Obama's 2012 Slogan: Can't Work With Others

How can you ever compromise with a Party that says they want you dead?

Be Half Dead?

98 votes

#1.1 - Sun Jan 8, 2012 1:17 PM EST

jade1

Congress has been dubbed the Party of No. Wonder how they got that name?

88 votes

#1.2 - Sun Jan 8, 2012 2:08 PM EST

Dani-976192

Who said they want him dead? If some Republican had actually said that, not only would it be the ONLY news story for at least a month, that particular Republican would have been tarred, feathered and shot on the White House lawn.

27 votes

#1.3 - Sun Jan 8, 2012 2:57 PM EST

Congress has been dubbed the Party of No

Really? Interesting.

17 votes

#1.4 - Sun Jan 8, 2012 3:04 PM EST

Hmmmm when the repubs said their only goal was to block Pres. Obama and make him a one term president EVEN BEFORE HE TOOK THE OATH OF OFFICE they pretty much set that tone. Their actions CONfirmed it. When people from the Bush 1 and Reagan admins are saying the same thing how can you criticize the president on this? The hypocrisy is laughable at this point.

73 votes

#1.5 - Sun Jan 8, 2012 3:07 PM EST

"Whether the blinds of bigotry, the shackles of the priesthood, and the fascinating glare of rank and wealth, give fair play to the common sense of the mass of their people, so far as to qualify them for self-government, is what we do not know. Perhaps our wishes may be stronger than our hopes." --Thomas Jefferson to Alexander von Humboldt, 1817.

19 votes

#1.6 - Sun Jan 8, 2012 3:10 PM EST

Janie Ackerly

jade1, maybe it's because they won't go for the "Socialist Agenda" the Obama Administration it forcing on this Country. He can't get it through his head that "we" are not like the Countries abroad.That's why "everyone " want to come here. The idea of the election in Nov. was to get people in there to vote NO. The real party on no is Reid and his cronies that won't even bring up for a Vote the Bills the House have Passed that would help with JOB CREATION!!

23 votes

#1.7 - Sun Jan 8, 2012 3:38 PM EST

gNOp slogan for 2012.....well, 1st is what they have said all alonf for FOUR friggin' years....they will do anything to get Obama out of office even if it involves sacrificing the country.

2nd... WE won't work for the good of all Americans!

30 votes

#1.8 - Sun Jan 8, 2012 3:43 PM EST

jumpshotjarrod

How very predictable: Republicans in Congress go to literally unprecedented levels to not work with the President and when he responds, he's the one who won't work with others.

Astounding.

47 votes

#1.9 - Sun Jan 8, 2012 3:46 PM EST

http://www.outsidethebeltway.com/the-absurdity-of-calling-obama-a-marxist/

jade1, maybe it's because they won't go for the "Socialist Agenda" the Obama Administration it forcing on this Country.

Wow, way to ignore actual facts, Janie Ackerly...

Obama’s proposals are well within the republican tradition, well within the classical liberal tradition, and well within the free-market tradition. You might question the wisdom of particular aspects of his policies given current economic conditions. Or argue that it doesn’t make a lot of sense to raise taxes now when we can borrow cheaply.

But calling the President a Marxist only exposes the speaker’s ignorance of Marxism, the history of capitalist countries, and President Obama.

35 votes

#1.10 - Sun Jan 8, 2012 3:48 PM EST

Poorworkingman

It should be like this " Fuk the country and Get Obama out. GOP style ".

15 votes

#1.11 - Sun Jan 8, 2012 3:49 PM EST

mountainmike-1199289

And who does he have to work with? Teapublicans are breaking all records for blind obstruction and filabusters. Then they are refusing to let Democrats even speak in committees.

If this is all about the Cordray appointment, this is BS. Cordray has the exact type of track records of holding multi billionaire corporations and white collar criminals accountable the American people/consumers need. In the meantime, Republicans are not serving the American people, they are serving the Koch brothers, ALEC, Grover Norquist, big oil, big coal, the military industrial complex, Wall Street, etc...

Lobbyist In Charge Of ‘Trying To Kill’ Financial Reform Hired By GOP Chair To Oversee Financial Regulations

Dec 26, 2010

A few days ago, incoming Agriculture Chairman Rep. Frank Lucas (R-OK) announced the hire of Ryan McKee as the senior staffer to oversee the Commodity Futures Trading Commission. McKee is currently a lobbyistworking for the U.S. Chamber of Commerce’s division dedicated to deregulating complex derivatives products. In her new role working for Lucas, McKee will be liaising with regulators in charge of implementing new rules under the Dodd-Frank Wall Street reform law to overhaul the over-the-counter derivatives market.

This is the type of slob appointment the Republicans like.

31 votes

#1.12 - Sun Jan 8, 2012 4:10 PM EST

kappa_man_stew

"He's poisoning the well," observed University of California, Berkeley law professor and former Bush administration attorney John Yoo. Worse: "This is going on when his party is in charge."

john yoo, the psycopath who advised former president george w. bush that torture was a legitimate means of extracting information from prisoners of war in direct contradiction of the geneva convention of war thereby subjecting us military forces to the same

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Yoo#Legal_opinions

John Yoo

Yoo's writings and areas of interest fall into three broad areas: American foreign relations; the Constitution's separation of powers and federalism; and international law. In foreign relations, Yoo has argued that the original understanding of the Constitution gives the President the authority to use armed force abroad without congressional authorization, subject to Congress's power of the purse; that treaties do not generally have domestic legal force without implementing legislation; and that courts are functionally ill-suited to intervene in foreign policy disputes between the President and Congress (kinda kills checks and balences). With the separation of powers, Yoo has argued that each branch of government has the authority to interpret the Constitution for itself, which provides the justification for judicial review by the federal courts

Legal opinions

Regarding torture of detainees and children of detainees

See also: Enhanced interrogation techniques

After he left the Department of Justice, it was revealed that Yoo had authored memos, including co-authoring the Torture Memo of August 1, 2002, defining torture and American habeas corpus obligations narrowly.^[34]^[35]^[36] In addition, a new definition of torture was issued. Most actions that fall under the international definition do not fall within this new definition advocated by the U.S.^[37] Several top military lawyers, including Alberto J. Mora, reported that policies allowing methods equivalent to torture were officially handed down from the highest levels of the administration, and led an effort within the Department of Defense to put a stop to those policies and instead mandate non-coercive interrogation standards. ^[38]^[39]

On December 1, 2005, Yoo appeared in a debate in Chicago with University of Notre Damelaw professor Doug Cassel. During the debate Cassel asked Yoo, "If the President deems that he's got to torture somebody, including by crushing the testicles of the person's child, there is no law that can stop him?", to which Yoo replied "No treaty." Cassel followed up with "Also no law by Congress — that is what you wrote in the August 2002 memo...", to which Yoo replied "I think it depends on why the President thinks he needs to do that

Regarding the Fourth amendment

Further information: Fourth Amendment to the United States Constitution, NSA electronic surveillance program, and NSA warrantless surveillance controversy

Yoo also authored the October 23, 2001 memoasserting that the President had sufficient power to allow the NSA to monitor the communications of US citizens on US soil without a warrant because the fourth amendment does not apply. Or, as another memo says in one of its footnotes, "Our office recently concluded that the Fourth Amendment had no application to domestic military operations."

That interpretation is used to assert that the normal mandatory requirement of a warrant, under the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act, could be ignored.^[47]

In a 2006 book and a 2007 law review article, Yoo defended President Bush's terrorist surveillance program, arguing that "the TSP represents a valid exercise of the President's Commander-in-Chief authority to gather intelligence during wartime." He claimed that critics of the program misunderstand the separation of powers between the President and Congress in wartime because of a failure to properly understand the differences between war and crime, and a difficulty in understanding the new challenges presented by a networked, dynamic enemy such as al Qaeda. "Because the United States is at war with al Qaeda, the President possesses the constitutional authority as Commander-in-Chief to engage in warrantless surveillance of enemy activity."^[48] In a Wall Street Journalopinion piece in July 2009, Yoo found it "absurd to think that a law like FISA should restrict live military operations against potential attacks on the United States."^[49]

Unitary executive theory

Yoo suggested that since the primary task of the President during a time of war is protecting US citizens, the President has inherent authority to subordinate independent government agencies, and plenary power to use force abroad.^[50]Yoo contends that the Congressional check on Presidential war making power comes from its power of the purse, and that the President, and not the Congress or courts, has sole authority to interpret international treaties such as the Geneva Conventions "because treaty interpretation is a key feature of the conduct of foreign affairs".^[51] His positions on executive power are controversial because the theory can be interpreted as holding that the President's war powers place him above any law.

^{this extremist psychopath should not be listened to, he should be tried and imprisoned}

25 votes

#1.13 - Sun Jan 8, 2012 4:13 PM EST

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/02/07/AR2010020703003.html

"He's poisoning the well," observed University of California, Berkeley law professor and former Bush administration attorney John Yoo. Worse: "This is going on when his party is in charge."

Really?? This from a guy who should be in jail for his part in the illegal torture practice of the previous administration and gave the OK to use wire taps without court sanction on American citizens in America?

For the basis of your arguments to rely on a quality individual such as Yoo speaks volumes to the worth of this seed and your positions.

25 votes

#1.14 - Sun Jan 8, 2012 4:21 PM EST

Reliant

Janie you wound not recognize "Socialist Agenda" if Stalin came up and gave you a wet sloppy kiss on the lips.

Healt Care: Created an exchange where people would purchase "Private Sector" health Insurance, and instituted a policy where people would be mandated to take part in their personal responsibility to share the costs of the health care infrastructure which they will one day require. Trying to ensure that all citizens in the greatest nation on earth have access to health care is not socialism, it is sanity.

Military: Brought to close a 10 year warof adventurism that has damaged our own country economically, as well as it reputation within the world.

Bailing out the Auto Industry: They industry has just demonstrated for the second year, that it can be vibrant and grow in the nation that created the auto industry. The loans have been payed back with a profit to the tax payer. The industry was not nationalized.

If not those, what? What socialism are you talking about? The Private Sector has posted record profits for the second year in a row. Private Sector U.S. Oil and Gas production have been up over 11% in the last two years, following 8 straight years of decline under the Bush Administration. The U.S. has become a net Petroleum Products Exporter for the first time in 50 years, and U.S. Private Sector Manufacturing us up for the second straight year; the last time we say growth in the manufacturing sector was 1997. So where are these supposed anti-Private Sector pro Socialist Agenda policies?

28 votes

#1.15 - Sun Jan 8, 2012 4:26 PM EST

CMlawyer

At least Janie put "socialist agenda" in quotes. Because it sure is fictional, and it sure is just quoting the Fox news gibberish. Calling Pres. Obama or his policies socialist has no roots in reality. And silly Rick Perry just repeated the same nonsense last night. Keep it in quotes, because that's the only place it belongs.

27 votes

#1.16 - Sun Jan 8, 2012 4:27 PM EST

Sog-510945

Tea Party Express co-founder Sal Russo likened the Obama strategy to Bush guru Karl Rove's strategy to win re-election in 2004 by ginning up the base. Russo doesn't see how it could work for the Democrats this year.

To independent voters especially, the president's failure to work with Congress doesn't compute. "Look, you're president," Russo said. "Why can't you just walk over to Congress and talk to these guys?"

Remember this?

Or this?

http://articles.cnn.com/2011-07-15/politics/debt.talks_1_debt-ceiling-gop-leaders-debt-reduction?_s=PM:POLITICS

It's seriously like these Teapublican morons live in their own universe. Or maybe they're the smart ones, and they expect the dumb ones to believe this excrement.

24 votes

#1.17 - Sun Jan 8, 2012 4:29 PM EST

According to his own writings he actively sought out those 'marxist professors and student radicals' while in school. Then, his little community organizing profession takes it's cue from both Marx and Engels. Then you have Saul Alinsky who was a fond fan of Marx and Engels and the creator of the concept of community activism, both Hillary and Obama are worshipful admirers of Alinsky.

Now, let us examine Reverend Wright, the espouser of Radical Liberation Theology, a theology which gets much of its basis from the writings and philosophies of Marx and Engels. Obama sat in his church for over twenty years. Then you have Obama's attendance at many socialist rallies while in attendenance at university.

Now, wealth redistribution is a major tenet of socialist/marxist doctrine. Obama has openly stated his aim of wealth redistribution. Class warfare is a tactic and battlecry of those following the marxist doctrines and Obama has been very vocal in his 'tax the rich' narrative. Radical transformation of America was Obama's rallying campaign cry, if America is theoretically a 'capitalistic society' then what, exactly was Obama's meaning when he discussed 'radical transformation?"

Nationalization of production and manufacturing where the government exerts total or near total control of commodities, manufacturing, labor and wages is a major component of communism. Socialism, as Marx stated, was the phase between capitalism and true communism.

Obama is a great proponent of governmental control over all aspects of an individuals life. His agencies which he has created via executive order, the fact that the EPA now answers to him, ditto the DOJ under Holder and his signing of the NDAA bill exempting the formerly constitutional protections of the requirement of trial by jury, defense counsel and no indeterminate detention without charges have all been nullified by Obama's signing of said bill. These are not the actions of someone who seeks a freer society. Rather, they are indicative of someone who is actively seeking more and greater governmental control over the individual and society as a whole.

Obama is a unique hybrid of radical thinking coupled with pandering to massive institutions such as banking, insurance, pharmacuetical and energy production. There are elements of fascism and in effect, nationalization very similar to what Mussolini and Hitler created.

15 votes

#1.18 - Sun Jan 8, 2012 4:49 PM EST

CPOSharkey

Another brilliant seed by P8888 and I see her commentary is the usual smarmy crap, oh well sure this will be #9.

17 votes

#1.19 - Sun Jan 8, 2012 4:54 PM EST

Pretty much.

13 votes

#1.20 - Sun Jan 8, 2012 4:57 PM EST

agagnu

I voted this one down low, for the seeder to deny knowing the GOP being the party of NO. NOT to mention that it is known as the party of HELL NO.

As Obama is heading into his second term, all of the incumbent GOP must be voted out because they are incompetent servants of the taxpayers, doing bugger all for the past three years.

19 votes

#1.21 - Sun Jan 8, 2012 5:05 PM EST

Yes, let us remove dissention or opposing opinion, let us not have a free and open society. Rather, let us create an autocratic system that is controlled by one person. As to the bugger all republicans, perhaps you should remember that until the landslide elections of 2010, the democrats held the majority of all offices, also, Obama has been the president for over three years now and all of his decisions and actions seem to have escaped your notice. Why is this not surprising?

Those of you decrying the socialist and marxist terminology, please, let us know your definitions of those ideologies. Inquiring minds want to know. Rather than casting aspersions, perhaps you can provide specifics, otherwise your arguments and attempts at disputation are rather weak.

6 votes

#1.22 - Sun Jan 8, 2012 5:15 PM EST

Stevie-445471

Who said they want him dead?

Pastor Wiley Drake, Southern Baptist Convention. June 9,2009 said the prays for the death of President Obama. Google it.

17 votes

#1.23 - Sun Jan 8, 2012 5:22 PM EST

How many liberals demanded the death of Bush? How many liberals hung him in effigy? Sorry. There are many out there who are, shall we say, a few bricks shy of a load. To use the radical extremists as an example of an entire group is to paint with a massively broad brush. Nice try though.

13 votes

#1.24 - Sun Jan 8, 2012 5:28 PM EST

jumpshotjarrod

@ mygirl1

How many liberals demanded the death of Bush? How many liberals hung him in effigy? Sorry. There are many out there who are, shall we say, a few bricks shy of a load. To use the radical extremists as an example of an entire group is to paint with a massively broad brush. Nice try though.

I agree, it certainly is an unfair broad brush approach.

Along those lines, comparing the way that Obama was treated before even took office to the way Bush was treated after he'd been in office for some years is also an unfair broad brush approach.

People seem to forget that Bush had made several decisions which proved to be faulty before the nation (and self identifying Democrats specifically) really began criticizing him heavily, although some people definitely crossed the line in that how they expressed their discontent for Bush at that point.

Republicans were refusing to work with Obama before he even took office - that's a distinctly different scenario.

29 votes

#1.25 - Sun Jan 8, 2012 5:42 PM EST

Randy McMurphy

So true JumpshotJared... I didn't appreciate Bush at all from day 1.. but I damn sure did stand behind him after we were attacked...90% of the country did...that means most democrats did...we left him he didn't leave us

Contrast that with the decided tactic of the republican majority to obstruct everything Democrats did, and in under a month the Astroturfed teabaggers were born, with Rick Santelli in a bit of faux populism called for a tea party...Little did their dupes know Dick Armeys Freedumbverks leased tea party websites a week before, well scripted..

20 votes

#1.26 - Sun Jan 8, 2012 6:12 PM EST

grumpy_jon

"He's poisoning the well," observed University of California, Berkeley law professor and former Bush administration attorney John Yoo. Worse: "This is going on when his party is in charge."

Well, hell, if John Woo, who wrote the position paper that the Constitution and the Bill of Rights didn't apply if the president didn't want them to, says it, it must be true; right?

12 votes

#1.27 - Sun Jan 8, 2012 6:25 PM EST

I didn't appreciate Bush at all from day 1.. but I damn sure did stand behind him after we were attacked...90% of the country did...that means most democrats did...we left him he didn't leave us

That needs to be said more often,,, good point.

12 votes

#1.28 - Sun Jan 8, 2012 6:25 PM EST

Sam Spade-1094274

perhaps you should remember that until the landslide elections of 2010, the democrats held the majority of all offices

And that Congress was one of the most productive in history. You might not like the Demo policies, but they were prolific in passing it.

15 votes

#1.29 - Sun Jan 8, 2012 6:27 PM EST

A whole lot of people throw out "socialist" and Stalin and such without realizing that those on the right are AUTHORITARIAN.......vs Libertarian. and I would really like to see where paul REALL falls along those lines. Libertarian.....MY ASS! he's as authoritarian as the rest of that soulless bunch....the gNOp!

11 votes

#1.30 - Sun Jan 8, 2012 6:28 PM EST

tychonaut

mygirl1

Those of you decrying the socialist and marxist terminology, please, let us know your definitions of those ideologies. Inquiring minds want to know. Rather than casting aspersions, perhaps you can provide specifics, otherwise your arguments and attempts at disputation are rather weak.

The problem is that calling someone socialist or communist because they support things like a more equal society or government intervention is disingenuous at best and dishonest at worst. It's like calling a politician fascist because they want more funding for the police force. Or calling someone a murderer if they are pro-choice. You are just taking things to the extreme to try to mudsling, either out of ignorance or out of malevolence.

Do you actually know anything about Marx and Engels by the way? They were "GOOD GUYS" fighting for the poor and oppressed who were getting the short end of the 19th century industrialization "stick" (..well, Marx was a bit of an antisocial jerk, but he had important ideas for the time). Yes, crap things have been done in their name, but crap things have been done in the name of Jesus, too.

These philosophies are taught in university classes for Pete's sake! If you are going to condemn someone for being interested in what they had to say, would you also say that anyone who likes the movie "American Psycho" must be a twisted sicko? Are you that naive?

Be critical of Obama for whatever reasons you want, but when you throw around terms like socialist and communist it just makes you appear uneducated to anyone who has a bit of perspective on the matter. One can almost imagine you writing letters to Joe McCarthy about the theatre director in your hometown who wants to put on "Threepenny Opera" ..

.. and about the dangers of .. *gasp* .. flouridation!

18 votes

#1.31 - Sun Jan 8, 2012 6:30 PM EST

Tone down the faux outrage please.

11 votes

#1.32 - Sun Jan 8, 2012 6:38 PM EST

jumpshotjarrod

@ Randy McMurphy

Contrast that with the decided tactic of the republican majority to obstruct everything Democrats did, and in under a month the Astroturfed teabaggers were born, with Rick Santelli in a bit of faux populism called for a tea party...Little did their dupes know Dick Armeys Freedumbverks leased tea party websites a week before, well scripted..

