As long as the folks on your side of the fence keep framing this as "takers" vs. "makers," I think you're likely to keep losing.

I just call 'em like I see 'em. All the people taking food stamps, welfare checks, Obama phones etc. etc want to make certain that they keep getting their hand outs. While having a Republican in office does not necessarily guarantee lower spending on these sorts of things, the perception is that it does.

Marcia and Tamar (was reading some old posts and came across this rather interesting exchange)...

Over the last few years, I've heard Newt Gingrich describe Obama as the "Food Stamp President". There's no question that the # of new Food Stamp enrollments has spiked over the last few years. But the wheels were set in motion for a huge spike during the ....wait for it....during the Bush administration.

During the Bush administration, the USDA/FNS started outreach programs that included incentives to states for signing up more for food stamps. And those TV commercials on Mexican TV that give instructions on how to come to the U.S. and get on food stamps were initially drafted before Obama took office. Obama gets blamed for much of this, but it started before he took office. (And both of you know me well enough to know that I'm not a fan of Obama)

Yes, incentives for Food Stamps have further increased during Obama's time - but there was a pronounced spike that began under Bush. The reality is that sometimes Bill Clinton was a bit more of a fiscal conservative than George Bush. Remember it was George Bush who said in 2002, "we will use the mighty hand of govt to force banks to lend money to black families to address the issue of the low % of blacks who can obtain mortgages. Can you imagine the uproar if Obama had said that?

Now, what CAN be said is that during the Obama administration, food stamp fraud has sharply increased. I can speak from some experience, having worked in WIC/FNS before, that these govt programs allocate resources disproportionally - hiring WAY too many in program and policy areas, and not enough compliance investigators. This is one of the many issues I have with Barack Obama - his complete lack of business acumen and even basic project management skills are a reason (one of many) for the increased visibility of fraud and waste. But it's historically incorrect to say that 1 in X Americans are on food stamps because of Obama. The real reasons are much more complex.

This "Obama phone" thing was a pure gimmick and a stupid election ploy by the RNC that made them look petty. Here's where Mitt Romney was unable to hit Obama where he should have - Obama likely set back green energy 10 years by indiscriminately giving away billions of dollars to energy companies that were also labeled "in distress". Yes, Romney mentioned Solyndra in the debates, but not in the right way.

Here's where Barack's lack of experience comes in. Since we are all software professionals, let's use the analogy of wanting to invest in a new technology or a new methodology. A sound approach would be to take one or two of the most promising aspects, implementing some funding/investment in a prototype model, tie a payout to an outcome, etc ..and then re-evaluate. If the signs are good, then green-light and give some more funding....wash, rinse, evaluate, repeat.... This is project management 101 - an approach for which Barack Obama's experience as a "community organizer" is anathema. But because he blew away billions on companies whom his own advisers said were bad investments....and on the basis of cronies and not merit....he set back any legitimacy of green energy 10 years. Romney was a good businessman, and yet he was unable to communicate this.

THAT is the kind of criticism that Barack Obama deserves, not this crap that comes out of the mouth of the likes of Rush Limbaugh or Newt Gingrich. The only way to beat bad ideas is with good ideas or good arguments - that means some underlying philosophy or framework, and the RNC is more window-dressing here.

There is enough false information about "what started under Bush, what started under Obama" to fill the Grand Canyon. Unfortunately, most of the news shows fail to set the record straight. CNN is weak, and people like Rachel Maddow and Sean Hannity are nothing but sophists. It leads to countless liberals believing (for instance) Fast and Furious started under Bush and that there's no actual IRS targeting, and countless conservatives believing that Obama is responsible for everything that's going wrong.

There is a perception that George Bush was capitalism personified and that Barack Obama is a socialist. Both statements are more false than true, and to a degree, both are not all that relevant. Both were sloppy, though for different reasons. This country has GOT to start evaluating politicians by their accomplishments, their judgment, and their bias for outcomes and execution. I don't mind govt programs - so long as they're implemented with levels of accountability that sadly are going backwards under this current president. One of these days I'd like to see more coverage of the state leaders in North Dakota, where there seems to be a sliver of hope of "smart govt" (if they'd only get their brains out of their rear ends on heartbeat bills)

For the most part, I avoided the "makers vs takers" argument. But I'll say this - while in the abstract I'm for immigration reform and generally think it's OK for anyone to come live here so long as they behave and obey our laws, it is absolutely irresponsible for any politician in Washington D.C. to entertain immigration reform until we get some stronger and more effective leadership and until we start slimming down the size of govt. This is an argument that's been successfully presented by Ann Coulter, who (for once in my life) I agree with .