, scholarships, parks, charities.....all beneficial to the community which means me and you.
I was blabbing about my buddy who is clipping at and t for 37.50, but he takes that cash and throws it right back into the economy, I dont agree on the wage and that is another discussion, but it keeps the ball rolling, now instead of trying to fix his boat in the garage he has the money to pay someone, we lost that core years ago and i really dont think its that hard to understand. when your out of money you usually go up the chain not down, but you must learn along the way as to what got you in that position and not to let it happen again....and I think GM was in that position and I think they know they wont get another chance

I think it would be a Hummer deal Papa if not. For some strange reason the majority wants to some day bow to a flag.
glad to hear you guys kept your jobs

63 Skier wrote: Trump is making noises about running - Mr. Art of the Deal has gone bankrupt a number of times, would anyone seriously want him as a leader? Beck? They couldn't make it through the year plus of scrutiny during the election process. Gates or Buffett would be a force. Buffett would probably win with 93% of the vote if he ran, he's one of those rare figures that seems to relate with working stiffs and wealthy, right and left. When you look at it, you have to wonder why anyone seriously wants the job. Eric, N. Korea certainly is a problem, talk about unpredictable. We've got 28,000 troops there, I just hope they stay safe.

You may be correct with your opinion about Buffett but what I find even more interesting is what he's saying and has been saying for a long time.


"Billionaire Warren Buffett, the third-richest man in the world, recently told ABC's Christine Amanpour that he disagrees with those who say the Obama administration is unjustly hurting business orders with high taxes by saying that in fact, the wealthy have never had it so good."

"I think that people at the high end, people like myself, should be paying a lot more in taxes. We have it better than we've ever had it," he told Amanpour.

"The rich are always going to say that, you know, 'Just give us more money, and we'll go out and spend more and then it will all trickle down to the rest of you.' But that has not worked the last 10 years, and I hope the American public is catching on."

Buffet is a poor comparison when discussing the 'high end'. Under the current structure, he is the exception rather than the norm in the 'high end'. Many small businesses that are just barely making it also fall into this abyss.

The truely wealthy will continue holding their cash rather than be punished by the gov't.

Greg, why do you feel so sorry for the rich? honestly tell me that you think Derek Jeter is worth 24 million a year?
I fall into that abyss, but taxes are a part of our civic duty, a good example is the downfall of the tax base at local levels, im being assessed for 7 k for a new bridge that is publically used, in reality taxes should be paying for this bridge, but there aint no money....someone has to pay for it via taxes or a assessments....im going to put a fcn toll road on this bridge bacause it goes to the community pool

Who said I feel sorry for the rich? I say let every man do his best.

The day our gov't is held to the same standards as we are by it is the day we do something about our debt. The waste in our system is a disgrace.

general consensus here, the pub party, feels the rich shouldnt pay their fair share of taxes, as you go up in income the tax shelters increase, for the rich created by the rich. we allow everyman in this country to do his best but alot of gain comes from being very lucky, but with it should come penalties, lets say taxes not penalties.
if you took a poor ass man off the streets and offered to him the winning lottery ticket for 20 million, but you would have to pay a 36% tax.....would he refuse the 20 million? of course he wouldnt, he would take the he would take the 12.8 and live comfortably for the rest of his life....or piss it away because he has no clue how to handle that type of wealth, but point being these are the opportunities this country gives us unlike any other in the world..., and it does come with a price...taxes, maybe its a dont know what you have until its gone syndrome, just like myself paying for the bridge, should i have to pay for a public access bridge, no, but I do realize without the bridge I cant get to the pool

what baffles me is on a gallon of gas, whether its 4.00 a gallon or 2 bucks a gallon, the tax I believe is 29 cents a gallon, there is some room there for more revenue, its one of those things unlike a sin tax, everyone is exposed. maybe im missing something?

Well, GM has almost paid back all there goverment money back, trimmed the union fat and FORD and GM are top seeling auto's again. Where they should be. Toyato is begging for customers, and hurting badly. Screw the foregin jobs and your liberal plug in the wall cars. When Obama's taxes take full affect, you can kiss in 2012 his "hind end", goodbye. Time for the republicans and americans to stand up again then. Private sector is still in a tevy and people know and want better jobs. Obama has had his adminstration tried to produce but can not. See ya!! Love ya Glenn Beck!!