Yeah, and legislatively, Republicans started obstructing even before that. 2007-2008 saw a massive increase in filibusters from Republicans in Congress. link The current group of Republicans leaders in Congress wouldn't even let Democrat legislation get to their own President. And not surprisingly, an already ridiculous filibuster record got even worse when Obama took office.

15 votes

#1.33 - Sun Jan 8, 2012 6:40 PM EST

dwillie

Tone down the faux outrage please.

LOL!

The article and this seed is faux outrage.

Clear hypocrisy. Again.

No surprise.

30 votes

#1.34 - Sun Jan 8, 2012 6:46 PM EST

Tychno: Well, I wasn't the one creating labels, attaching labels, I was responding to those posters who did. As to Marx and Engels, the ideals which they espoused were great as ideals, the results of placing those ideals into practice have resulted in some of the most repressive and murderous regimes in the history of the planet.

No one has a perfect solution for how to govern fairly and justly. Ideologues and idealists often end up confronting some harsh realities. You cannot legislate human nature beyond a certain extent. Perhaps the moral of the story should be to educate and create as fair and just a system as possible without creating autocratic or totalitarianistic regimes.

The framers of the Constitution were flawed human beings, but somehow they managed to craft an incredible document. If read and followed rather than tinkered with or ignored, you have the basis for a great society.

Now, nowhere in your post did I read about the signing of the NDAA bill. You fret over fluoridation while you ignore the fact that it is now law that you can be deemed a 'terrorist' and held indefinitely, without right to counsel or trial by a jury of your peers. That seems to have escaped many people and it is a very grievous law, a law that would make any totalitarian system proud. Obama signed it into law on New Years day. He should have vetoed it, any man of principle, any constitutional scholar would have seen how egregious this bit of legal blasphemy is. The argument that it would have passed even with a veto misses the point completely. A president with principles would have vetoed it, Obama did not.

16 votes

#1.35 - Sun Jan 8, 2012 6:51 PM EST

Bless you mygirl1. Well said.

9 votes

#1.36 - Sun Jan 8, 2012 7:05 PM EST

Shouldn't it be "Can't work with Psychotics"?

16 votes

#1.37 - Sun Jan 8, 2012 8:32 PM EST

itshelterskelter

Once again since you have clearly forgotten. John Boehner, on the debt ceiling negotiations: "I got 97% of what I wanted."

11 votes

#1.38 - Sun Jan 8, 2012 8:53 PM EST

Sam Spade-1094274

That seems to have escaped many people and it is a very grievous law, a law that would make any totalitarian system proud. Obama signed it into law on New Years day.

Mygirl1-- I couldn't agree with you more. Let's also remember the first shot fired in the erosion of constitutional rights was Bush's labeling individuals captured in the "War on Terror" as "enemy combatants" not protected by the Geneva Conventions nor our Constitution.

13 votes

#1.39 - Sun Jan 8, 2012 9:03 PM EST

Linda Luke

Folks, these politicians are all working together, they have presented you with the National Defense Authorization Act and it is signed into law. You are no longer American citizens but you are terrorists at the whim of a politician.

4 votes

#1.40 - Sun Jan 8, 2012 9:05 PM EST

lovemyplanet-400560

Patriot,

You really kicked a hornet's nest. Just look at the buzzing! LOL! This is the most amusing collection of comments I've read all day. I really liked yours at 1.4. Do you think the person it was addressed to ever understood? :)

7 votes

#1.41 - Sun Jan 8, 2012 9:08 PM EST

I really liked yours at 1.4. Do you think the person it was addressed to ever understood? :)

No, the real question is..does Patriot understand that this Congress under the GOP is considered to be the worst one ever because of their being the "party of no"?

17 votes

#1.42 - Sun Jan 8, 2012 9:16 PM EST

Super Saiyan: Golly, I wasn't aware of the fact that both houses of congress were solely filled with republicans. Where did all the democrats go?

Sam: The so-called Patriot Act was one of the most egregious and dreadful civil rights destroying bit of legislation to ever pass a congress and president...until NDAA. Obama has finished what Bush started. How proud we all should be, we are now a police state.

10 votes

#1.43 - Sun Jan 8, 2012 9:29 PM EST

Poorworkingman

Once again since you have clearly forgotten. John Boehner, on the debt ceiling negotiations: "I got 97% of what I wanted."

The other guy got 3% and that's a fair compromise. LOL

6 votes

#1.44 - Sun Jan 8, 2012 9:44 PM EST

Do you think the person it was addressed to ever understood?

Not sure. Maybe doubtful. Never saw a correction or clarification.

5 votes

#1.45 - Sun Jan 8, 2012 9:49 PM EST

lovemyplanet-400560

the real question is

The real question is the one I asked. It was hilarious! This whole comment section is hilarious. I'll admit, I'm glad I'm only reading it rather than listening to it. To actually hear this cacophony of desperate ridiculousness might be too much for me to bear.

Not sure. Maybe doubtful.

Well, it kept me laughing for a full 5 minutes. I had to go back and look at it a couple of times. :)

3 votes

#1.46 - Sun Jan 8, 2012 9:50 PM EST

No, the real question is..does Patriot understand that this Congress under the GOP is considered to be the worst one ever because of their being the "party of no"?

Super - I see you attribute no blame to the Dem-controlled Senate. Or the Dem-controlled executive branch.

Are you seriously saying that 50% of 1 branch of the total government is to blame for the mess we are in?

Please proliferate that ideology. The GOP will win in a landslide in November.

12 votes

#1.47 - Sun Jan 8, 2012 9:56 PM EST

Rich-365548

Oh, please. How many times in Bush's last two years did he demand "I want a clean bill, I want a clean bill, I want a clean bill," meaning give me what I want with no strings attached? I lost track, it seemed like every bill was am emergency with no time for negotiation. Now, even when Republicans get 98% of what they want, they cry about being bullied and how unfair Obama and the press are to them. Grow up! You were elected to govern, not to stomp your feet. Get off your lazy butts and work for it, GOP! Just earn one day's pay honestly. And don't spend it on golf, spray-tan and booze, Mr. Speaker.

10 votes

#1.48 - Sun Jan 8, 2012 11:01 PM EST

take2la

NICE TRY...

1 vote

#1.49 - Sun Jan 8, 2012 11:55 PM EST

JEFFINVA

Better than the Republican's slogan..."Got millions?"

6 votes

#1.50 - Mon Jan 9, 2012 7:40 AM EST

The first thing one has to recognize when dealing with this issue is: When times are tough and only getting worse by the day, there have never, in the history of the United States, been any democrats in elected office, ever. Once you begin to operate from that realization, you can then begin to talk sense. Any effort made without this fact firmly in ones mind is just wasted effort. If it is wrong in Washington, the republicans are behind it, period. If, after 3 years, the president is unable to get our economy moving this is entirely the fault of republicans as they are the only elected officials in office outside of the white house. Y'all see how this works??? Ok, Carry on....

8 votes

#1.51 - Mon Jan 9, 2012 12:10 PM EST

SuperSaiyan

Wow, way to ignore actual facts, Janie Ackerly...

Outside The Beltway blog is not fact but liberal progressive/socialist opinion!

2 votes

#1.52 - Mon Jan 9, 2012 11:13 PM EST

Better than the Republican's slogan..."Got millions?"

Republican slogan: Hard work got you your money? Well you get to keep it!

Democratic slogan: Hard work got you your money? Well that is not fair! We will tax you and buy votes with it from non-working people!

4 votes

#1.53 - Mon Jan 9, 2012 11:17 PM EST

Republican Slogan: Made Millions Outsourcing jobs? Well you get to keep it.

Democratic Slogan: Republicans Outsourced your job so you have no money? Kick them out of office and we'll get the jobs back so that you can pay your bills.

9 votes

#1.54 - Tue Jan 10, 2012 12:08 AM EST

Republican slogan: Cut taxes for corporations that give you a job so they will not be outsourced. Also didn't over-regulate corporations that employ you so they wouldn't outsource your job. Also cut your taxes so you can keep your money! Also allowed your pension investment in corporations to grow by not taking away your profits ala Hilary Clinton to the oil companies in this country!

Democrat slogan: Over-regulated, over-taxed, and took away profits from corporations so they will........ well........ OUTSOURCE YOUR JOB. Also lower production which lowers GDP and the standard of living for all!

3 votes

#1.55 - Tue Jan 10, 2012 12:29 AM EST

Republican Slogan: Many Corporations pay NO Taxes, vote for us and we'll make sure that ALL Corporations pay NO Taxes.

Democratic Slogan: Corporate Taxes are lower than they've been in 60 years, what are they whining about and where are the jobs?

9 votes

#1.56 - Tue Jan 10, 2012 10:09 AM EST

They want everyone to return the time before the great depression the Aristocrats and their chattel.

They use the same arguments now that they used then to try and justify it.

As Montesquieu wrote in Spirit of the Laws, VI,c.2:

"In republican governments, men are all equal; equal they are also in despotic governments: in the former because they are everything; in the latter because they are nothing.

6 votes

#1.57 - Tue Jan 10, 2012 1:00 PM EST

Newsflash slogan for Terry.............

The US Pays the second highest corporate taxes in the world only second to Japan and not by much. The federal rate for the largest companies on a federal level is 35%. Then in Wisconsin you can add another 8% state tax to that! Wisconsin recently cut a deal with one of their larger corporations in order to keep them from moving to another state or China for that matter. Mercury Marine got tax breaks from Doyle a democrat.

Gov. Jim Doyle recently parroted the company line: "Mercury could bring 1,400 jobs to Fond du Lac." Then why will they not sign any binding resolution to this effect? Why were they so interested in eliminating severance pay? Perhaps they only intend to consolidate in Fond du Lac, before an inevitable move to China. Then they would really leave the workers high and dry; without so much as a severance check.

Meanwhile, politicians are being praised as heros for offering incentives for Mercury to remain in the area. Huge tax breaks and loans have been granted to the company, which would actually result in greater taxes for residents of Fond du Lac County.

3 votes

#1.58 - Tue Jan 10, 2012 3:03 PM EST

They want everyone to return the time before the great depression the Aristocrats and their chattel.

They actually want something worse, a power structure in which corporations are more powerful than the rule of law. J.P. Morgan bailed out the government out of a pragmatic mix of preservation of his interests and genuine patriotism. I doubt the Koch brothers will make any contribution not tied to political favors.

4 votes

#1.59 - Tue Jan 10, 2012 3:06 PM EST

"Generally speaking, the proportion which the aggregate of the other classes of citizens bears in any state to that of its husbandmen is the proportion of its unsound to its healthy parts, and is a good enough barometer whereby to measure its degree of corruption." --Thomas Jefferson: Notes on Virginia Q.XIX, 1782.

3 votes

#1.60 - Tue Jan 10, 2012 3:34 PM EST

The US Pays the second highest corporate taxes in the world only second to Japan and not by much. The federal rate for the largest companies on a federal level is 35%. Then in Wisconsin you can add another 8% state tax to that! Wisconsin recently cut a deal with one of their larger corporations in order to keep them from moving to another state or China for that matter. Mercury Marine got tax breaks from Doyle a democrat.

no they do not. that's the set tax rate, they don't pay that as they use tax loops.

5 votes

#1.61 - Tue Jan 10, 2012 3:58 PM EST

The US Pays the second highest corporate taxes in the world only second to Japan and not by much. Complete and utter bull@!$%#. The nominal corporate tax rate is near the top. But virtually no American corporation pays the nominal tax rate. They all pay effective tax rates which are at about 20%-- a figure which puts them very near the median for all OECD countries. Additionally, America's depreciation rules are much more amenable to corporations than those of other countries.

In both EMTR (Effective Marginal Tax Rate) and EATR (Effective Average Tax Rate) for corporations, we are not at the top (although we are above the average for the OECD countries. Countries which pay higher corporate taxes than we do?

EMTR (United States - 23.6%):

France - 23.8%
Spain - 26.3%
Mexico - 27.7%
Japan - 30.5%
Countries which are very close to our EMTR:
- Norway - 22.1%
- Italy - 22.6%

EATR (United States - 27.6%)

Spain - 27.5%
Mexico - 28.4%
France - 27.5%
Japan - 33%
Countries which are very close to our EATR:
- Canada - 25.5%
- Germany - 24.2%
- Italy - 24.3%
- Norway - 24.2%

Then, take into consideration that loopholes allow the large multi-nationals doing business in the United States to pay near nothing in taxes. Additionally, a large number of these companies can export their profits to avoid taxation by "internal transfers" to foreign countries.

I'd be perfectly happy with closing all the loopholes, and setting both statutory and effective tax rates at 25%. But let's drop the bogus claim that US corporations PAY the highest tax rates in the world. They don't.

10 votes

#1.62 - Tue Jan 10, 2012 3:59 PM EST

It would be great if they actually paid 35%.

Many pay nothing.

Let some companies pay nothing in taxes on their billions, but make sure you get some from that guy making 40k a year to make up the difference.....thats the republican way.

8 votes

#1.63 - Tue Jan 10, 2012 4:00 PM EST

U.S. Corporations Suffer High Effective Tax Rates by International Standards

by Philip Dittmer

For a PDF of the full study, click here. A summary of the report and the key findings are below.

Tax Foundation Special Report No. 195

Key Findings

• The U.S. has the second-highest statutory corporate income tax rate in the developed world. Despite anecdotes regarding a few companies that exploit the dubious carve-outs in the tax code to minimize their tax liabilities, the results of 13 unique studies of the effective tax rate on corporate investment across the globe show that the average U.S. effective corporate tax rate, like the statutory rate, is nearly the highest in the world.

• By every available measure, the U.S. imposes a very high tax burden on its corporate sector, in comparison to other nations, even after credits and deductions are considered.

• The most recent studies show that the average effective corporate tax rate for corporations headquartered in the U.S. is roughly 27 percent, while the average of other nations is about 20 percent. The effective average rate for new investment in the U.S. is roughly 29.8 percent, 7.4 point above worldwide competition.

• The U.S. effective corporate tax rate consistently ranks among the five highest of nations considered. The only nation with a higher effective tax rate in each study is Japan, which not by coincidence is the only developed nation with a higher statutory rate than the U.S.

• The literature shows that high corporate taxes and high effective tax rates are detrimental to attracting investment, and subsequently detrimental to economic growth.

4 votes

#1.64 - Tue Jan 10, 2012 4:18 PM EST

Code Pink, you have posted nothing different from what you have posted before. You have answers, yes the tax rate exists but with the loop holes the corporations do not pay it.

You are doing nothing but reposting the same thing again that has been answered already.

4 votes

#1.65 - Tue Jan 10, 2012 4:57 PM EST

The Tax Foundation:

...has been described as having a "pro-business leaning"[2] and it has ties to various conservative groups. ...against reducing $47 billion in tax credits for the oil industry, and against taxes on growing fossil-fuel carbon emissions. ...has received funding from ExxonMobil and from conservative political groups such as the Koch Family Foundations, the Earhart Foundation,[16] and Citizens for a Sound Economy.

In 2008, Paul Krugman wrote in his New York Times blog that the Tax Foundation was "not a reliable source" in response to a report by the Tax Foundation comparing corporate tax rates in the United States to those in other countries.[40] In 2011, Krugman accused the Tax Foundation of "deliberate fraud" in connection with a report it issued concerning the American Jobs Act.

Ongoing Directors:

David P. Lewis, Chairman -- Eli Lilly & Co
James Lintott -- Sterling Foundation Management
Bill Archer -- former Texas Congressman
Douglas Holtz-Eakin -- American Action Forum; chief economic adviser to Presidential candidate John McCain in 2008
Pamela F. Olson -- Skadden, Arps; senior economic adviser to the Bush-Cheney campaign and formerly Assistant Secretary of Treasury for Tax Policy[24] under Pres. Bush

Golly! Sounds completely objective to me. out of curiosity, how many former directors were on the payroll of Exxon, Mobil, Koch Industries, et cetera?

Here's some fact-checking on the Tax Foundation's claims.
Good luck with your sales effort.

9 votes

#1.66 - Wed Jan 11, 2012 12:28 AM EST

To be fair, Krugman has a long history of calling anyone who disagrees with him "not a reliable source".

1 vote

#1.67 - Wed Jan 11, 2012 1:22 PM EST

Yes and he got a Nobel Prize in economics for it… LOL.

7 votes

#1.68 - Wed Jan 11, 2012 1:38 PM EST

Sheesh, what kind of an honor is that?

Even BO got a Nobel Prize - for doing nothing.

2 votes

#1.69 - Wed Jan 11, 2012 1:47 PM EST

You do it then if it’s so easy.

I’ll wait.

8 votes

#1.70 - Wed Jan 11, 2012 2:03 PM EST

I don't think I will wait around for 8888 to get a Nobel Prize or Pulitzer.

6 votes

#1.71 - Wed Jan 11, 2012 2:11 PM EST

Even BO got a Nobel Prize - for doing nothing.

It wasn't for doing nothing. It was for getting elected president while being black.

Now, in fairness to him, getting elected president is certainly not easy. But nor has it been Nobel Prize worthy until now.

3 votes

#1.72 - Wed Jan 11, 2012 2:39 PM EST

Hell, I'm not sure I'll wait around for 8888 to get a clue, much less a Nobel.

8 votes

#1.73 - Wed Jan 11, 2012 2:39 PM EST

The disparaging of the noble peace prize, really? that's your answer?

obama won the peace prize was for the plan he set in. understand one thing, when bush was the president the world saw a complete lunatic behind the red button. when obama came in he revamped relations and began talks. this breathed a strong sigh of relief to the world. the committee believed because of that he deserved the noble peace prize.

7 votes

#1.74 - Wed Jan 11, 2012 4:20 PM EST

And your point is?

2 votes

#1.75 - Wed Jan 11, 2012 4:38 PM EST

you cannot answer to the sources provided so you attack the source on ridiculous reasons. it is: answer or admit that the other user is correct.

6 votes

#1.76 - Wed Jan 11, 2012 4:43 PM EST

CPOSharkey

I'd just like to see Patriot 8888 post something worth a @!$%# and then actually defend her posts rather than make smarmy remarks and deflections. No respect what so ever for this poster.

5 votes

#1.77 - Fri Jan 13, 2012 6:15 AM EST

you cannot answer to the sources provided so you attack the source on ridiculous reasons

You mean like liberals do at every turn of the cards?

I'd just like to see Patriot 8888 post something worth a @!$%# and then actually defend her posts rather than make smarmy remarks and deflections

Obama getting a Nobel Prize for nothing is definitely worth a @!$%#. The truth of the matter is, is that the guy did absolutely nothing, zilch, nada to earn the Nobel Prize. Now that might not be worth a @!$%# to you or the rest of the Obamaniacs, but that doesn't make it any less true.

4 votes

#1.78 - Fri Jan 13, 2012 7:31 AM EST

ZeroX

Obama has been the most divisive President in our history. His is a complete partisan and everything he says turns out to be a lie.

6 votes

#1.79 - Sun Jan 22, 2012 7:05 PM EST

Not a very good grenade, zero. You may have to try a better one.

3 votes

#1.80 - Sun Jan 22, 2012 7:18 PM EST

Paul William Tenny

I think he/she/it was on vacation, 2001-2008.

3 votes

#1.81 - Mon Jan 23, 2012 8:10 AM EST

j-bird-2923980

GOP motto, "wont work with others, especially "black" others"

68 votes

#2 - Sun Jan 8, 2012 1:42 PM EST

Comment collapsed by the community

j-bird-2923980

Ya mean like the premise of your article LOL

58 votes

#2.2 - Sun Jan 8, 2012 2:02 PM EST

T. Gracchus

Why does typing the words "race card" invalidate any argument based on race?

It is like a trump card in bridge?

39 votes

#2.3 - Sun Jan 8, 2012 2:02 PM EST

T. Gracchus

Hey!

We can call it the "race card card".

23 votes

#2.4 - Sun Jan 8, 2012 2:02 PM EST

They’ve called Obama everything but the Grand Wizard of the KKK and they say if we bring it up WE are playing the Race Card…

53 votes

#2.5 - Sun Jan 8, 2012 2:21 PM EST

Pathetic.

No. What's pathetic is this juvenile and silly thread.

