According to your leadership, Democrats are reluctant to raising taxes. All the while, Democrats have said the problem with the economy is Bush’s tax breaks.

Why would the Democrats NOT raise taxes?

START SPINNING!

Here’s the article: http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/us_tax_cuts
Steve: Create MORE jobs in the private sector, there-by creating a larger tax base.
TEAGAN: You, my friend, are a great American. Liberals, read Teagan’s answer, and PLEASE, try to learn something!
Capt. Cold: Now, explain what happens when your Government gets the taxes. That’s right, WASTE. You can’t use government to control the flow of money!
BY THE WAY: AS I SHOWED WITH THE LINK….IT’S THE DEMOCRATS THAT ARE THINKING TWICE ABOUT RAISING TAXES! WHY IS THAT?

I DIDN’T ASK THE QUESTION TO DEBATE "MY SIDE" OF THE STORY. EXPLAIN WHY "YOUR SIDE" IS BACK-SLIDING!

and we need to flush Washington of democrats.

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20100911/ap_on_bi_ge/us_poverty_in_america

no matter which way you spin it, after a year and a half his majesty has been unable to turn this tide. Which is just proof to me that the trend began because of policies set in place by clinton back in the 90s and made worse by a democrat congress in 06.
so far just just liberals in denial want to answer?
i love how robert proves that liberals and dumocrats respond to the truth about their inadequacies with namecalling

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20090410/ap_on_go_pr_wh/obama_war_costs

"…with another 0 million in counterinsurgency aid to Pakistan."

When Bush sent money to Pakistans government, the Left had an all-out full blown meltdown in the press over the ‘wasted millions of dollars spent on a corrupt government’.

So I’m curious, will we also see that same level of hatred in this forum from the current crop of Obama supporters? Will you all now stand up and slam Obama for doing the exact same thing Bush did that you then opposed?

Careful, this will be a tough one to spin away…
CathRun – You just said that Pakistan is doing it ‘on their own’ yet at the same will be accepting millions from Obama. Did you even read the link???

http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20080808/ts_nm/usa_politics_obama_dc

In the article, McCain is dogging Obama for taking some time off. He’s using the Congress/Senate on vacation platform to bash him.
Yet, McCain himself was hanging out with Bush Sr. a few weeks back.

The way I see it, both McCain OR Obama haven’t been doing too much "Senate" work since they’re BOTH out campaigning full time.
And, Obama has been campaigning much longer than McCain due to his early Republican nominee win. He deserves a few days off to spend with his FAMILY.

So, why does McCain have to use this as a negative spin? Why can’t he just use Obama’s time off as a chance to promote HIMSELF without bashing his opponent?

Thoughts?

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20090226/ap_on_go_co/fact_check_budget

Or is this another case of what Republicans like to infamously call "liberal media spin"?
I know… and for 8 years you believed things from President Bush that ended up being in direct contrast with what he ended up doing, but believed & defended him. You see the irony here? I guess you guys truly have "seen the light", lol.
And most US Firms fall into the tax bracket that President Obama said would be getting taxed more after 2010. Seriously… look into things… it’s fun.

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20090316/ap_on_go_pr_wh/obama_economy

Per the article, Obama is helping small businesses to get loans.

According to many in here, that seemed to be one of the ways to boost the economy. Now that President Obama is addressing this, what will his naysayers gripe about now?

yet the "BOTTOM LINE" is in their OWN ARTICLE:

"The bottom line for Obama: Losing even one seat in the Senate would make it more difficult to block Republican filibusters. And if the GOP makes big gains in the House — a pickup of 30 or more seats is seeming ever more likely — that will make it much harder to pass administration proposals."

BOTTOM LINE: OBAMA WILL BE A LAME DUCK FOR HIS LAST TWO YEARS OF HIS ONLY TERM

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20100107/ap_on_go_co/us_democrats2010

If it were Republicans stepping down because they were going to lose, the media would have a field day. With Democrats, it’s being spun as positive. So transparent.

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20100107/ap_on_go_co/us_democrats2010

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/us_asian_carp_great_lakes

I agree with their opinion on stopping the Asian carp flow…blocking access to the basin should be our first priority for that.
But I shouldn’t even know their opinion on the matter, as a good journalist wouldn’t inundate his articles (or articles taken from other sites, like this one which is from Associated Content) with bias to the point of being an Op-ed and call it "news".

so tell me: is this a good example of the terrible news bias of Yahoo News?

Poll: Obama earns nation’s trust

http://news.yahoo.com/s/politico/21213;_ylt=AuMegA0JPPONCTP7eDy08OQGw_IE;_ylu=X3oDMTE2azY4MDY3BHBvcwMzBHNlYwN5bi1yLWItbGVmdARzbGsDLXBvbGw6b2JhbWFl

Of those who said they trust the president, 31 percent said they trust him “a great deal.” An additional 35 percent said they have “some” trust that Obama will find the correct solution. Thirty-one percent said they trust Obama either “not very much” or “not at all.”……Romney got a mixed reaction, with 38 percent of voters saying they trust him and 39 percent saying they don’t.
me…."Why would you need to manipulate things like this?"

Obama had 31% strongly for and 31% strongly against.

Romney had 38% strongly for and 38% strongly against.

Obama is said to be "trusted". Romney is not.