48 votes

#2.6 - Sun Jan 8, 2012 2:31 PM EST

It's NOT "playing the race card" to point out the rampant and vile racism that is common in the repub/teabag party.

49 votes

#2.7 - Sun Jan 8, 2012 2:32 PM EST

Dog_Blue

Comment collapsed by the community

pg-974581

or the blaa as explained by santorum...

27 votes

#2.9 - Sun Jan 8, 2012 2:34 PM EST

It's NOT "playing the race card" to point out the rampant and vile racism that is common in the repub/teabag party.

Then point it out, just don't talk @!$%# about it. Post here racial comments directed at the President from Republicans.

23 votes

#2.10 - Sun Jan 8, 2012 2:43 PM EST

Dog_Blue

Comment collapsed by the community

http://whitehouse.blogs.cnn.com/2011/08/01/congressman-calls-obama-a-tar-baby/

just a few examples...

Representative Doug Lamborn (R-CO) said dealing with President Obama in the debt ceiling negotiations was "like touching a tar baby,"

Within a day of the president taking office, Mitch McConnell stated that Republicans highest priority was making President Obama a one term president.

The Republican congressman is not the first to run into trouble with the phrase. Mitt Romney referred to the Big Dig construction project in Boston as a "tar baby" in 2006 during a fundraiser on the campaign trail. And Sen. John McCain also used the term during his campaign for president.

Rep. Doug Lamborn and TV commentator Patrick Buchanan backtrack after using the terms 'tar baby' and 'boy,' respectively, in reference to President Obama.
http://articles.latimes.com/2011/aug/04/nation/la-na-obama-racial-20110804

At GOP Leadership Conference, Obama Impersonator Tells Racist Jokes
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YFguV0MkkoI

Another UT Republican Caught Tweeting Racist Comments About Obama
President of UT College Republicans appears to post racially tinged tweet
Cassie Wright, who is listed as president of the group on the UT website, posted at 2:46 a.m. Sunday, "My president's black, he snorts a lot of crack. Holla. #2012 #Obama."

(snip)
Wright replaced Lauren Pierce as president of the Texas chapter after Pierce in November posted on Twitter that people should not shoot Obama, even though it may be "tempting."

In an interesting twist, Pierce retweeted Wright's post about Obama.
http://www.democraticunderground.com/1078234

Racist Orange County Republican Email: President Obama and His Parents Are Apes
http://blogs.ocweekly.com/navelgazing/2011/04/racist_orange_county_republica.php
A new survey by the University of Washington Institute for the Study of Ethnicity, Race & Sexuality offers fresh insight into the racial attitudes of Tea Party sympathizers. "The data suggests that people who are Tea Party supporters have a higher probability"—25 percent, to be exact—"of being racially resentful than those who are not Tea Party supporters," says Christopher Parker, who directed the study. "The Tea Party is not just about politics and size of government. The data suggests it may also be about race."
http://www.newsweek.com/2010/04/25/are-tea-partiers-racist.html

2010 Multi-state Survey on Race & Politics
http://depts.washington.edu/uwiser/racepolitics.html

49 votes

#2.12 - Sun Jan 8, 2012 3:33 PM EST

Janie Ackerly

Comment collapsed by the community

swagg

Janie why because it's sacrileges for that uppity colored to run for office? Why because one race can't handle a guy who is mixed leading this nation? Seriously how did he start the division?

40 votes

#2.14 - Sun Jan 8, 2012 3:56 PM EST

Seriously how did he start the division?

By getting elected.

How dare a young black man get more votes than a grizzled old war "hero".

48 votes

#2.15 - Sun Jan 8, 2012 3:57 PM EST

Why Tar Baby is such a sticky phrase

??? what Janie ??

so by being a bi racial man who ran for president and winning is started it ?

are you sure it wasn't the idiots who hung a black mannequin in a noose along side a building ? the chick who carved a B backwards in her own face and blamed it on a black Obama supporter ? A redneck who carried a monkey doll with the name Obama on it at a McCain rally ?

Racist McCain Supporters in Pottsville, Pennsylvania
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fieGfc6DL7k

Racist McCain Supporter On The News Obama in Noose
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZvPJOQhXrak

Monkey at Palin Rally Inspires Racism & Cowardice
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5Esocs9qPRY

a church that set up a shoot Obama target at it's fair ?

Church Carnival Sets Up Shooter Game With Obama As Target

In Roseto, Pa., a carnival company closed down a shooter game called "Alien Attack," after complaints and news stories that President Obama was one of the targets.

The black "alien leader" is holding a scroll titled "Health Bill" and wearing a presidential seal belt buckle. He also has antennae and a troll doll with a KISS T-shirt on his shoulder.

The owner of the carnival company, Goodtime Amusements, dismissed a complaint, saying the figure is not meant to be Obama.
http://tpmmuckraker.talkingpointsmemo.com/2010/08/church_carnival_sets_up_shooter_game_with_obama_as.php

you have to be a moron to believe the carnival company ..... it sure wasn't Bill Cosby drawn there .

I could go on you know...

the Fact is the right is racist. FACT. not all of course but a good number and more than on the left .

46 votes

#2.16 - Sun Jan 8, 2012 4:01 PM EST

Patriot 8888Restored

Mitt Romney referred to the Big Dig construction project in Boston as a "tar baby" in 2006 during a fundraiser on the campaign trail. And Sen. John McCain also used the term during his campaign for president.

ROFLMAO! Get a grip, Ripley 8. That's your example of racism? Because someone uses it in a sentence to describe a sticky situation?

Is tar baby a racist term? Like most elements of language, that depends on context. Calling the Big Dig a tar baby is a lot different than calling a person one.

Two years ago, TIME used the phrase, reporting that John Kerry's presidential advisers were telling him to get away from "the Iraq tar baby."

None of the examples you have cited are calling any person a name. They all refer to situations.

It is part of the American vernacular based on literary reference.

Heightened sensitivity is one thing. To view it as "racist" is quite another in those particular situations that you have cited. Is it good form to use that expression today? No. But not racist in the context you have cited.

The tweet:

"My president's black, he snorts a lot of crack.

can be interpreted in several ways. The implication that the President is a crackhead is much more vitriolic.

people should not shoot Obama, even though it may be "tempting."

How is that "racist"? Sick, vitriolic, and despicable yes. Racist - no...unless there is more to the statement. On a similar subject, would you concur that a fictitious movie about the assassination of Bush was also racist?

The Libs are becoming like the Boy who Cried Wolf. Any slight against Obama is "racist". People are starting to tune them out.

20 votes

#2.17 - Sun Jan 8, 2012 4:03 PM EST

Patriot 8888Restored

are you sure it wasn't the idiots who hung a black mannequin in a noose along side a building

Can we compare and contrast that with this:

Sarah-Palin-effigy-hung-by-noose-in-Halloween-display

16 votes

#2.18 - Sun Jan 8, 2012 4:16 PM EST

dumbya the mental/moral midget divided this country more than ANY ONE else and the baggies and the rabid cons are incapable of understanding that FACT!

29 votes

#2.19 - Sun Jan 8, 2012 4:23 PM EST

Janie Ackerly

Comment collapsed by the community

JANE: IN just about every one of your posts you mention Obama's "socialist agenda".Could you for once explain what that is?

34 votes

#2.21 - Sun Jan 8, 2012 4:30 PM EST

WOW--is THAT a stretch. Geez-seems like desperation to me if that's all you have.

BTW-I'm white and I absolutely agree with Obama about his comment.

How would you like it if you were questioned and almost arrested outside your home by a black police officer????

24 votes

#2.22 - Sun Jan 8, 2012 4:34 PM EST

How would you like it if you were questioned and almost arrested outside your home????

Operative word: almost

After questioning and verification, the situation ended.

15 votes

#2.23 - Sun Jan 8, 2012 4:40 PM EST

nospin1

petri #2.10- You say things in your post are facts. Nothing more than your opinion unless you provide the facts you speak of.

11 votes

#2.24 - Sun Jan 8, 2012 4:47 PM EST

pacosperson

Patriot,

What are you doing here? You make too much sense, that's no fun. Ice cold clarity doesn't have a place here.

14 votes

#2.25 - Sun Jan 8, 2012 4:54 PM EST

Generally speaking, it is easy to make accusations, much more difficult to prove such accusations. The 'tar-baby' reference is made about a story, the tar-baby came from "Uncle Remus and Brer Rabbit' wherein a figure was made of tar, and whoever touched said figure, became entangled or stuck in the tar. It was never racist in concept, but rather, indicated a situational advisory or moral tale.

Attempting to twist facts is rather puerile and weak. If you wish to defend Obama's actions by stating that anyone who disagrees with Obama's policies is 'racist' then you create a straw man that is easily destroyed because, how racist can a country be if they elect a 'black' man to the highest office in the land and place him in one of the most powerful positions in the free world?

As to the incident with the Harvard professor, Obama made a rush to judgement statement, automatically calling racism for an event which had absolutely no bearing on race. Seems Obama was the one pulling the race card.

11 votes

#2.26 - Sun Jan 8, 2012 5:09 PM EST

tar baby is racist... it evolved from the novel to be so.

ask any redneck what a tar baby is.

a Harvard professor was stopped and arrested because the police thought he was breaking (to his own home ! )in solely because he was black...

"The Cambridge police acted stupidly in arresting somebody when there was already proof that they were in their own home," said Pres. Obama during the press conference.

It was a blunt assessment from the president of the United States on a local matter involving one of America's leading black scholars, Henry Louis Gates of Harvard, an Obama friend.

But on Thursday presidential press secretary Robert Gibbs clarified that the president wasn't calling the officer who arrested Prof. Gates at his home in response to a 911 burglary in progress call "stupid" -- only that cooler heads should have prevailed. Gibbs said, "The President was clear&in denoting that at a certain point the situation&got far out of hand."

Gibbs added that the president stands by his view that generally blacks and Hispanics have been subjected to racial profiling by police for a long time. The Cambridge police officer says he won't apologize to Prof. Gates as demanded. Sgt. James Crowley in fact is a Boston area expert on racial profiling and taught the subject to police recruits at the Lowell, MA police academy, according to the school.
http://abclocal.go.com/wls/story?section=news/local&id=6930219

Obama was right.

37 votes

#2.27 - Sun Jan 8, 2012 5:31 PM EST

Patriot 8888Restored

No, Obama was wrong.

13 votes

#2.28 - Sun Jan 8, 2012 5:33 PM EST

Only the second comment and already playing the race card?

Sooo sick of hearing 'race card'... It's not a @!$%#ING CARD. It's the truth! You may be playing games- but anyone who calls it racism- is speaking the truth- Not playing 'cards'

If it wasn't racist, people wouldn't be calling it so.

28 votes

#2.29 - Sun Jan 8, 2012 5:34 PM EST

Comment collapsed by the community

dwillie

Obama supporters play the race card when someone - usually republican - says or does something racist. Because republicans have been demonstrating racism and race baiting with great frequency, people have been correctly pointing it out. If republicans are tired of seeing the race card played, then they should stop dealing it. Republicans have been dealing the race card for the last half century and it has only crescendoed since President Obama began running for office.

31 votes

#2.31 - Sun Jan 8, 2012 6:10 PM EST

Comment collapsed by the community

Janie AckerlyRestored

chitownty, Obama wants FREE Health Care for everyone,he wants Mexico Canada and the USA to be United,if you have worked hard and became well off he thinks he should distribute your money to others so everyoneis equal. So Why Work. Lets live off someone else's money. He wants everyone to depend on the Government. This is a free Country, we want the Freedom to choose "who" we give our money to! :)

9 votes

#2.33 - Sun Jan 8, 2012 6:21 PM EST

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2008/10/19/racist-obama-effigy-hung_n_135971.html

Here ya go 8888 and I'll raise you two.

http://firedoglake.com/2008/09/24/obama-hung-in-effigy-at-christian-college/

http://www.walb.com/global/story.asp?s=11759669

29 votes

#2.34 - Sun Jan 8, 2012 6:29 PM EST

dwillie

This seed demonstrates the desperation of Obama Derangement Syndrome sufferers.

34 votes

#2.35 - Sun Jan 8, 2012 6:53 PM EST

And it is still January, dwillie. They will be in convulsions by September.

28 votes

#2.36 - Sun Jan 8, 2012 6:57 PM EST

Comment collapsed by the community

pat8888

Right after 9/11.....before we found out waht a coward our commander in chief really was, hw has everyone in the world AND congress on his side.....what did he do.....he suggested legislation that would make us less safe and make us fearful of our neighbors......remember the 'with us or agin us" BULL POO! Do you really want me ot have to go through all DUMBYA's signing statements and legislations to prove my point. It can be done BUT I think I'll pull a republiCON on ya.......look it up for yourself. That is what y'all tell us when we look for supporting FACTS! You live by playing those games....please don't get pissed when it gets thrown in YOUR face!

28 votes

#2.38 - Sun Jan 8, 2012 7:07 PM EST

TPisFORtheBATHROOM101

lol,it's difficult to 'play with others' when they're on vacation all the time. Not just IMO either,but rather a fact ;)

21 votes

#2.39 - Sun Jan 8, 2012 7:28 PM EST

Patriot 8888

No, Obama was wrong.

no , he was right . It was stupidity , racial profiling and racism that had...

a Harvard professor was stopped and arrested because the police thought he was breaking (to his own home ! )in solely because he was black...

unless your a racist and think that kind of behavior is ok.

24 votes

#2.40 - Sun Jan 8, 2012 7:31 PM EST

JANIE ACKERLY: Could you please cite when and where President Obama suggested FREE health care,a united states of US,Mexico,and Canada,and how he wants to give EVERYONE the same amount of money

29 votes

#2.41 - Sun Jan 8, 2012 7:31 PM EST

Comment collapsed by the community

Comment collapsed by the community

Thats right Patriot...I'm sure if it would have been an old white man at the door trying to get in the same thing would have happened right???

21 votes

#2.44 - Sun Jan 8, 2012 8:27 PM EST

Depends on the neighborhood. I am sorry but it is a fact of life.

Police are trained to notice things that do not seem ordinary.

On that day at that hour, something seemed amiss. I am not going to second guess the Boston Police who put themselves in harm's way 24/7.

Misunderstandings do happen. The best possible outcome prevailed. Identification was verified and the house was not being robbed.

What if it was not the professor but someone actually robbing his house? What if someone did break into the house and was lurking in wait for the professor?

A myriad of scenarios could have ensued.

11 votes

#2.45 - Sun Jan 8, 2012 8:43 PM EST

things that do not seem ordinary.

Like a black man in a nice neighborhood???

24 votes

#2.46 - Sun Jan 8, 2012 8:57 PM EST

Or a Red man in a Black neighborhood?

8 votes

#2.47 - Sun Jan 8, 2012 8:58 PM EST

So where does a white man not seem ordinary???

23 votes

#2.48 - Sun Jan 8, 2012 8:59 PM EST

http://www.businessinsider.com/15-charts-about-wealth-and-inequality-in-america-2010-4?op=1

Don't ask me - I was not there, I do not know the neighborhood, and I do not know any of the individuals involved.

I would suggest you forward that question to the Boston Police Dept.

8 votes

#2.49 - Sun Jan 8, 2012 9:02 PM EST

lib50

chitownty, Obama wants FREE Health Care for everyone,he wants Mexico Canada and the USA to be United,if you have worked hard and became well off he thinks he should distribute your money to others so everyoneis equal. So Why Work. Lets live off someone else's money. He wants everyone to depend on the Government. This is a free Country, we want the Freedom to choose "who" we give our money to! :)

That whole post is crap. Obama NEVER called for free healthcare or a United North America. Total bull@!$%#. He NEVER said he wanted to equalize wages. He (and anyone with a brain) can see how decades of trickle down have decimated the middle class.

http://www.faireconomy.org/research/TrickleDown.html

And NOBODY wants to make Americans live on the dole. How ridiculous.

24 votes

#2.50 - Sun Jan 8, 2012 9:05 PM EST

If I help him, he will pay my mortgage

That whole post is crap. Obama NEVER called for free healthcare or a United North America.

Obama might not have said it in so many words but that's the way it was interpreted. Like this:

or this:

Where do I get my Free Health Care

Face it, the public was sold a bill of goods.

Does not matter what Obama said - those that don't know any better think that things are free.

Is it shame on him or shame on them?

13 votes

#2.51 - Sun Jan 8, 2012 9:24 PM EST

Anyone recall a time when the person (Pres Obama) who always went and asked for cooperation and compromise was considered trying to work with others? And the people (the Republicans) who kept rebuking that same person were considered jerks?

It's seems like such a fading memory - or was there ever such a time?

5 votes

#2.52 - Sun Jan 8, 2012 9:39 PM EST

"Obama might not have said it in so many words but that's the way it was interpreted."

This is the crux of the problem. Open your minds to what is said, not what the spinners tell you, 8888.

23 votes

#2.53 - Sun Jan 8, 2012 9:44 PM EST

Patriot doesn't know the difference between what a person ACTUALLY SAYS and what some ditwit THINKS he said.

20 votes

#2.54 - Sun Jan 8, 2012 9:56 PM EST

Well, then perhaps the more genuine measure of worth would be to watch what the person does, rather than listen to what he says. Talking and doing are two different things. I can say anything, I can lie, twist the truth or promise the moon, the stars and a chevy in every garage, doesn't mean its gonna happen or that I mean what I say, especially if I'm looking for votes.

11 votes

#2.55 - Sun Jan 8, 2012 10:08 PM EST

Chitownty

And Yellow Dog D

Seems to me that the ability to differentiate lies with the Obama constituency.

They are the ones who will be mighty disappointed.

Why do you think the Obamacare does not kick in until AFTER the 2012 election?

Many unhappy voters when they find out their Health care is not free.

12 votes

#2.56 - Sun Jan 8, 2012 10:16 PM EST

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=egJ8NtvVFs8

Why do you think the Obamacare does not kick in until AFTER the 2012 election?

Why does any large piece of legislation takes a while to kick in?

Many unhappy voters when they find out their Health care is not free.

No, many want it cheaper as it should be.

13 votes

#2.57 - Sun Jan 8, 2012 10:20 PM EST

Richard BaerDeleted

NYPeach

List of racist comments made by democrats....

Joe Biden...

DEMOCRAT: Joe Biden
QUOTE: "I mean, you got the first mainstream African-American who is articulate and bright and clean and a nice-looking guy... I mean, that's a storybook, man." [To the New York Observer in February 2007]

Lyndon B. Johnson...

DEMOCRAT: Lydon B. Johnson
QUOTE: "I'll have those n*ggers voting Democratic for the next 200 years." [Allegedly said to two governors

Rod Blagojevich....

DEMOCRAT: Rod Blagojevich
QUOTE: "This guy, he was catapulted in on hope and change, what we hope the guy is. What the @!$%#? Everything he's saying's on the teleprompter. I'm blacker than Barack Obama. I shined shoes. I grew up in a five-room apartment. My father had a little laundromat in a black community not far from where we lived. I saw it all growing up." [To Esquire in their new issue]

Al Sharpton....

DEMOCRAT: Rev. Al Sharpton
QUOTE: "White folks was in caves while we was building empires... We taught philosophy and astrology and mathematics before Socrates and them Greek homos ever got around to it." [In a 1994 speech at Kean College]

Bill Clinton...

DEMOCRAT: Bill Clinton
QUOTE: "A few years ago, this guy would have been getting us coffee...

Diane Watson...

DEMOCRAT: Diane Watson (State Senator, CA)
QUOTE: "He's married to a white woman. He wants to be white. He wants a colorless society. He has no ethnic pride. He doesn't want to be black."

Harry Truman...

DEMOCRAT: Harry Truman
QUOTE: "I think one man is just as good as another so long as he's not a n*gger or a Chinaman. Uncle Will says that the Lord made a White man from dust, a n*gger from mud, then He threw up what was left and it came down a Chinaman. He does hate Chinese and Japs. So do I. It is race prejudice, I guess. But I am strongly of the opinion Negroes ought to be in Africa, Yellow men in Asia and White men in Europe and America."

Geraldine Ferraro...

DEMOCRAT: Gealdine Ferraro
QUOTE: "If Obama was a white man, he would not be in this position. And if he was a woman of any color, he would not be in this position. He happens to be very lucky to be who he is. And the country is caught up in the concept." [To the Torrance Daily Breeze in March 2008]

Hillary Clinton...

DEMOCRAT: Hillary Clinton
QUOTE: "You @!$%#ing Jew Bastard."

This video is classic and typical of Hillary Clinton...

17 votes

#2.59 - Sun Jan 8, 2012 10:25 PM EST

NYPeach that post is priceless, well done indeed.

Game over at this point!!!

15 votes

#2.60 - Sun Jan 8, 2012 10:43 PM EST

Hang on to those peach, they will be classics one day.

17 votes

#2.61 - Sun Jan 8, 2012 10:43 PM EST

Yeah I saved them to my desktop as I'm certain they'll come in handy really soon!!

12 votes

#2.62 - Sun Jan 8, 2012 10:45 PM EST

Shame on you RT36.

Using a despicable activity that caused massive sorrow, bloodshed, and human suffering to mask incompetence.

I truly can't fathom WHY you believe that. Just to let you know- most who are black, and not republican(So... All of us....) Are tired of the little 'race card' game. You have very little idea what it is to be discriminated against because of the color of your skin. If you did, you wouldn't even say stupid @!$%# like that. And it's still not a card- it's the truth.

Using a despicable activity that caused massive sorrow, bloodshed, and human suffering to mask incompetence.

What the @!$%# are you talking about?

You know what?....Whatever.

Carry on with your race baiting.

It just illustrates the desperation of the Obama apologists.

I want some of what you're smoking... Pot? Kettle.

11 votes

#2.63 - Mon Jan 9, 2012 12:10 AM EST

Comment collapsed by the community

I see you've learned how to 'cherry pick' a sentence.

I don't know what it is to be discriminated against?

That is not what I said.

You have very little idea what it is to be discriminated against because of the color of your skin.

Quite a distinction, yes?

And, for the record, I did not bring up the subject of race. I am solely concerned with competency.

I'm pretty sure your definition of 'competency' is NOT the same as most people's. If you think that ANY ONE of the people running to beat Obama- CAN beat him- You've FAILED.

The 'Vine must be paying well- because you've actually goaded people into commenting on this garbage seed.

Including me.

You can't SERIOUSLY believe this @!$%#.

Detracking. I've had enough of your bull@!$%# sandwich. @!$%# like this is EXACTLY why I'm voting for Obama. Delusional people make things worse- by posting stupid @!$%#- LIKE THIS SEED.

18 votes

#2.65 - Mon Jan 9, 2012 12:38 AM EST

Calling people delusional is a CoH violation but I will let you slide - just this once.

And again the question - let me rephrase it this time:

How do you know I do not know what it is like to be discriminated against because of the color of my skin? Are you omniscient?

10 votes

#2.66 - Mon Jan 9, 2012 12:44 AM EST

http://www.healthcare.gov/law/timeline/full.html

PATRIOT: Earlier you said Obamacare doesn't kick in until AFTER the 2012 election.If you have a minute,please come out of your fact free bubble long enough to look at this:

16 votes

#2.67 - Mon Jan 9, 2012 1:26 AM EST

http://redsfan.newsvine.com/_news/2012/01/08/10055006-racism-is-a-vital-piece-of-the-2012-republican-platform

10 votes

#2.68 - Mon Jan 9, 2012 1:39 AM EST

PATRIOT: Earlier you said Obamacare doesn't kick in until AFTER the 2012 election.If you have a minute,please come out of your fact free bubble long enough to look at this:

Yes - they did throw some bones in before the 2012 election. The two primary benefits are the no preexisting conditions and the ability to keep a child on the parents' plan until age 26.

The true "meat" of the program does not kick in until AFTER the election: "affordable" insurance for the uninsured (and for "all").

The benefit for the people who have no health insurance is not effective until 2013. Those fortunate to have it, whether through employment or privately; have seen 18-20% increases in cost for 2010 and 2011.

10 votes

#2.69 - Mon Jan 9, 2012 1:52 AM EST

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oh-yR1HWkbM&feature=player_embedded

dumbya ...divided this country more than ANY ONE else

Nope Obama has done that better than anyone. Bush, for all his faults, pretty much turned the other cheek. But Obama? Here's a sampling of the ones I can remember:

"they bring a knife, you bring a gun"

Reps: "carnival barkers"

"we will punish our enemies and reward our friends "...

"ole, Mr. Burgess, he'll tear him up" (speaking of Hannity)

"bitter PA's clinging to their guns and religion"

"argue with your neighbors...get in their face"

here Obama just implored Hispanic and Black people to vote. What happened to the rest of America? Is their vote not important:

African Americans: “Take off your bedroom slippers. Put on your marching shoes. Shake it off. Stop complainin’. Stop grumblin’. Stop cryin’.”

Americans: Are “not a model for the world” and have a “tragic history.” Also, “we’re hard wired not to always think clearly when we’re scared,” and, more recently, we have gotten “a little soft” and lost our “competitive edge.”

Bankers: “Fat cats”

Border enforcement: Its overzealous adherents want “alligators and moats” on the border and would arrest children on their way to get ice cream.

Corporate-jet owners: “Are you willing to compromise your kids’ safety so some corporate-jet owner can get a tax break?”

Democratic base: Must “shake off this lethargy. People need to buck up . . . if people now want to take their ball and go home, that tells me folks weren’t serious in the first place.”

and this - the official BO home for the holidays - how to talk to the "too stupid unenlightned family members about all the good BO is doing".../sarc/

http://www.barackobama.com/news/entry/home-for-the-holidays-aapi/

14 votes

#2.70 - Mon Jan 9, 2012 2:04 AM EST

Well, looks like RT can't argue with fact, so in typical lib fashion, he cusses and blows off...so silly, but again, typical.

Most of Obamacrapcare taxes and regulations don't come in until after the 2012 election...(and forget the deficit neutral crap, the CBO a week later when the got the final numbs said it would cost us and not be under the trillion they told us it would either.

oh, and interestingly,

Obama and the dem nitwits got the debt extension through the 2012 election too, Dec 0f 2012...how convenient.

If Obama can't work with others then maybe he needs to take his ball and go home...

14 votes

#2.71 - Mon Jan 9, 2012 2:12 AM EST

Well, looks like RT can't argue with fact, so in typical lib fashion, he cusses and blows off...so silly, but again, typical.

If you actually read my post, I said this-

Detracking. I've had enough of your bull@!$%# sandwich. @!$%# like this is EXACTLY why I'm voting for Obama. Delusional people make things worse- by posting stupid @!$%#- LIKE THIS SEED.

I'm sneezing, hacking.... I'm allergic to GOP Bull@!$%#.

Don't worry about me- You and 'Patriot' can Thelma and Louise it up all you want. The seed is bull@!$%#, and it almost cost me a suspension for putting you in your rightful place. Besides, there are others here to show you how silly your thoughts are. They don't need me.

12 votes

#2.72 - Mon Jan 9, 2012 2:22 AM EST

and it almost cost me a suspension for putting you in your rightful place

oh, well, bless your heart...you know, self control is a good attribute to have, it's good to not allow others to control how you respond. Oops, well,never mind then, I see it didn't work... I am sooo glad you put us in our rightful place (LOL!! That was hilarious)...self control issues and a exaggerated opinion of oneself...hmm, again typical of the pseudo intellectual giants of the left.

And any thoughts as to the rest of the facts of post 2.71?

11 votes

#2.73 - Mon Jan 9, 2012 3:25 AM EST

So when was the TeaGOP ever working with Obama?

Was it after Mitch McConnell (R-Flatworm) decided to announce that making Obama a 1-termer was the top priority of the GOP? Ahead of jobs?

I'm struggling with any sign that the GOP has ever tried to work with Obama in any way.

12 votes

#2.74 - Mon Jan 9, 2012 7:32 AM EST

The Republicans, in their own words (Part 2): bigotry, hate and violence

a whole list of racism and hate from the right .. for example ..

MY DOG
I went down this morning to sign up my Dog for welfare.

At first the lady said, "Dogs are not eligible to draw welfare".

So I explained to her that my Dog is black, unemployed, lazy, can't speak
English and has no frigging clue who his Daddy is.

So she looked in her policy book to see what it takes to qualify...

My Dog gets his first check Friday.

Is this is a great country or what?

-- Virginia Beach (Va.) Republican
Committee Chairman
David Bartholomew
http://www.dailykos.com/story/2010/10/26/913651/-The-Republicans,-in-their-own-words-%28Part-2%29:-bigotry,-hate-and-violence

14 votes

#2.75 - Mon Jan 9, 2012 9:10 AM EST

Not surprsing. Racism, hatred, and a fat thumb in the eye is all the GOP has left to offer.

That, and a passel of insulting lies.

13 votes

#2.76 - Mon Jan 9, 2012 9:25 AM EST

Delusional people make things worse- by posting stupid @!$%#- LIKE THIS SEED.

No a violation 8888 and you know it. This article is delusional even on the "right" side of sanity it comes out as nothing more than ill thought out opinions displaying nothing more than hatefulness towards the President.

14 votes

#2.77 - Mon Jan 9, 2012 9:28 AM EST

Now Don, you wrote delusional people, not delusional article.

I've seen suspensions for calling people delusional.
Can't you make a point without calling people names?

8 votes

#2.78 - Mon Jan 9, 2012 9:38 AM EST

I won't bother getting into the pissing contest about which party and its followers are worse, which seems utterly pointless. What I will do, however, is point out that the quoted section of the seed, above, makes a statement that is utterly and without a doubt wrong. The claim made is this:

The Constitution, of course, gives the president the power to make appointments during Senate recesses. Technically, however, the Senate was in session. The imperial president bypassed Senate rules and years of precedent because he wouldn't or couldn't cut a deal.

This is, of course, complete and utter nonsense. The Senate was in recess. No matter how you torture the English language, the fact will remain that the Senate was in recess. There is no Senate rule on how long a recess has to be to be considered a recess, much less any constitutional guidance on how long a recess has to be in order to trigger the president's recess appointment power, and not all the bloviating wind-power of the collective conservative outrage machine will change these facts. They're noted by the Senate Majority leader (i.e., that majority of the Senate), the Congressional Research Service (the non-partisan research arm of Congress which investigates such questions in order to inform Senators of facts), and the court (in Evans v Stephens).

Despite the attempt of Republicans to claim that the Senate is not in recess, by reference to Article I, Section 5, clause 4, it is abundantly clear, both from what is occurring and from the language of that particular clause, that what we have are a series of three day Senate recesses interspersed with pro forma sessions of less than a minute each-- a situation which has been engineered by the House (which has no say whatsoever in appointments) in an attempt to unilaterally thwart the president from using his constitutionally delegated authority to make recess appointments.

Far from evidence of an "imperial presidency", it is nothing more than solid evidence that the president has no one to "cut a deal" with. You don't "cut deals" with people who refuse to budge. You don't "compromise" with people who refuse to compromise. And you certainly don't "work with" a minority party who has filibustered nearly every piece of legislation to come down the pike, including their own, in order to fulfill their stated aim in allowing the president to accomplish nothing while in office-- up to and including, if necessary, forcing America to default on its debt while simultaneously attempting to prevent the Executive Branch from running the government-- something the full Congress has no say in, much less the conglomeration of conservative cry-babies currently throwing a tantrum over the failure of their juvenile ploy.

Whatever Debra Saunders' qualifications might be, the ability to research claims, understand the constitutional basis for what is occurring, and present them in a logical fashion designed to enhance the understanding of her readers do not seem to be among them. The House is attempting to undermine the principle of separation of powers, not the president. And in order to obfuscate that fact, Saunders employs selective quotations (of the CRS), rhetorical fallacies (as in her tu quoque regarding the 2007 pro forma sessions), and outright lying (as in claiming that recess appointments represent use of "the executive boot to step on the Senate's power to advise and consent").

Unfortunately for lying shills of the right, reference to reality utterly shreds Saunders sophistry. As noted in McAlpin v. Dana, No. 82–582, slip op. at 14 (D.D.C. Oct. 5, 1982) ("[T]here is no reason to believe that the President's recess appointment power is less important than the Senate's power to subject nominees to the confirmation process"-- this isn't a case of "stepping on" some sacrosanct power of the Senate (which, by the way, would certainly take a longer recess if the House Republicans would allow it). It's fulfilling precisely the purpose for which the recess appointment power was placed into the Constitution in the first place: ensuring that the government can continue to function by filling vacancies which hinder its ability to do its job.

Saunders' piece is a notable example of the sort of yellow journalism which puts facts in the back seat behind her axe-grinding agenda.

17 votes

#2.79 - Mon Jan 9, 2012 9:42 AM EST

http://kleinonline.wnd.com/2011/12/06/new-nbc-newsroom-acorn-moveon-funders-network-teams-up-with-%E2%80%98journalism%E2%80%99-outfit-founded-by-billionaire-obama-campaigners/

RE: 2.45 Patriot 8888

Just a tidbit about that Harvard Professor....remember the new State-Run news source that all the mainstream media is being directed to use from now on, ProPublica? This affirms the media is White House controlled...and Soros owns the journalists! (just take a look at how many Soros orgs are involved in this!)

""""Controversial Harvard professor Henry Louis Gates Jr., a friend of Obama who was embroiled in a national race scandal in 2009, sits on the board of ProPublica.""""""

10 votes

#2.80 - Mon Jan 9, 2012 9:46 AM EST

JEFFINVA

People who say that the use of "tar baby" isn't racist probably thought the black birds in the movie "Dumbo" were an acceptable interpretation of southern black men.

11 votes

#2.81 - Mon Jan 9, 2012 9:46 AM EST

Now Don, you wrote delusional people, not delusional article.

Sorry there buddy try again. As usual you are totally incorrect in other words you're wrong as is usual.

12 votes

#2.82 - Mon Jan 9, 2012 9:51 AM EST

And you are in abject defiance of yourself.

10 votes

#2.83 - Mon Jan 9, 2012 9:56 AM EST

swagg

Peach twisted words is in no way compared to legislation brought fourth to suppress votes and racially profile brown people.

4 votes

#2.84 - Mon Jan 9, 2012 10:02 AM EST

caught in the middle!

Obama is finally confessing some truth to his failed presidency! he can't work with others, only YES men. is this what we really need to hear? did we really need to hear this? too bad, most american's expected more from this president than what we got. we have been staggering for the past almost 4 years, now we have a chance to heal. say goodbye to this incapable performer and get serious!

5 votes

#2.85 - Mon Jan 9, 2012 11:19 AM EST

No, the Truth is that it's the Republicans who can't work with others.

Obama just can't work with RWNJs who think that Compromise (Working with others) is a bad word.

5 votes

#2.86 - Mon Jan 9, 2012 11:22 AM EST

I see some are collapsing comments merely because they do not like them, rather than let others read the facts and opinions contained in them, as I see nothing wrong with Patriot's comments whatsoever. Obama is also squelching news it does not like in the White House with his RAPID RESPONSE TEAM.

9 votes

#2.87 - Mon Jan 9, 2012 12:22 PM EST

The first thing one has to do when entering a discussion of this kind is to remember the one simple rule. When times are tough in America and only getting worse by the day, one must remember that never in the history of the United States has a democrat ever held public office of any kind, outside of the White House, and this is why things are so bad. If after 3 years the President has been unable to turn "his" economy around this is not the fault of the President, but rather the republicans who hold every office in the land and thwart his every move, no matter how incomprehensible. Once you begin to formulate your ideas based on this simple rule you will then begin to make "sense" of the whole situation.

7 votes

#2.88 - Mon Jan 9, 2012 12:24 PM EST

Of course - it's part of the Lib MO. Deny, deflect, denigrate and if that does not work, disappear. Just because they cannot see it, they think is does not exist.

I had an entire seed disappear yesterday because the Lefties on the vine did not like the subject matter of Michelle advancing the "royalty" meme with her preference for the "your excellency" title.

7 votes

#2.89 - Mon Jan 9, 2012 12:26 PM EST

8888, you are really upset about the First Lady being on a TV show. sad.sad. sad. You used to have better talking points. You have my sympathy.

7 votes

#2.90 - Mon Jan 9, 2012 12:38 PM EST

it's part of the Lib MO. Deny, deflect, denigrate and if that does not work, disappear. Lol! 22 straight months of positive private sector job growth, recovery of the GDP back into positive numbers, lost ground in the stock market regained, manufacturing in the positive, improvement in consumer confidence and business confidence-- these things are all facts which conservatives deny. When pointed out to them, they deflect the conversation to nonsense topics, then denigrate what they can't refute. And when that doesn't work, they run and hide, hoping to start back up with the same nonsense in another thread. And yet, somehow, this is the "Lib MO"?

I had no idea that conservatives were "Libs". It puts the whole thing in a new light.

Bottom line is this-- people who want to pretend that things haven't gotten any better than they were when Bush left office aren't people with whom you can have a rational discussion. They didn't use reason to arrive at the position they hold, and they sure as @!$%# won't allow reason to dissuade them of that position. Which is why the vast majority of conservative seeds like this one are nothing more than conservatives taking an opportunity to thump their chests and pretend to manliness.

There is a reason why Obama is consistently polling higher than every Republican candidate for president-- not even you people believe in your own bull@!$%#.

9 votes

#2.91 - Mon Jan 9, 2012 12:48 PM EST

I actually could care less about the First Lady appearing on a TV show.

What is tasteless is that a First Lady could be so classless on that TV show. Even joking about "your excellency" when brave Americans sacrificed their lives for our freedom from the monarchy is rather gauche. Not the standard of behavior becoming the wife of the head of a Democratic Republic.

I can imagine the frenzy of the Liberal watchdogs if Laura Bush had uttered a penchant for the monarchy, even in jest. They would still be foaming at the mouth.

We are not amused.

11 votes

#2.92 - Mon Jan 9, 2012 12:53 PM EST

The reason Obama polls well wouldn't be because that is the conclusion that was settled upon before the poll was taken is it? Or that perhaps they only have Obama to choose from on the democratic side whilst they have a plethora of choices on the republican side?

6 votes

#2.93 - Mon Jan 9, 2012 1:02 PM EST

Or, Tes, the plethora of choices is a actually percieved,and rightly so, as a Hydra of evil?

6 votes

#2.94 - Mon Jan 9, 2012 1:06 PM EST

What did Laura Bush ever do -- other than SMILE for the cameras like all good submissive wives? Do we detect a note of jealousy of the First Lady from you Patriot? or is it just that narrow vision of yours? PS -- we all would've been foaming at the mouth if Mrs. Bush even uttered a complete thought!

6 votes

#2.95 - Mon Jan 9, 2012 1:10 PM EST

Not the Hydra of EEEEEEEville!!! IMSHO more like the Hydra of Incompetence, but that is just me. Many on the other side perceive Obama as EEEEEville and from what I am experiencing on a daily basis(especially at the grocery store my next stop today) I am inclined to give that notion more credibility YD.

9 votes

#2.96 - Mon Jan 9, 2012 1:16 PM EST

Do we detect a note of jealousy of the First Lady from you Patriot? or is it just that narrow vision of yours?

Do you actually read what you write??

Too bad there isn't a COH for tripe.

9 votes

#2.97 - Mon Jan 9, 2012 1:16 PM EST

Tes, I revised my comment and threw the EEEEEEEville just for you. Although the Incompetence works well also.;>)

8 votes

#2.98 - Mon Jan 9, 2012 1:26 PM EST

The reason Obama polls well wouldn't be because that is the conclusion that was settled upon before the poll was taken is it? Sure. It's a vast left wing conspiracy which encompasses all major pollsters. Out of curiosity, do you believe all the stuff you read in the Fortean Times, too?

perhaps they only have Obama to choose from on the democratic side whilst they have a plethora of choices on the republican side? These polls ask about Obama compared individually to each of the Republican candidates. I said a year ago, when conservatives continued to trumpet that Obama was neck-and-neck with a "generic" Republican that, in the long run, Republicans would see a drop in popularity for "their" candidate, once they actually had to settle on a name. If all Republicans were of the opinion that "any Republican candidate is better than Obama", the end results of these polls would be consistent advantage for any of the Republican candidates.

We don't see that. Instead, no Republican candidate beats Obama in these polls.

This is a serious problem for a putative Republican candidate-- after months of debates, and plenty of campaigning, there is no front runner for the Republican candidacy. The Republican party is split. Moderates would no more vote for an ignorant culture warrior like Michele Bachmann than Tea Partiers would vote for a moderate Republican like Huntsman or Romney.

This does not bode well for Republicans in 2012.

Guy showed me a neat trick the other day. he showed me how by using percentages rather than numbers one could increase the amount of republicans that voted on a bill without actually increasing the amount of republicans in congress. Ah, yes... tricks with numbers. Interestingly, I've been noting since 2007 that when a conservative sees a poll he likes, it is the indisputable truth, but when he sees one that implies things he doesn't like, it's all statistical trickery.

It's unfortunate that these sorts of claims never go so far as to actually investigate or criticize the actual polling methodology.

11 votes

#2.99 - Mon Jan 9, 2012 1:30 PM EST

Much as it may surprise you iarnuocon I predicted a looong while back that the current batch of dweebs from the GOP couldn't beat Carter(after inflation) let alone Obama. I also predicted that no matter what the numbers may indicate Romney(the other democrat) will be the GOP nominee. I was merely pointing out that these things do happen with polls, albeit seemingly only when those polls show a negative result for either side depending upon whom one is talking to of course. As you said "when a conservative sees a poll he likes...", that statement works both ways I'm afraid. And I have made it perfectly clear that I do not put ANY faith in any poll. Though they are sometimes fun to kick around.

7 votes

#2.100 - Mon Jan 9, 2012 1:47 PM EST

Cob the Crazed

This is Hysterical. Only on the Vine can the actual Seeders comments get "Collapsed by the Liberal Community." I've seen it done on general conservative comments so they can try to hide the truth, but I don't recall seeing them doing it to a Seeder!! lol

4 votes

#2.101 - Mon Jan 9, 2012 1:47 PM EST

Sally

Pathetic.

Come on now, Patriot 8888. As the seeder, you should know better.

As the host of your column, you are expected to foster healthy, open discussions by setting a good example.

You are suspended for a day for violating rule # 1 of the Code of Honor.

Above all else, respect others. Address issues and arguments and refrain from making personal attacks.

Thanks.

This and other lies is all these pathatic morons have and why the country is falling apart wih Obama in office.

Dog_Blue, don't grenade troll please.

That is proof beyond a logical doubt that Obama supporters are truly and ineffably brainwashed.

mygirl1, discuss without personal insults. You are both suspended for a week.

14 votes

#2.102 - Mon Jan 9, 2012 2:25 PM EST

My apologies for the near duplicate comments. I posted the first one and it disappeared until today. Thanks to all who voted them up however.

:-)

4 votes

#2.103 - Tue Jan 10, 2012 12:08 PM EST

Yeah, likely story. Postin for extra votes,eh, tes? ;>)

6 votes

#2.104 - Tue Jan 10, 2012 12:43 PM EST

Hey what's up over there at Soph's YD? Did you not get the crayon referrence? You said you attempt to respond to others in a language they can understand I said you never use crayon with me and everyone is thinkin I somehow dissed you? I was dissin myself.

5 votes

#2.105 - Tue Jan 10, 2012 12:54 PM EST

I know. I guess they did not realize my tongue in cheek response about chastisement. I on the other hand( I forget which one) recognized your self abasing statement as grandiose humor. And loved it. (Damn, I used two 50 cent words in one post.)

2 votes

#2.106 - Tue Jan 10, 2012 1:10 PM EST

Oh and ah Hell Yea posting for more votes :-) I wanna be on that list thingy (they need a rolling eyes moticon)

4 votes

#2.107 - Tue Jan 10, 2012 2:13 PM EST

I did see that list a while back. Not good for Yellow Dog D. I had to tip my monitor up on the edge to see me.

1 vote

#2.108 - Tue Jan 10, 2012 2:17 PM EST

I looked at it some damn time last year I think. I have never opened half of the sections here. Not havin a home terminal limits my exploring time.

4 votes

#2.109 - Tue Jan 10, 2012 2:21 PM EST

It's not the President that's poisoning the well--it's the Republicans. And they are so blatant about it. They are proud of blocking everything that will move the country forward no matter what the cost to the citizens, because they just don't care.

If you think the country is not noticing the Republican party of obstruction, think again.

What's Congress's approval rate??? 9%??? Why do you think that is??

43 votes

#3 - Sun Jan 8, 2012 1:47 PM EST

Comment collapsed by the community

jade1

Where have you been?

28 votes

#3.2 - Sun Jan 8, 2012 2:09 PM EST

nm

5 votes

#3.3 - Sun Jan 8, 2012 2:30 PM EST

Lex majoris partis, The majority Rules.

Salus populi suprema lex esto "Let the good of the people be the supreme law”

But if you are an ultraconservative…block the vote and make it harder to have free elections, they can’t get into power without lying and cheating and never could…

"The denunciation of the democratic societies, whose avowed object is the nourishment of the republican principles of our Constitution, is one of the extraordinary acts of boldness of which we have seen so many from the faction of monocrats,... and is an attack on the freedom of discussion, the freedom of writing, printing and publishing." --Thomas Jefferson to James Madison, 1794.

26 votes

#3.4 - Sun Jan 8, 2012 2:34 PM EST

You may also use the phrase 'ultra-liberal' to same effect.

7 votes

#3.5 - Sun Jan 8, 2012 5:22 PM EST

You may also use the phrase 'ultra-liberal' to same effect.

There is no such word in the dictionary.

But if you want to make up your own language because Obama supports English...

"Fascism, which was not afraid to call itself reactionary... does not hesitate to call itself illiberal and anti-liberal. Benito Mussolini

Look up the word Reactionary!

"As Mankind becomes more liberal, they will be more apt to allow that all those who conduct themselves as worthy members of the community are equally entitled to the protections of civil government. I hope ever to see America among the foremost nations of justice and liberality." George Washington, [1790]

The Father of America was a socialist!

17 votes

#3.6 - Sun Jan 8, 2012 5:52 PM EST

Corie

There is no such word in the dictionary.

In your rush to attack her, maybe you did not read what words she used - even though you quoted them.

You may also use the phrase 'ultra-liberal'

mygirl1 clearly called it a phrase, not a word.

8 votes

#3.7 - Sun Jan 8, 2012 6:16 PM EST

A red-herring… that’s a word and that’s what this is from you to distract from my reply I gave to her nonsense...

13 votes

#3.8 - Sun Jan 8, 2012 6:32 PM EST

Semantics. Are you aware of the purpose of placing words or sentences into quotation marks?

8 votes

#3.9 - Sun Jan 8, 2012 7:00 PM EST

Corie

A red-herring… that’s a word and that’s what this is from you to distract from my reply

Calling out a lie is the same as interjecting a red herring? Only in liberal la-la land...

2 votes

#3.10 - Mon Jan 9, 2012 12:45 AM EST

Red-herring, defiantly. Now you are calling me a liar for nothing but making a point... ad hominem abusive as well.
Typical antagonistic behavior from the Right.
Now you are going to feign umbridge. Poor me babies.

"Fascism, which was not afraid to call itself reactionary... does not hesitate to call itself illiberal and anti-liberal. Benito Mussolini

9 votes

#3.11 - Mon Jan 9, 2012 1:09 AM EST

They are proud of blocking everything that will move the country forward no matter what the cost to the citizens, because they just don't care.

Let's see, Did Harry Reid allow a vote on and pass the budget for this year (it was supposed to have been passed by the end of last Sept)? The answer is NO.

The House has passed 28 bills from last January until Dec...has Harry Reid allowed them to come to a vote on the floor of the Senate? The answer is NO.

Now, who's the obstructionists again??

9 votes

#3.12 - Mon Jan 9, 2012 2:17 AM EST

Let's see, Did Harry Reid allow a vote on and pass the budget for this year

Wonderful, if the GOP lead congress hadn’t put all kind of riders onto the bill.

GOP Riders Continue to Impede Budget Process | Elly Pepper's …

GOP Riders Continue to Impede Budget Process ... bill is something that shouldn' t even have been part of the budget debate in the first place

9 votes

#3.13 - Mon Jan 9, 2012 6:14 AM EST

The House has passed 28 bills from last January until Dec

Is this evidence that the GOP is working with Obama? What compromises did the GOP make in order to get the President onboard with those 28 bills?

Or, are those 28 bills all composed of sharp jabs in the eye, like everything the GOP has offered for the last 4 years?

Oh, that's right I forgot this is the meaningless, fact-free "harry reid can't work with others" thread, not the meaningless, fact-free "obama can't work with others" thread.

Right?

Also, while we are on the topic let's review the Senate's record number of filibusters during the last two years of Bush's term, when the Congress had a clear mandate from the people that Democrats were to be in charge:

http ://www .prnewswire .com/news-releases/record-breaking-senate-conservatives-use-filibuster-for-62nd-time-in-this-session-of-congress-58789162.html

The new report outlines every bill filibustered, vetoed or threatened
to be vetoed by President Bush. Conservatives filibustered bills to end the
occupation of Iraq, provide soldiers in Iraq rest time equal to their
deployments, support renewable energy and grant residents of the District
of Columbia representation in Congress. Today's record-breaker involved a
$516 billion budget package passed by the House to fund the federal
government in 2008. The conservative minority demanded $20 billion
additional funding for the war and opposed House language to bring troops
home, and threatened a filibuster to prevent the bill from getting an up or
down vote.

"In just one session, a minority in Congress has prevented a
mind-blowing 62 pieces of legislation from going to the floor for an up or
down vote," said Campaign for America's Future co-director Roger Hickey.
"Our report shows how over and over again, the uncompromising minority has
thwarted the will of majorities in Congress and of the American people,
holding the Senate floor hostage to a radical right-wing agenda."

Once Obama got elected, it got even worse:

http ://www .nationaljournal .com/daily/majority-does-not-rule-in-filibuster-filled-111th-congress-20101216

At least eight major pieces of legislation have been entirely halted by filibusters in this Congress—six since September, including three in the past 10 days alone—although each bill received more than 50 votes in the Senate. Five of those eight passed in some form with a majority vote in the House before failing to achieve a "super majority" vote in the Senate.

The graphs are quite damning.

It is very clearly the GOP who do not know how to play with others. Please stop wasting your breath on this stupid talking point.

8 votes

#3.14 - Mon Jan 9, 2012 9:37 AM EST

JEFFINVA

Wonderful, if the GOP lead congress hadn’t put all kind of riders onto the bill.

Apparently in the GOP's mind, it doesn't matter what was in the bill that passed the Republican lead House, it was that they passed it. Hey they passed a bill proposing pizza as an acceptable "veggie" in the school lunch program so I guess the fact that they passed it should garner more praise then what they actually passed. Or hey maybe you can count that other piece of legislative time wasting the "Country Motto" vote as an acceptable use of legislative power and time. Especially considering how well our country is doing these days./s I sure am glad they got all the confusion out of what we have as a National motto./s

5 votes

#3.15 - Mon Jan 9, 2012 10:18 AM EST

GOP Riders Continue to Impede Budget Process ... bill is something that shouldn' t even have been part of the budget debate in the first place

Oh gee, is that like the piece of crap the some Senate Dems (and Pubs)put in the last bill that passed? Maybe like the stupid indefinite suspension that Obama said he would veto and then - lo and behold - he signs without all the fan fare nice and quietly on vacation? Yeah, they ATTACHED that to the Defense funding bill, so if they voted against it the Dems would jump on that and say, "the Pubs don't want our soldiers with bullets" (like the silly ganes they have played before with the troops). Not to mention 8 billion dollars worth of pork (for their part at least, the House has banned earmarks).

bill is something that shouldn' t even have been part of the budget debate in the first place

I fully agree, but BOTH sides do it...and it is WRONG. But, PLEASE, don't act like it's just the Pubs (and we could go to Obamacrapcare, where we have the Louisana Purchase, the Cornhusker kickback, and the deal Ben Nelson worked out, etc to sweeten the pot for some Dems who were going to vote against it) who are doing it, because that is blatantly FALSE.

6 votes

#3.16 - Mon Jan 9, 2012 5:25 PM EST

Don't worry. As the NDAA proved, the parties can agree very easily when the subject is on how to trample on the constitutional rights of the American people.

9 votes

#4 - Sun Jan 8, 2012 1:49 PM EST

DBE928

Obama's radical ideology and lack of experience are becoming more evident every day.

15 votes

#5 - Sun Jan 8, 2012 2:00 PM EST

T. Gracchus

Race card!

Did I get that right?

11 votes

#5.1 - Sun Jan 8, 2012 2:09 PM EST

cannonballer

Sure T, thats as valid a card play as any others.

Obama was elected to do a job, Congress was elected to do a job, saying they cant work together isn't an option.

5 votes

#5.2 - Sun Jan 8, 2012 2:55 PM EST

Obama's radical ideology and lack of experience are becoming more evident every day.

cannonballer, you actually wrote the above? Oh my!

Quick question for ya: In the election of 2012, who will have more experience as POTUS, PRESIDENT Obama or the GOP contender? By your logic, you are asking folks to elect someone who would have less than "lack of experience" to be our new POTUS.

Also, while we are at it, please give an example of Pres Obama's radical agenda?

19 votes

#5.3 - Sun Jan 8, 2012 3:35 PM EST

Have you read section 1021 of the NDAA? The section that Obama demanded be in there or else he'd veto it?

7 votes

#5.4 - Sun Jan 8, 2012 3:52 PM EST

The section that Obama demanded be in there or else he'd veto it?

That's a lie and you know it.

15 votes

#5.5 - Sun Jan 8, 2012 3:59 PM EST

youtube.com/watch?v=K0PdDGqK0S4

Carl Levin, a Democrat, openly stated this fact on the Congressional floor.

Nope, it's not a lie. Try again

7 votes

#5.6 - Sun Jan 8, 2012 4:08 PM EST

geez

3 votes

#5.7 - Sun Jan 8, 2012 4:11 PM EST

You are misrepresenting what was negotiated in the run-up to the vote on the NDAA. With knowledge that the provision would be included in the bill whether he liked it or not, all Obama insisted on was the president being in the loop for defining who would fall into the category of suspect that could be imprisoned under the act. Congress is the one that included the provision in the bill and it was Congress that voted down an amendment to remove it.

11 votes

#5.8 - Sun Jan 8, 2012 4:16 PM EST

Oh wow. Way to run around the facts. He knew that American citizens could be sent off to Gitmo (the prison he promised to close) without a shred of evidence and signed off on it on New Year's Eve when nobody would notice. He stripped you of your 5th amendment rights and all you can do is make excuses for the coward. How about he say "No, I won't sign off on an unconstitutional law like this and if you dare override my veto on it I'll go straight to the American people with what you passed and how you passed it!"

7 votes

#5.9 - Sun Jan 8, 2012 4:27 PM EST

Oh wow. Way to run around the facts. He knew that American citizens be sent off to Gitmo without a shred and signed off on it on New Year's Eve when nobody would notice. Stop making excuse for the coward.

You are the one that claimed that the imprisonment provision was in the bill at Obama's insistence. I just pointed out that the claim was a lie.

How about he say "No, I won't sign off on an unconstitutional law like this and if you dare override my veto on it I'll go straight to the American people with what you passed and how you passed it!"

Virtually every member of Congress, Democrat and Republican, voted for the bill. If Obama had vetoed it, that veto would have been overridden. His signing statement did just what you suggest.

13 votes

#5.10 - Sun Jan 8, 2012 4:33 PM EST

You actually brought up that signing statement?! That is completely meaningless! Would you let me hold a loaded gun to your head as long as I promised you I wouldn't pull the trigger? He has no obligation to follow that statement. In fact, the constitution doesn't even permit them. My point was, if he actually cared about the people, he would've dared Congress to override him with the threat of exposing their crimes, rather than just go along with it with an unconstitutional signing statement as his excuse. The moment his pen hit that paper he became just as guilty as every member of Congress who voted for that bill. I can't believe you're letting him trick you this easily with his innocent act.

7 votes

#5.11 - Sun Jan 8, 2012 4:43 PM EST

http://www.opednews.com/articles/Why-Obama-Will-Not-Veto-ND-by-Ralph-Lopez-111210-198.html

You are the one that claimed that the imprisonment provision was in the bill at Obama's insistence. I just pointed out that the claim was a lie.

Lie? Source, please...

Why Obama Will Not Veto NDAA Military Detention of Americans: He Requested It.

"""Sen. Carl Levin (D-MI) on Senate floor explaining it was Obama who requested the provision for indefinite military detention of American citizens without charge or trial. Levin is a primary co-sponsor of the bill along with Sen. John McCain, and Chairman of the Senate Armed Services Committee.""""

10 votes

#5.12 - Sun Jan 8, 2012 4:48 PM EST

I already posted that video and he gave it the run around.

3 votes

#5.13 - Sun Jan 8, 2012 4:49 PM EST

cannonballer

Nope I didn't write, Obama's radical ideology and lack of experience are becoming more evident every day. Maybe you should scroll back up and have another look.

As far as experience, it doesn't matter. Hillary had way more political experience than Obama, he was a freshman Senator with a pretty poor voting record and he got the nomination, why is that?

My point above was that the President, Congress and Senate are hired to do jobs, they get compensated pretty good and telling the people that hired them they cant seem to work together is unacceptable. Having two or more parties is good but having the extremists from both sides in office isn't working out so well.

6 votes

#5.14 - Sun Jan 8, 2012 5:08 PM EST

Exactly spot-on.

The President is paid to do a job - he cannot fulfill a critical part of the job description: works well with others.

H*ll, forget about the Presidency, that's a prerequisite for a child in pre-school.

The Populace Board of Directors of the US will fire BO on 11/6/12.

9 votes

#5.15 - Sun Jan 8, 2012 5:16 PM EST

and replace him with another puppet who can't work well with others.

6 votes

#5.16 - Sun Jan 8, 2012 5:25 PM EST

Must not be so optimistic.

7 votes

#5.17 - Sun Jan 8, 2012 5:28 PM EST

exltcusa

Just to keep the facts straight here, have any of the above posters actaully read the 2012 NDAA? Obviously not.

The NDAA does not invalidate the Posse Comitatus Act of 1878. The US military DOES NOT have the power or authority to detain or arrest ANYONE, much less US citizens, off of a Federal installation. The US military does provide technological (ie. sensors, aircraft), training and logistics support to Federal agencies, such as the Border Patrol. The National Guard retains the power and authority, when called to active duty by the Governor of the state in which the National Guard is stationed to enforce the laws of THAT STATE.

The right of habeas corpus has not been suspended, though US law allows for it in cases of emergency. If anyone is detained without charges in the US, their family, friends, or interested parties may sue in Federal court for their release if charges have not been preferred. If charges have been preferred they may seek release on bond. Even the foreign citizens detained at Gitmo were able to sue in Federal court over their detention.

What the provision in the NDAA allows is for the US military to detain US citizens outside the US who are suspected of supporting anti-American terrorist organizations identified by Congress in previous NDAA and Authorizations to Use Military Force (AUMF). In such cases, US citizens are defined as "enemy combatants" or "members of terrorist organizations" and handled as such. It is the intent of the Administration that US citizens when detained will be turned over to the FBI.

Which is what has been taken out of context by the Obamahaters. What President Obama requested was that a provision ASSIGNING all detention of suspected terrorists or supporters to the US military be struck in the interests of flexibility in executing the law. The provision was not modified to his satisfaction and like every modern President (including his predecessor, who set the record for doing so), he used a signing statement to outline his intent to retain flexibility over how and when terrorist will be detained.

BTW, since when has it been a requirement for President to be willing to compromise or worse, give in, to your political opponents in Congress? Would you care to argue that Bush II, Clinton, Bush I, Reagan, Carter, Ford, Nixon, LBJ(!), Kennedy and Eisnehower were better than Obama in "playing well with others". The actual intent of your seed is obvious when you use such a corny and immature phrase to cover the complexity of the political process when part or all of the Congress is in the hands of one party and the Presidency in the other.

5 votes

#5.18 - Mon Jan 9, 2012 9:07 AM EST

What you so artfully ignore is the definition of terrorist, the most germane aspect of the issue. Said definition is rather broad and vague enough to allow for anyone deemed suspect to be considered a terrorist if they hoard food or belong to an 'extremist' group or ideology or express any form of dissent or anatognism toward the established authorities. Also, intent can be used to incarcerate, regardless of an actual crime being committed. It is a very slippery slope which is why the ACLU is all over this little gem.

As to the signing statements, please. They are a suggestion of intent by one individual, they are not law. Any future president can follow the law as written, Obama's 'integrity' must be relied upon to avoid any misconduct by individuals in the vast police agency known as Homeland Security.

4 votes

#5.19 - Mon Jan 9, 2012 1:51 PM EST

j-bird-2923980

Mcchinless and Orangey McCrysalot are sick and tired of the president being so uppity and not checkin with them privately before he talks about his ideas. I mean really who does the President think he is, he jus don know his place I guess!!

27 votes

#6 - Sun Jan 8, 2012 2:13 PM EST

If it makes it more palatable to believe that, it's your prerogative.

Last time I checked though, incompetence did not discriminate. It comes in people of all colors, shapes, and sizes.

Pathetic that you have to hide behind other people's suffering and persecution in order to make up an excuse to prop up the empty suit currently occupying the White House.

13 votes

#6.1 - Sun Jan 8, 2012 2:45 PM EST

I've read half this thread and still have not seen any evidence that the TeaGOP has ever tried to work with Obama.

I must assume such evidence is nonexistent. Or that such evidence is from such an infinitesimal source that it almost cannot be seen. Like, maybe there's a really tiny Republican party hidden somewhere in Mitch McConnell's ear that desperately wants to work across a very tiny aisle, if they could only find a little bitty President who is petty enough to work with them.

8 votes

#6.2 - Mon Jan 9, 2012 7:36 AM EST

I've read half this thread and still have not seen any evidence that the TeaGOP has ever tried to work with Obama.

You do realize that it goes both ways…. correct…….??? I am confident there has been efforts on both parts to work through issues…….however, it is not so simple as to completely agree on those…..therefore, the reports are broadcast as one not working with the other, dependent on which news source you follow……..!!! Obama’s frustration plastered all over the airways would be perceived as ill favor toward the House…but the accuracy of the events are not necessarily presented fairly……!!

6 votes

#6.3 - Mon Jan 9, 2012 8:54 AM EST

You do realize that it goes both ways…. correct…….???

When has the GOP ever offered to concede to anything Obama has asked for?

I just asked for any evidence and you immediately pull out this two-way street BS? That isn't the issue here and you know it.

I am confident there has been efforts on both parts to work through issues

I am confident that you can't produce a single example of the GOP working with Obama on anything. I am even more confident that you are completely full of it.

Produce ONE example where the GOP has tried working with Obama. JUST ONE.

7 votes

#6.4 - Mon Jan 9, 2012 9:17 AM EST

It is apparent that this President is a nice guy. Okay? We good with that? His problem is budgeting, spending, and the prospect of repayment for the debt. If someone takes money out of your pocket and starts throwing around to new friends and it's up to you to replace it.............................

5 votes

#6.5 - Mon Jan 9, 2012 9:32 AM EST

His problem is budgeting, spending, and the prospect of repayment for the debt

And since nobody seems to be able to answer my very pertinent question, you're changing the subject.

This is how come liberals can't talk to conservatives. Every time we get the better of one of your bull@!$%# talking points, you CHANGE THE SUBJECT.

8 votes

#6.6 - Mon Jan 9, 2012 9:39 AM EST

The point being, how do you agree on budget concerns with this President? It's pretty hard to come together on it when one side knows we are broke and other thinks borrowing means you have boatloads to spend. Sorry you are having such a horrible morning thisbusymonster, such hate screaming from that message. Oh well.

6 votes

#6.7 - Mon Jan 9, 2012 9:45 AM EST

Runner, your sentence is barely comprehensible, and totally off the subject. I think you're reaching for some desperate construction where Obama is "not compromising" with the GOP because he doesn't concede to their BULL@!$%# LIES about how the budget got so screwed up in the first place. Hint: it was Bush who inherited a balanced budget and then screwed it up six ways from Sunday. The two major items keeping the budget out of balance have been the Bush Tax Cuts for the rich, that didn't create jobs, and the Bush Wars, that Obama is finally winding down. That discussion is now over, thanks. We are not balancing our budget by ending Medicare or Social Security, since they are not the reasons it's out of balance in the first place. So you LOSE on that front as well.

I will assume you've got nothing useful to add to this discussion, since you can't answer my one simple question.

9 votes

#6.8 - Mon Jan 9, 2012 9:48 AM EST

Say please. Let's try to be cordial.

5 votes

#6.9 - Mon Jan 9, 2012 9:49 AM EST

"we are broke"? Funny, other countries are lining up to invest in America by purchasing our debt. And the only thing that seems likely to throw a wrench in a) our ability to use that funding to improve our long term position, and b) our ability to pay off the debt we currently hold, are the regressive policies of conservatives who apparently know next to nothing about the world economy, the American economy, or how economies work, in general.

Let's assume Republicans get their wish, and we eliminate all taxes. Ho quickly will this pay off the debt?

Because, you know, I'm curious to see whether you can spot the problem.

11 votes

#6.10 - Mon Jan 9, 2012 9:51 AM EST

Who said eliminate taxes? I said responsible spending. If other Countries are lining up to invest in America by purchasing our debt, what does that tell you? Let me see that proposed contract with-out some pretty serious strings.

5 votes

#6.11 - Mon Jan 9, 2012 9:52 AM EST

Who said eliminate taxes? Is this or is this not a core value of the Republican party? You say, without defining, "responsible spending", and bring up "budgeting, spending, and the prospect of repayment for the debt".

Since "budgeting, spending, and the prospect of repayment for the debt" intimately involves taxation, I'd like to know whether or not you sign on to the conservative belief that all taxes are bad.

If you don't, then what we're talking about is a difference in opinion about what constitutes "responsible" spending and budgeting. If you do, then we have to have an entirely different discussion which revolves around the basics of what a government is and how it works.

I can have either conversation. I just need to know where we're starting.

Contract? Foreign nations are investing in American treasury bills, which are repaid on a fixed schedule, and which offer a small return on the initial investment. What makes it interesting is that other countries see it as a good investment precisely because they see it as a safe investment-- contrary to suggestions that "we are broke".

8 votes

#6.12 - Mon Jan 9, 2012 9:56 AM EST

Say please. Let's try to be cordial.

About what? You can't even be coherent. All I know for sure is that you are spewing word-salad nonsense and changing the subject, because you can't answer my one simple question.

Are you ever going to produce an example of the GOP working with Obama?

Or am I just wasting my time? I'm guessing the latter. You haven't been at all sincere about the terms of this debate, dishonestly changing the subject and spewing irrelevant nonsense.

Instead of being cordial, why don't you just accept that you've got nothing to offer, as I have already deduced? You're just spewing because you are desperate.

5 votes

#6.13 - Mon Jan 9, 2012 9:59 AM EST

There will always be a need for taxes, no doubt. But there is not always a need for the is level of spending. Here, let me get the report. It's 49 pages long. I'll try and link it. Give me a couple of minutes.

It is not a different discussion, it one of the main reasons the GOP says no and won't concede to what Obama wants. It is relevant to this discussion.

5 votes

#6.14 - Mon Jan 9, 2012 10:05 AM EST

I have to link it from a different location. BRB

5 votes

#6.15 - Mon Jan 9, 2012 10:13 AM EST

Are you ever going to produce an example of the GOP working with Obama?

I have an idea……why don’t you produce what you have and we can all join in on the fun……..because based on your attitude here…..it would not matter what was produced……..you are not going to accept it……..so you are correct……..why do you even bother..??

You haven't been at all sincere about the terms of this debate, dishonestly changing the subject and spewing irrelevant nonsense…

Uhhh…….you might want to breeze back over all your posts here…..but make sure you have a good view of your mirror when you do……!!!

6 votes

#6.16 - Mon Jan 9, 2012 10:14 AM EST

4RealLyn

Christie says the the President is a divider? Please, the President has reached out to Republicans numerous times to work with them. To the point that many in his Party has become angry with him. He has been willing to compromise. There has been plenty of legislation passed that has republican ideas in it. He even reached out and met with Businesses, Financial Institutions, Insurance Companies, Pharmaceutical Companies,and Rich to try and workout something that All Americans can benefit and fix this problem. Only to be accused of all sorts of things mostly from Republicans (Spin & Pious Baloney). All Republicans have basically done is say Hell No!, Lied, and Played Games to make this President a one term President. They knew the policies the President put forth would work why do you think they are opposed? If these policies would not have worked then their mission would have been accomplished and they wouldn't be spinning or working so hard to defeat the President. The President would have eliminated Himself and the Republicans would be looking like Winners. Which not the case. They have out smarted themselves. Cut off their nose to spite their face. It doesn't matter who they run they won't win. Obama 2012!” 4 4 44 4Real.

5 votes

#6.17 - Mon Jan 9, 2012 11:04 AM EST

Oklahoma Sen. Tom Coburn on Tuesday released his annual “Wastebook” highlighting what he’s labeled some of the government’s most wasteful spending items, including $113,000 for a video game preservation center and $765,000 to subsidize “pancakes for yuppies” in Washington.

Coburn, a Republican who is known around Washington as “Dr. No” for his opposition to excess spending, said in a press release Tuesday that his “Wastebook 2011″ details the “most egregious ways your taxpayer dollars were wasted” — items he claims total more than $6.5 billion in “unnecessary” spending.

Coburn’s statement includes

“Video games, robot dragons, Christmas trees, and magic museums. This is not a Christmas wish list, these are just some of the ways the federal government spent your tax dollars. Over the past 12 months, politicians argued, debated and lamented about how to reign in the federal government’s out of control spending. All the while, Washington was on a shopping binge, spending money we do not have on things we do not absolutely need. Instead of cutting wasteful spending, nearly $2.5 billion was added each day in 2011 to our national debt, which now exceeds $15 trillion,” Dr. Coburn said.

A few choice bits of waste Coburn highlights

$75,000 to promote awareness about the role Michigan plays in producing Christmas trees & poinsettias.
$15.3 million for one of the infamous Bridges to Nowhere in Alaska.
$113,227 for video game preservation center in New York.
$550,000 for a documentary about how rock music contributed to the collapse of the Soviet Union.
$48,700 for 2nd annual Hawaii Chocolate Festival, to promote Hawaii’s chocolate industry.
$350,000 to support an International Art Exhibition in Venice, Italy.
$10 million for a remake of “Sesame Street” for Pakistan.
$35 million allocated for political party conventions in 2012.
$765,828 to subsidize “pancakes for yuppies” in the nation’s capital.
$764,825 to study how college students use mobile devices for social networking.

That’s what he highlighted. Digging into the report itself, we also find

$120 million in benefits for dead federal employees
$492,005 to study whether or not to trust Tweets
$742,907 grant to Montana State University to research the use of targeted sheep grazing to control weeds
$50,000 for cowboy poetry
$5.2 million for the Steamboat Overlook Interpretive Center
$592,527 to study feces throwing in ~~Occupiers~~ chimps
$74,470 – The Treehouse Museum Spends Taxpayer Dollars to Teach the Art of Puppetry
$6,279 for snow cone makers for emergency situations

Compliments of : http://www.stoptheaclu.com/2011/12/21/tom-coburn-release-wastebook-2011-highlights-government-waste/

Gotta stop there, I could keep going on and on with the list. And some might say “sheesh, come on, it was only $6k for the snow cone makers.” OK, let’s see you spend your own money on them. Not such a pleasant purchase now, is it? Your significant other, children, parents, friends, would excoriate you and call you a fool, right? Why should the federal government wasting your taxpayer money be treated any differently?

I found the whole report.........BRB. I'll post that next.

5 votes

#6.18 - Mon Jan 9, 2012 1:17 PM EST

http://www.coburn.senate.gov/public/index.cfm/pressreleases?ContentRecord_id=8a114193-dcf7-4ae8-ae8b-146797e5c162&ContentType_id=d741b7a7-7863-4223-9904-8cb9378aa03a&Group_id=7a55cb96-4639-4dac-8c0c-99a4a227bd3a

Here's is a link. Sorry for the delay.

4 votes

#6.19 - Mon Jan 9, 2012 1:24 PM EST

99, did not see the cost for advising Philanderers in your list.

#6.20 - Mon Jan 9, 2012 1:30 PM EST

That was during the Clinton Administration. ;) Under the cigar budget section.

4 votes

#6.21 - Mon Jan 9, 2012 1:33 PM EST

99, Fraidy cat.

2 votes

#6.22 - Mon Jan 9, 2012 1:47 PM EST

Gotta stop there, I could keep going on and on with the list. Without even bothering to debunk anything on the list, let's just posit for the sake of argument that nothing in it has any positive benefit to the economy (I'm pretty sure that's NOT true, but let's assume it is for the sake of argument). Let's assume all $6.9 billion that Coburn identified is truly "waste".

And?

Let's cut it all. We grant Coburn's wish, and eliminate every single item on his list. Congratulations. He has now shifted the budget downward by 0.19% and the deficit downward by 0.5%-- or by roughly the amount that the Walton family of Walmart fame saved over three years via Bush slashing of the estate tax. It represents roughly one-quarter of what the million-dollar-and-up tax brackets saved via the Bush income tax cuts, annually. It's a figure that is roughly three-quarters of what the top five tax-avoiders got in refund checks from the IRS on profits of $60 billion, in 2010.

I'm not opposed to cutting government waste. I suspect that Obama is not opposed to cutting government waste. I can guarantee that virtually every Republican member of Congress IS against cutting waste if the "waste" that gets cut is some pork barrel project that would benefit his or her constituents.

So let's quit pretending that "wasteful spending" is the reason why the GOP says "no" to Obama. It has @!$%#-all to do with wasteful spending, which they absolutely love, and a helluva lot to do with political grandstanding to play to the base back home.

6 votes

#6.23 - Mon Jan 9, 2012 2:05 PM EST

I still love the fact that you are smarty pants Yellow Dog!

5 votes

#6.24 - Mon Jan 9, 2012 2:10 PM EST

Thanks for the laugh, it is always fun to see what the right wing fringe is screaming.

32 votes

#7 - Sun Jan 8, 2012 2:25 PM EST

But it is much more telling to watch the Left get unhinged at the slightest hint of a GOP victory in November.

9 votes

#7.1 - Sun Jan 8, 2012 4:43 PM EST

Unhinged? I don't think so-especially with the crop of loonies that are running.

All Obama has to do is put the Republican candidates OWN words on every TV station and bill board in the country.

Then watch and wait till they implode.

17 votes

#7.2 - Sun Jan 8, 2012 4:51 PM EST

Well, it would be interesting to see Obama debate any of the current contenders. Think he is as smart as you think he is? Well, then, let him debate them one at a time. Otherwise all you have is conjecture and opinion.

5 votes

#7.3 - Sun Jan 8, 2012 5:44 PM EST

Unless their all going to run against him for President,there's no point in debating them individually,is there?

13 votes

#7.4 - Sun Jan 8, 2012 5:49 PM EST

Actually, they are all hoping to run against him. As to putting their words against them, perhaps you forget the little 'transparency' word or the 'there will be no lobbyists in my administration' promise which was immediately broken. Then, let us look at the very first of many broken promises, the promise made that "I will use public option campaign money" which was broken long before he got elected.

I would bring up how Senator Obama stated that it was immoral and unconscionable for a president to increase the national debt as then President Bush was attempting to do. Senator Obama chastised President Bush for doing what President Obama is now doing with remarkable efficiency and zeal. I wonder what happened to Senator Obama? Oh, yes, those darned republicans, they made him into what we have today.

9 votes

#7.5 - Sun Jan 8, 2012 7:14 PM EST

I do not believe me laughing at the article is coming unhinged... no matter how silly I sound laughing out loud in my kitchen.

I look forward to our President going one on one with any of the right wing clowns running for President.

18 votes

#7.6 - Sun Jan 8, 2012 7:30 PM EST

'our president.' That, in and of itself, speaks volumes. Actually, he is not 'our' president. He is obviously 'your president' but this was, until recently, a constitutional republic. Was Bush also 'our president?'

8 votes

#7.7 - Sun Jan 8, 2012 8:00 PM EST

Yes President Bush was our President.... Did I say somewhere that he was not?

Both are elected Presidents... that makes them both our President.

11 votes

#7.8 - Sun Jan 8, 2012 8:46 PM EST

"I look forward to our President going one on one with any of the right-wing clowns running for President."

So. Are the folks you deem 'right wing clowns' not Americans? You state that Obama is our president, and then call someone who may actually become our president a clown. now, there is an implied insult there, and, also implied, that you prefer Obama.

7 votes

#7.9 - Sun Jan 8, 2012 9:25 PM EST

mygirl11:The operative words in your statement above being"MAY actually become President".Of course that hasn't stopped those on the right calling THE PRESIDENT IN OFFICE NOW all kinds of names,does it?

9 votes

#7.10 - Sun Jan 8, 2012 10:19 PM EST

mygirl1 again your putting words in my mouth, no where have I said the clowns running on the right were not Americans.

Of course I prefer President Obama, you do not, that does not make either President Obama or President Bush less than the President of the United States. If by some odd chance a Republican gets elected President, he or she will be our President as well.

I do not expect President Obama to be defeated. I have started working for and donating to his reelection effort. That is the way it works in America.

9 votes

#7.11 - Sun Jan 8, 2012 10:38 PM EST

Kinda like the names that Bush was called?

6 votes

#7.12 - Sun Jan 8, 2012 10:45 PM EST

BUSH! Why is it you righties always bring up Bush.(sound familiar?)

10 votes

#7.13 - Sun Jan 8, 2012 11:07 PM EST

oooouch! nice chitownty!

9 votes

#7.14 - Sun Jan 8, 2012 11:15 PM EST

Weak, actually. The 'blame Bush' mantra is so endemic and so over-used amongst Obama defenders that it is taken as a matter of course and expected, to come up whenever anyone calls Obama's actions to task.

7 votes

#7.15 - Sun Jan 8, 2012 11:58 PM EST

so obama crashed the economy?

oh wait no he didn't its his fault because he didn't do anything to fix it even though he was given no resistance by republicans, oh wait. they filibustered everything.

so your point again is what mygirl1?

10 votes

#7.16 - Mon Jan 9, 2012 12:12 AM EST

mygirl1 in this thread your the one to bring up President Bush. I am more than willing to leave that mess for another day.

6 votes

#7.17 - Mon Jan 9, 2012 12:14 AM EST

mygirl1 in this thread your the one to bring up President Bush. I am more than willing to leave that mess for another day.

LOL, my girl, all the usual lib cards getting played here...it kind of fun seeing them spin since you mentioned Bush first (taking that card right out of their hand). BRAVO!

7 votes

#7.18 - Mon Jan 9, 2012 2:22 AM EST

vol fan always good to see you drop in with a bit of right wing yapping.... :)

6 votes

#7.19 - Mon Jan 9, 2012 4:38 AM EST

guessed you missed the IRONY, Steven...dang shame.

6 votes

#7.20 - Mon Jan 9, 2012 5:29 PM EST

2011 to 2012

unemployment down

gdp up

manufacturing up

osama bin laden dead

one less war

manufacturing base growing for first time in decades

domestic oil production up

You would think a Republican was president, but somehow a Democratic President and Senate.

Strange.......cognitive dissonance.......

I'll bet they are waiting until unemployment is 5% before they turn over the means of production to the State, take away all firearms, and require mandatory abortions for all expectant mothers who have not acquired their new federal maternity permits.

Dissonance resolved.

3 votes

#7.21 - Tue Jan 10, 2012 3:35 PM EST

But wait......None of those things are possible with republicans blocking all legislation that might allow those things to occur.....

6 votes

#7.22 - Tue Jan 10, 2012 3:54 PM EST

But wait......None of those things are possible with republicans blocking all legislation that might allow those things to occur.....

And where did I argue that?.... Oh, I see, I am not only responsible for my statements, but for those of everyone in the category you stereotype me into.

The old straw man fallacy, gotta love it, and three people supported it. Nice.

People interested in politics should really study the logical basis of argument, and common logical fallacies. Logic is really the basis that allows a democratic system of government work.

It works like this: If someone argues that Obama is causing our current decline, if no decline is actually occurring, the argument is flawed beyond all sense.

A more sensible argument is that Obama is stifling our current recovery, and that all of these things would have happened sooner without him. When placed against the light of economics and history, it is hard to support this argument without opening ones self to counterargument, but at least it does not refute itself.

You realize that stupidly constructed arguments make thoughtful people more likely to disagree with a position. I guess it is effective anyway if one is betting that the majority of people are simpletons.

3 votes

#7.23 - Tue Jan 10, 2012 5:26 PM EST

Whooooa there killer. No one did any such thing. I was mocking a typical liberal assertion. The rest of your comment is entirely self made. I do not know you, nor think that much of you to get that deeply involved. Take a breath bro.

Tell ya what I think of logic though. Credible though it may be. As far as I am concerned this applies to most folks who use it......

Logic- How to be wrong with confidence.

Ever heard the ole saying about assume?

3 votes

#7.24 - Tue Jan 10, 2012 6:06 PM EST

A more sensible argument is that Obama is stifling our current recovery, and that all of these things would have happened sooner without him.

how can you stifle when all your legislation is blocked?

4 votes

#7.25 - Tue Jan 10, 2012 7:07 PM EST

Tesla:

Actually you mocked a "typical liberal assertion" as a reply to my post. That is why the button you clicked says "reply."

"The rest of your comment is entirely self made" Most of my comments tend to be self-made. Otherwise they would not be my comments.

"Tell ya what I think of logic though. Credible though it may be. As far as I am concerned this applies to most folks who use it...... Logic- How to be wrong with confidence."

-- I am pleased you have deemed logic credible. I like your statement, I have not heard that particular statement before. Of course, it is simply a quick way to discount another's logic without providing any of your own.

"Ever heard the ole saying about assume?"

--I have heard that saying. I am not sure it applies to this case (see my statement that explains why the button is labeled "reply"), but if it does, at least I am taking you down with me :)

In all seriousness, the tone of my post was a little baiting, so I can understand your reply.

Signed,

Killer, AKA bro

2 votes

#7.26 - Fri Jan 13, 2012 11:46 AM EST

Gee, folks ... I read the article twice and didn't see any mention of Obama's race. Did I miss it? Why are some of you still so hellbent on whining with that old song and dance as your excuse for why Americans - even more and more Democrats these days - are fed up with Obama's policies and lack of leadership? Obama's a class act in not knowing how to work well with anyone who opposes his views. He's even got Democrat congresspeople jumping his ship.

Oh, right .... you're still wearing those "hope and change" blinders. Silly me!

16 votes

#8 - Sun Jan 8, 2012 2:26 PM EST

http://www.washingtonmonthly.com/political-animal/2012_01/scrutinizing_the_recessappoint034571.php

Gee, I read the article and it seems that it completely ignores politicial history...

Its aims, as Alexander Hamilton wrote in Federalist No. 67, included facilitating appointments “necessary for the public service to fill without delay.” Although the main concern in 1789 involved difficulties of travel that kept a recessed Senate from acting swiftly, the broad imperative retains modern relevance, even when the Senate engineers its own unavailability.

Past practice also points the way. Presidents have long claimed, attorneys general have long affirmed and the Senate has long acquiesced to the president’s authority to make recess appointments during extended breaks within a Senate session. In 1905, the Senate Judiciary Committee concluded that “recess” referred to periods when, “because of its absence,” the Senate could not “participate as a body in making appointments” — a definition that precludes treating pro forma sessions as true breaks in an extended recess.

Since 1867, 12 presidents have made more than 285 such appointments, without constitutional objection by the Senate. And attorneys general going back to Harry M. Daugherty in 1921 have held that the Constitution authorizes such appointments.

[4] There’s actually ample precedent for presidents making all kinds of recess appointments that would probably bring tears to McConnell’s eyes. In one instance, Teddy Roosevelt once made recess appointments “during an intersession recess of less than one day.”

http://www.washingtonmonthly.com/political-animal/2012_01/mcconnells_concern_for_precede034519.php

This is yet another example of why David Frum was right when he stated that the GOP is divorced from reality.

I guess the far right are still in their "Obama Derangement Syndrome" mode...

24 votes

#8.1 - Sun Jan 8, 2012 2:49 PM EST

Obama's a class act in not knowing how to work well with anyone who opposes his views.

You are right, NJPERSON

As a community organizer, having civil discussions are not the usual way to solve issues for President Obama. He is used to creating civil unrest to get what he wants. In Chicago he trained many activists to use that method of "discussion".

14 votes

#8.2 - Sun Jan 8, 2012 2:51 PM EST

baloney

14 votes

#8.3 - Sun Jan 8, 2012 3:32 PM EST

http://www.forbes.com/sites/charleskadlec/2011/10/03/president-obama-community-organizer-in-chief/

wavesofgrain (8.2) -- There's plenty of Internet documentation about Obama's days as a community organizer. He applied for, and obtained boatloads of government money to improve parks, residences, provide safe places for kids to hang out in, etc. Quite admirable, indeed, but that money was never spent on the applied-for improvements. His "community" was, and perhaps still is, a wasteland.

One needs to wonder why that money never made it to the original goal. The answer is (and is documented non-partisan articles on the Internet) that Obama and his "community friends" lined their pockets with that money and/or used it for other purposes.

Further literal community organizer taken to a broader, national level. Please note that there is again, as in Patriot 8888's article, no reference to Obama's race.

Truth and facts are always difficult for Obama followers to swallow. New Jersey's "documented" unemployment rate is 9.1%. Hope and change is working well!

9 votes

#8.4 - Sun Jan 8, 2012 3:52 PM EST

more unfounded republican propaganda.

17 votes

#8.5 - Sun Jan 8, 2012 4:03 PM EST

One needs to wonder why that money never made it to the original goal

Kind of like the stimulus money, half a billion, being used for Gore's luxury electric cars build in Finland (gone bankrupt), Solyndra, half a billion, bankrupt, GE half billion off shore windmills (bankrupt) Fast and Furious, etc etc. No benefits or jobs created here!!

10 votes

#8.6 - Sun Jan 8, 2012 4:04 PM EST

Truth and facts are always difficult for Obama followers to swallow. New Jersey's "documented" unemployment rate is 9.1%.

Actually, you are describing yourself, NJ Person especially in the fact that NJ's current governor is a Republican and going by your logic, then he must be to blame for that unemployment number...

Hope and change is working well!

You just further proved David Frum's point...

21 votes

#8.7 - Sun Jan 8, 2012 4:04 PM EST

Super-they make it so easy.

NJ person-complain about the NJ unemployment rate to your Republican governor.

But is it true he gave another tax break to the millionaires as soon as he got in office?

Seems Christie should worry more about unemployment then making the rich richer, don't ya think?

14 votes

#8.8 - Sun Jan 8, 2012 4:16 PM EST

wavesofgrain and NJ Person, ya gotta love when libbies try to defend failure. Deflection, deflection, deflection....".look over there at that guy....he's way worse". Ha ha ha ha ha....yeah...ummm zero value. I thought we were talking about the POTUS here.

9 votes

#8.9 - Sun Jan 8, 2012 4:16 PM EST

http://kleinonline.wnd.com/2011/12/06/new-nbc-newsroom-acorn-moveon-funders-network-teams-up-with-%E2%80%98journalism%E2%80%99-outfit-founded-by-billionaire-obama-campaigners/

more unfounded republican propaganda.

You will not find any wrongdoing by Obama & dems from mainstream media anymore! Talk about propaganda....there will be nothing but leftist propaganda flooding the airwaves now!

You most likely will no longer find ANYTHING negative about Obama/Democrats in any mainstream media. I posted a couple links about this.

1. He has set up a 'RAPID RESPONSE TEAM" to deal with anything in the media Obama does not like.

2. A major supporter billionaire couple, The Sandlers, have formed a non profit group, ProPublica, to obtain all their news sources. This couple also funds MoveOn.org, Acorn, Center for American Progress (Soros), etc.

3. They also have banned media that reported negatively about Obama from White House.

So..this is the back-door, underhanded way Obama gets what he wants. Dictator in Chief. Resembles STATE-RUN media from Communist countries!

Can you imagine all the filth and dirt the mainstream will dish on opposing views? There will be no more wrongdoing revealed about this president. Soros' journalists will destroy our country. We might as well be living in China. There are internet restriction bills coming up soon. I'm sure that will be kept under wraps until they've passed the SOPA and PIPA bills.

NBC newsroom gets fresh leftist invasion. Network teams up with ‘journalism’ outfit founded by Barack Obama Campaigners

(btw, an article announcing this also was on MSN....abc, cbs, comcast, cnn, etc, etc are ALL using PROPUBLICA now for their news sources)

White House sets up “Rapid Response Team” to deal with news stories it doesn’t
http://www.greeleygazette.com/press/?p=10001

10 votes

#8.10 - Sun Jan 8, 2012 4:21 PM EST

But is it true he gave another tax break to the millionaires as soon as he got in office?

Would you like to see the list of special Obamacare wavers Barry gave his pet donors? Hmmmmm?

Or would you preffer the list of billionaire donors and 'trans-global' corporations, Goldman Sach's and General Electric, come to mind, that Barry has gleefully sucked the cash out of before granting them sweetheart deals?. etc, etc, etc....you see how all this works?

8 votes

#8.11 - Sun Jan 8, 2012 4:23 PM EST

SuperSaiyan (31.7) --- As usual, you assume far too much. I was not referring to Chris Christie in any way, because he is not responsible for Obama's bogus jobs bill. NJ's "recorded" unemployment stats are much higher than the "recorded" national average. I'm sure that you are aware that there are "recorded" stats that are far lower than actual stats both nationally and by state.

However, what I did forget to type in 31.4 after "Hope and change is working well!" was /sarc after that sentence. Consider the sentence now corrected for accuracy:

"Hope and change is working well!" /sarc

8 votes

#8.12 - Sun Jan 8, 2012 4:26 PM EST

NJ Person - I got your point the first time. You did a great job of explaining your point. It seems that many people who are overly sensitive to criticism of Mr. Obama are quick to jump to conclusions prior to actually reading the facts, if they bother to read them at all.

Back in 2008, I could understand this blind allegiance and loyalty to something they 'hoped' was coming, but given the abysmal failure and blatant corruption, (references available upon request), of the once and never again 'Messiah', one would think that they would be a bit more skeptical about their lock step defense of all things obama.

10 votes

#8.13 - Sun Jan 8, 2012 4:44 PM EST

You guys are funny!!!!

Dictator? Messiah? Do yourselves a favor and buy a dictionary.

11 votes

#8.14 - Sun Jan 8, 2012 4:54 PM EST

And what makes you think that we are 'guys'?

If I were a liberal PC'er, I would say you just made a no no.

10 votes

#8.15 - Sun Jan 8, 2012 5:00 PM EST

Now, now. You must remember that Obama supporters, when confronted with facts which are less than savory concerning their Dear Leader, will stick their fingers in their ears, chanting 'lalalala I can't hear you' or else they will blame Bush or pull the race card. Then, you must also understand that they willfully refuse to listen to any side but their own and will go out of their way to stifle intelligent discourse, most of the posts on this article prove this point.

11 votes

#8.16 - Sun Jan 8, 2012 5:38 PM EST

You girls are funny!!!

Dictator? Messiah? Do yourselves a favor and buy a dictionary.

Better?

15 votes

#8.17 - Sun Jan 8, 2012 5:42 PM EST

To Ted 050247 (8.14) who said, "You guys are funny!!!! Dictator? Messiah? Do yourselves a favor and buy a dictionary."

Who are "you guys," and why do you assume someone is a male? But, I digress. FreedomRanger doesn't need a dictionary, because s/he spelled both "dictator" and "Messiah" correctly. In addition, his/her definition intimations are also correct.

By the way, I believe the topic of this article is Barack Obama, not fellow Newsviners. Do you have anything valid to contribute that is on-topic? I'd love to read it. If you don't, I will have no problem flagging your comment as "No value."

9 votes

#8.18 - Sun Jan 8, 2012 5:44 PM EST

Patriot 8888Restored

Ted

Tone down the rhetoric or you will be sent to violation island.

8 votes

#8.19 - Sun Jan 8, 2012 6:13 PM EST

8.18----Read 8.17

Dictionary's are used for definitions. Read the definition of dictator and messiah.

BTW it appears the right thinks Obama is a messiah. You never head that from a Dem.

13 votes

#8.20 - Sun Jan 8, 2012 6:31 PM EST

Obama supporters don't think he is the Messiah, rather, they know he is the Messiah. Democrats and republicans, on the other hand, are all members of the same party, the party of politicians. They don't worship at any fount other than the fount of the self-serving.

8 votes

#8.21 - Sun Jan 8, 2012 7:21 PM EST

Please provide proof that Obama supporters know he is the messiah.

Just because you say so, does not make it true.

Proof please. Thanks

11 votes

#8.22 - Sun Jan 8, 2012 7:36 PM EST

Please provide proof that Obama supporters know he is the messiah.

Just because you say so, does not make it true.

Proof please. Thanks

Uhhh…….I think this is a figure of speech……you might want to back off a little on that Obama juice you are drinking……!!

7 votes

#8.23 - Sun Jan 8, 2012 7:49 PM EST

As a Obama supporter,I know that he is the messiah,does that count?/s/

9 votes

#8.24 - Sun Jan 8, 2012 7:50 PM EST

Chitownty: I rest my case:)

Also, there is this thing know as irony. Calling a stupid play 'clever' is an example of irony. Also, if a firestation were to catch fire and burn to the ground, it would be ironic. Sometimes, those of too literal a mind set don't quite grasp either irony or sarcasm.

8 votes

#8.25 - Sun Jan 8, 2012 8:17 PM EST

What!?

8 votes

#8.26 - Sun Jan 8, 2012 8:20 PM EST

Ted 050247 (8.20) ..... Do you have a mature, on-topic comment to contribute here? If so, please do so. The topic is Mr. Obama, not the sex of Newsviners.

I do love this video showing an Obama supporter's "rapture" moment: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=P36x8rTb3jI -- I have more, but this one is great.

Thanks, and have a lovely evening.

7 votes

#8.27 - Sun Jan 8, 2012 8:51 PM EST

Chitownty: Nevermind.

4 votes

#8.28 - Sun Jan 8, 2012 9:19 PM EST

American Latina

WTF?

What a sorry bunch of sore losers, they have been crying for 4 years now, get over it, our ELECTED President is Obama and will remain so for the next 4 years....

Obama 2012

9 votes

#8.29 - Sun Jan 8, 2012 10:23 PM EST

Guess you like NDAA? Do you even know what NDAA is? Didn't think so.

6 votes

#8.30 - Mon Jan 9, 2012 12:00 AM EST

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xTz9iwJqt7Q

NJ Person, that is one of my favs...you will like this one too:

7 votes

#8.31 - Mon Jan 9, 2012 2:29 AM EST

GOP 2012 slogan: "Be against everything that President Obama is for and has done, even if we were previously for it or have done it ourselves"...

29 votes

#9 - Sun Jan 8, 2012 2:27 PM EST

even if we were previously for it or have done it ourselves"...

Excluding all the amendments and junk attached, as always happens in legislation. Those issues the the Republicans once were for, but are not now....were likely bloated with nonsense. That's how it works.

9 votes

#9.1 - Sun Jan 8, 2012 2:43 PM EST

The repubs are so hypocritical they know they won't win this election that's why they have no serious candidates running.

18 votes

#9.2 - Sun Jan 8, 2012 3:13 PM EST

The repubs are so hypocritical they know they won't win this election that's why they have no serious candidates running.

That made NO sense on so many levels.

10 votes

#9.3 - Sun Jan 8, 2012 5:02 PM EST

Arlene Tognetti

Super

Here is the bumper stickers/car magnets we are having made in Seattle

R.I.P GOP 2012

It's over before they even started

Obama/Biden 2012

4 votes

#9.4 - Tue Jan 10, 2012 2:01 AM EST

pg-974581

or the blaa as explained by santorum...

12 votes

#10 - Sun Jan 8, 2012 2:33 PM EST

caballojoe

"Technically, however, the Senate was in session."

Technically, yes, but actually, no. The lights were on, but nobody was home.

Recess appointments are necessary when the Senate is unavailable. Parsing words or playing semantic games doesn't change that. The Senate wasn't in session because they were not there to take motions, pass resolutions, conduct hearings, advise and consent, or take votes. The Senate was not available to conduct a confirmation hearing. Therefore they were not in session.

A concrete apple is, technically, an apple, but that doesn't mean you can eat it. So you see, technically, technically is irrelavent.

17 votes

#11 - Sun Jan 8, 2012 2:34 PM EST

Sorry, republicans and teabaggers. None of your "leaders" have a chance at the presidency.

President Obama has another term to serve.

Try again in 2016.

Or maybe 2020.

22 votes

#12 - Sun Jan 8, 2012 2:36 PM EST

How many times have I read this post...? What, do you have a rubber stamp...??

8 votes

#12.1 - Sun Jan 8, 2012 5:55 PM EST

573 times? And I vote it up every time.:>)

13 votes

#12.2 - Sun Jan 8, 2012 6:10 PM EST

With all the rhetoric liberals splash around here, I wonder how many of you folks will even have the gonads to come back and take your lumps after Obama looses……and he will…!!!!

7 votes

#12.3 - Sun Jan 8, 2012 6:56 PM EST

Amen PCMan.

8 votes

#12.4 - Sun Jan 8, 2012 7:08 PM EST

Yes - the Vine might be a ghost town on 11/7/12!

7 votes

#12.5 - Sun Jan 8, 2012 7:42 PM EST

Nah, bashing is big business. Liberal vs conservative, rich vs poor and so on...what would happen should Obama lose is that MSNBC will either have to shut down or become the internet's version of talk radio. Oh wait....

5 votes

#12.6 - Sun Jan 8, 2012 8:20 PM EST

cannonballer

Nah, if Obama loses all the LWNJ's will be here calling the voters racist.

4 votes

#12.7 - Sun Jan 8, 2012 8:20 PM EST

hugh b

This can't be a serious seed. It just can't be. It is beyond the pale of reason and facts.

Keep the chasm between the right and left wide and deep, lord knows there is enough bull@!$%# like this to fill it and overflow it.

The GOP=NOP, no on progress, no on people, no on participating in the democratic process.

Champion of Collapsed Comments, what a thing to be a champion of, written words nobody wants to read. Brilliant. Just like the conservative agenda something more and more people are learning we can't live with anymore.

23 votes

#13 - Sun Jan 8, 2012 2:37 PM EST

It is beyond the pale of reason and facts.

You are referring to Obama's actions, correct?

King Barry has decided that he can no longer work with people.

Champion of Collapsed Comments, what a thing to be a champion of

Yes, it's illustrative of the Left's intolerance of any other ideas/perspectives but their own.

9 votes

#13.1 - Sun Jan 8, 2012 3:13 PM EST

What part of Hugh's post didn't you understand?

You are referring to Obama's actions, correct?

Deflect, deflect, deflect.

19 votes

#13.2 - Sun Jan 8, 2012 3:37 PM EST

hugh b

Ted, like most conservatives he doesn't understand being reasonable.

13 votes

#13.3 - Sun Jan 8, 2012 4:45 PM EST

What part of my response did you not understand?

8 votes

#13.4 - Sun Jan 8, 2012 4:50 PM EST

Remember when Mitch McConnell said that the Republican's first priority is to make Obama a one term president? It wasn't creating jobs or improving the economy by any means.
http://thinkprogress.org/politics/2010/10/25/126242/mcconnell-obama-one-term/?mobile=nc

12 votes

#13.5 - Sun Jan 8, 2012 5:00 PM EST

Absolutely the correct priority - they already saw the damage being done to this country in 2 years.

8 votes

#13.6 - Sun Jan 8, 2012 5:18 PM EST

And they have not worked at all for the American people-just for their "priority".

Don't you think people notice this?

They do--9% approval

10 votes

#13.7 - Sun Jan 8, 2012 5:45 PM EST

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2010/03/01/analysis-republicans-sett_0_n_480801.html

Absolutely the correct priority - they already saw the damage being done to this country in 2 years.

can you explain me how he managed to do harm to this country when any of the policies he supports has been filibustered?

9 votes

#13.8 - Sun Jan 8, 2012 6:44 PM EST

For one - Obamacare.

The negatives continue to be higher. The populace does not like to have things shoved down their throats.

Now just why do you think that the GOP won in such a landslide in 2010 if not a blanket repudiation of BO and his policies?

7 votes

#13.9 - Sun Jan 8, 2012 8:03 PM EST

Now just why do you think that the GOP won in such a landslide in 2010

Becaused they were promised a laser like focus on job creation. The only jobs I have seen created from the GOP are those hired to write the bills to further restrict awoman's choice where abortion is concerned and legislation to restrict voting privileges of American citizens. Good job GOP!

13 votes

#13.10 - Sun Jan 8, 2012 8:38 PM EST

http://www.speaker.gov/Blog/?postid=271218

It would be behoove you to stop parroting Dem talking points.

I always try to read up on a subject before I talk about it

Start here:

25 jobs bills stuck in the Democratic-run Senate

5 votes

#13.11 - Sun Jan 8, 2012 8:56 PM EST

Start here:

25 jobs bills stuck in the Democratic-run Senate

http://www.speaker.gov/Blog/?postid=271218

Never mind that those so-called "jobs bills" doesn't actually address jobs...

I always try to read up on a subject before I talk about it

Doesn't seem like it, if this is an example...

13 votes

#13.12 - Sun Jan 8, 2012 9:01 PM EST

8888, those 'jobs bills' have way too may repub dingleberries hanging on them.

12 votes

#13.13 - Sun Jan 8, 2012 9:07 PM EST

'k - can you explain why we have no jobs bills with Dem dingleberries hanging on them?

7 votes

#13.14 - Sun Jan 8, 2012 9:27 PM EST

Write the @!$%#ing jobs bills straight up. Majority in the house writes most of the bills, I believe. President asked and offered suggestions in December. What happened?

10 votes

#13.15 - Sun Jan 8, 2012 9:48 PM EST

http://www.reuters.com/article/2009/12/03/us-healthcare-usa-poll-idUSTRE5B20OL20091203

For one - Obamacare.

So block all pieces of legislation because one piece of legislation Republicans didn't want? That makes no sense.

Blaming Obama for the state of the economy is like blaming the driver for allowing the car to continue to be stuck in a hole but preventing the driver from doing anything.

I always try to read up on a subject before I talk about it

Not true, majority of Americans want a public option. They want health care reform. Obamacare is that. Republicans had 8 years to create reform and did not. 2006 RomneyCare passed, I see no complaints.

25 jobs bills stuck in the Democratic-run Senate

They do not create jobs.

10 votes

#13.16 - Sun Jan 8, 2012 10:08 PM EST

Correct. But they create Jobs bills to make an environment conducive to create jobs.

5 votes

#13.17 - Sun Jan 8, 2012 10:24 PM EST

http://rt.com/usa/news/dream-percent-america-bottom-267/

Correct. But they create Jobs bills to make an environment conducive to create jobs.

from the article SuperSaiyan posted:

Number one on the list of "pro-growth" policies House Republicans intend to push is reducing "regulatory burdens" on small businesses. The GOP plan highlights a number of regulations that hurt "job creators," including the EPA's efforts to regulate greenhouse gasses; the FCC's net neutrality proposal, which is hated by the nation's biggest telecom monopolies; and "burdensome pesticide regulation."

Next on the list is … lower taxes. House Republicans are promising to lower the tax rate for individuals and businesses to 25 percent, down from the current 35 percent. How that squares with the other GOP proposal to tackle the national debt isn't laid out in the plan. Presumably the big tax reduction will spur so much growth that the revenue will magically appear in the federal treasury, just the way it did, uh, with the Bush tax cuts. (It didn't.)

The GOP's other ideas include patent reform (which Congress actually passed since the last version of the plan was released) and "expediting" the drug approval process at the FDA. And no GOP jobs plan would be complete without a proposal to drill, baby, drill, to increase domestic energy production.

and they put it pretty elegantly:

already been tried, over and over again, to no avail

Here is another question for you, since all this is really bringing back the "American Dream" why is that if you want to get the "American Dream" do you have to go to Canada or Europe?

last time I checked Canada and Europe have way different policies than what the Republicans propose. So why is that?

4 votes

#13.18 - Sun Jan 8, 2012 11:23 PM EST

Randy McMurphy

Like they did under bush? Bushs' job creation was pathetic, a mere 13% of Clintons record, and offset by the 85% job loss the from 2001 till 2009

7 votes

#13.19 - Mon Jan 9, 2012 12:00 AM EST

CPOSharkey

Champion of Collasped Comments - you wear it like a crown but in reality you are a clown. You really think people collaspe your comments because they are so insightful and on target? Please give me a break, you get collasped because you post the most obnoxious immature @!$%# that has absolutely no value. Your comments get collasped because they have no value, just like your post about Michelle Obama, removed from the vine by the community because it is of no value, just like you!

7 votes

#13.20 - Mon Jan 9, 2012 9:16 AM EST

But they create Jobs bills to make an environment conducive to create jobs.

The republicans have never met an environment they didn't want to destroy.

9 votes

#13.21 - Mon Jan 9, 2012 9:34 AM EST

can you explain me how he managed to do harm to this country when any of the policies he supports has been filibustered?

This president just bypasses Congress to get what he wants. He just gives powers to unelected appointees in the SEC, FCC, throws out exec orders like a dictator. He is ignoring the will of the people. This is downright Tyranny!

4 votes

#13.22 - Mon Jan 9, 2012 10:04 AM EST

Wow. Imagine that. I had no idea that the Executive performing executive functions in directing the functioning of the government was "downright Tyrrany". I am so glad that you informed me, because otherwise I might have gone through life imagining that tyrrany was something like being told that the government can control what I say, how I worship, what I read, whether or not my papers and belongings are secure, et cetera.

Now I know the truth, however-- tyrrany is management.

Thank you, again, citizen!

8 votes

#13.23 - Mon Jan 9, 2012 11:03 AM EST

This president just bypasses Congress to get what he wants. He just gives powers to unelected appointees in the SEC, FCC, throws out exec orders like a dictator. He is ignoring the will of the people. This is downright Tyranny!

Besides being completely twisted what you just wrote it doesn't even bother to answer my question.

Sadly I don't think the seeder is going to be able to respond. Unfortunately what will end up happening they will just scuttle away to only post something similar later on. I have no problems with people holding different views, just be able to defend them. If you cannot rethink your ideas.

5 votes

#13.24 - Mon Jan 9, 2012 11:59 PM EST

michelle-1073610

No, no, no. We don't believe in compromise. Never compromise. Sign pledges to not fund our government by taxing 4% more on income ABOVE $1,000,000. We bow to Grover and the Koch's. No to healtcare, it's not a right. No to anything to help worker's. NO NO NO.......................a well deserved 9% approval rating. None of this was done by Pres. Obama, just by the party of NO.

22 votes

#14 - Sun Jan 8, 2012 2:40 PM EST

http://news.yahoo.com/obama-announces-resignation-chief-staff-201134730.html;_ylt=AuovU0yLsxify2_CAYZ8jCqw73QA;_ylu=X3oDMTQzZGc4cmgwBG1pdANBcnRpY2xlIFRvcFN0b3JpZXMEcGtnAzM3NjY0ZGZkLWFlM2YtMzc3MS1hM2JiLWZiZDQwMTEzMmRlYwRwb3MDMwRzZWMDTWVkaWFTZWN0aW9uTGlzdAR2ZXIDYWE2NTVmNjAtM2FmZS0xMWUxLWFmY2YtMTEzOTA1MzFlMWVl;_ylg=X3oDMTMxOXRnOXBlBGludGwDdXMEbGFuZwNlbi11cwRwc3RhaWQDZGE4ZWJkMjEtNmE0Ny0zMTE5LTg5ODEtNTg1MDk1ODUzYTgxBHBzdGNhdANidXNpbmVzcwRwdANzdG9yeXBhZ2UEdGVzdAM-;_ylv=3

Obama's 2012 Slogan: Can't Work With Others

President Barack Obama is running for re-election with an unusual pitch: He can't work with others.

He only gets along with yes men. "I refuse to take 'no' for an answer," Obama said

It appears he has another Chief of Staff resigning!!! Could it be we (Obama) just can't get along with anybody right now, not just republicans?

Obama announces resignation of chief of staff

5 votes

#14.1 - Mon Jan 9, 2012 3:25 PM EST

Or perhaps Daley was simply the wrong choice for the job:

That meant he had to figure out the president and run his operation simultaneously. He did not seem to mesh as the one, more than anyone, charged with ensuring a smooth operation.

You really should start reading the articles you post.

6 votes

#14.2 - Tue Jan 10, 2012 12:03 AM EST

As President Obama's certain reelection gets closer, I expect more and more republicans/teabaggers to become unhinged and attack the President Obama for the most trivial of matters.

It will be hard to believe that it's possible, but republicans/teabaggers will sink far lower and be far more despicable and vile than they have so far.

21 votes

#15 - Sun Jan 8, 2012 2:40 PM EST

It will be hard to believe that it's possible, but republicans/teabaggers will sink far lower and be far more despicable and vile than they have so far.

The bar for corruption has been reset, and it is getting lower with each passing month of this administration. Does Solyndra and Fast and Furious ring a bell? Granted, it is still in investigation, but I imagine they will not have happy endings for Holder and Obama.

7 votes

#15.1 - Sun Jan 8, 2012 3:07 PM EST

FreedomRanger (15.1) -- Wow, I'd almost forgotten about Solyndra! How on Earth did that fall off the Obama media radar screen? /sarc

Please read the link in 8.4.

9 votes

#15.2 - Sun Jan 8, 2012 4:01 PM EST

Wow, I'd almost forgotten about Solyndra! How on Earth did that fall off the Obama media radar screen? /sarc

You mean the one that started under Bush?

15 votes

#15.3 - Sun Jan 8, 2012 4:08 PM EST

Hey Super-thanks for the facts. I didn't know that. I bet NJ person and freedom didn't know that either.

12 votes

#15.4 - Sun Jan 8, 2012 4:18 PM EST

http://hotair.com/archives/2011/09/17/solyndra-pressured-bush-wh-for-approval-in-january-2009/

that started under Bush?

The sugar coated mainstream Politifact put a sugar-coated spin on this to protect Obama. Here is another version....got some emails in the discussion to prove it.......all the more reason to be suspect of the state-run mainstream funded media.

Solyndra pressured Bush WH for approval in January 2009

""""Solyndra officials were intensely pressuring Bush administration officials in early January 2009 to approve a government loan for the solar company before the Obama administration took power, according to new emails obtained by Fox News on Friday.

On Jan. 12, 2009, Solyndra CEO Chris Gronet sent an Energy Department official an email marked “urgent” expressing outrage that Bush officials had decided a few days earlier that while the loan application had “merit” it needed further study before officials could move forward with a taxpayer-financed loan.

“I was appalled to learn on Friday that our application is being delayed yet again,” Gronet wrote to Energy official Steve Isakowitz, writing there had been “countless communications” back and forth suggesting the application would be reviewed Jan. 15.""""""""

And I do NOT find Politifact credible!

2012 Preview: Who Will Fact-Check the Corrupt MSM’s Cherished PolitiFact?

http://bigjournalism.com/jjmnolte/2011/04/13/2012-preview-who-will-fact-check-the-corrupt-msms-cherished-politifact/

""""This is the same PolitiFACT that defended Obama from a SNL skit. The same PolitiFACT that somehow determined Obama’s failed stimulus “saved” a million jobs. The same PolitiFACT who just got busted by our own Charlie Sykes for using a Soros-funded source in an attempt to discredit him. In fact, PolitiFact’s lies and biases are so bountiful, they’ve kept a whole website in business devoted to chronicling them. They also won a Pulitzer, which should tell you everything you need to know.""""

9 votes

#15.5 - Sun Jan 8, 2012 5:06 PM EST

Super seems to think that there is no other credible source except POLITIFACT.

I have tried countless times to point out the folly of relying on this as a source.

Thank you for your fine contribution.

7 votes

#15.6 - Sun Jan 8, 2012 5:21 PM EST

Super seems to think that there is no other credible source except POLITIFACT.

Ironic this this is coming from the same person who conviently ignors evidence that disproves their assertions...

And unlike wavesofgrain, I'm not relieing on a blog(and a blog that's not known for accuracy, no less) to back up my assertions

I have tried countless times to point out the folly of relying on this as a source.

Oh, so I guess the sources that they cite mean nothing to you?

Why is it that the far right are constantly the ones that complain about fact checking(especially if they disprove their assertions)?

12 votes

#15.7 - Sun Jan 8, 2012 5:29 PM EST

Why is it that the far right are constantly the ones that complain about fact checking(especially if they disprove their assertions)?

Your fact sources are left-leaning, progressive biased sources, that's why.

Soros began using his billions to fund numerous, HUNDREDS of NGO's and a few are fact-checking sites...like Media Matters. Fact Check is run by Annenber PPC, which is an arm from the same "Annenberg arm (Challenge)" that Obama sat on. The Annenberg PPC director writes conservative bashing books and hates Rush. I would say these sites are extremely biased. Soros' billions have funded so many orgs (his NGO's are banned in some countries after he destroyed their economies), that it is brainwashing society, IMHO. He has an agenda...to create a permanent Democratic majority. And now that Obama is using ProPublica as the news source for ALL mainstream media, I'm sure those that do not search other sources for facts will be shielded from any further wrongdoing by this administration. Rest assured America will be bombarded with liberal ONLY propaganda!

7 votes

#15.8 - Sun Jan 8, 2012 6:06 PM EST

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Walter_Annenberg

Fact Check is run by Annenber PPC, which is an arm from the same "Annenberg arm (Challenge)" that Obama sat on.

Oh yes, they're so "left wing" that their founder was appointed to offices by Nixon and Reagan...

United States Ambassador to theUnited Kingdom

In office1969–1974

President

Richard Nixon

It was Annenberg who introduced President Reagan to British Prime Minister Margaret Thatcher, and the Reagans often celebrated New Year's Eve with the Annenbergs. Leonore Annenberg was named by President Ronald Reagan as the State Department's Chief of Protocol as well.

In 1989, he established the Annenberg Foundation, and 1993, created the Annenberg Challenge, a US$500 million, five-year reform effort and the largest single gift ever made to American public education.

and was a lifelong republican...

Though a lifelong Republican

http://www.anb.org/articles/10/10-02280.html

Your fact sources are left-leaning, progressive biased sources, that's why.

Wow, I guess anything that disproves your assertions are "left wing"...

13 votes

#15.9 - Sun Jan 8, 2012 6:22 PM EST

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Walter_Annenberg

and was a lifelong republican...

Sorry, the liberal kids and grandkids took it over. The old guy is dead! There is quite an infiltration of liberals in that organization now.

The wiki may say he was a lifelong Repub, but anyone who would give William Ayers and Obama a half a billion dollars to start progressive education initiative schools (Annenberg Challenge) was NOT true to the party. This org now donates to liberal organizations, like PBS.

It was one of these schools, Mountain View High School, AZ, with curriculum provided by Ayers/Obama's initiatives, that Loughner attended in Arizona. I bet the old man is turning in his grave about this.....

""""Annenberg Challenge In 1993, the largest gift to public education was made by Ambassador Walter Annenberg, a $500 million grant named the Annenberg Challenge. The grant was designed to unite the resources throughout the United States and ideas of those committed to increasing the effectiveness of public schooling. Recognizing that no single gift could improve all schools, the Challenge served as a catalyst to energize and support educational reform efforts across the country."""

Bill Ayers, communist provided Arizona shooter’s curriculum?

http://www.wnd.com/2011/01/249429/

Obama can't work with our Congress, because he wants to fundamentally change this country (see type of initiatives above), and the Congress sees Obama's motives through his actions, and Congress is trying to preserve our constitutional foundation....which propelled us to the greatest country in the world.

6 votes

#15.10 - Sun Jan 8, 2012 7:23 PM EST

Waves:Good points. However, when you realize just how many people are out there who actually believe the spin and hype surrounding Obama, or how many people there are out there who refuse to pay attention to facts (like his signing NDAA into law) and how many people who actually believe that the National Debt is no big deal and so on....I am not sanguine about the continuing status of this country. We have become remarkably 'progressive' and incredibly stupid. Indoctrination in schools has been pernicious and pervasive. We now see how a lie, if repeated often enough, is believed as gospel.

6 votes

#15.11 - Sun Jan 8, 2012 8:28 PM EST

http://www.salon.com/2009/03/27/deficits/

However, when you realize just how many people are out there who actually believe the spin and hype surrounding Obama, or how many people there are out there who refuse to pay attention to facts

Ironic that this is coming from someone who doesn't know what Socialism actually is, mygirl1...

and how many people who actually believe that the National Debt is no big deal and so on....

Well, let's ask Dick Cheney what he would think of this subject shall we?

Dick Cheney once observed that “deficits don’t matter,”

It was one of these schools, Mountain View High School, AZ, with curriculum provided by Ayers/Obama's initiatives, that Loughner attended in Arizona. I bet the old man is turning in his grave about this.....

""""Annenberg Challenge In 1993, the largest gift to public education was made by Ambassador Walter Annenberg, a $500 million grant named the Annenberg Challenge. The grant was designed to unite the resources throughout the United States and ideas of those committed to increasing the effectiveness of public schooling. Recognizing that no single gift could improve all schools, the Challenge served as a catalyst to energize and support educational reform efforts across the country."""

Bill Ayers, communist provided Arizona shooter’s curriculum?

http://www.wnd.com/2011/01/249429/

Can you back up this assertion citing a reputable source instead of nonsense like WND, wavesofgrain?

10 votes

#15.12 - Sun Jan 8, 2012 8:44 PM EST

Super Saiyan: You make the assumption that I do not know the definition of socialism and you base this on what, exactly? Please, let us have your definition of socialism. There are many schools of 'socialism' BTW. Which one do you follow? Which definition is best for your arguments. Scoffing is fine if you can refute intelligently, otherwise, you invalidate yourself.

Once again you ignore NDAA? Why is this? Is this something you would like to sweep under the carpet, like it never happened? Does it embarass you? Does it concern you or are you too busy attempting to deflect blame from Obama to want to discuss that little item?

5 votes

#15.13 - Sun Jan 8, 2012 9:11 PM EST

don't bother, my girl or waves of grain...he only believes it if TP or huffingandpuffington post tells him so...(and going back to Nixon was a REAL classic to explain away Politifact - though occasionally they take off the Dem colored glasses and get it right).

5 votes

#15.14 - Mon Jan 9, 2012 2:34 AM EST

http://www.newsmax.com/InsideCover/Daily-Kos-Bullseyed-Giffords/2011/01/10/id/382350?s=al&promo_code=B6E7-1

Can you back up this assertion citing a reputable source instead of nonsense like WND, wavesofgrain?

And you expect Obama to OK this news to be released to the mainstream media? Loughner DID attend that radical school, Ayers and Obama DID run the ANNENBERG CHALLENGE. Do you think ABC would proudly headline that fact? NO, instead they deflected and tried to blame it on Palin's site...although the Daily Kos also had bulls eye marks on Giffords...and scrubbed it after the incident. Read the link below. Obama's press CERTAINLY would not authorize any release of those facts. They just wanted to destroy Palin.

And for you to ever hear of an opposing facts in the future from Mainstream Media will be a miracle from now on. Please read my post at 24.5. Those tactics he is implementing is nothing short of media oppression, similar to communist China. This man does not play fair. That's why he can't work with Congress........

5 votes

#15.15 - Mon Jan 9, 2012 9:30 AM EST

2 votes

#15.16 - Mon Jan 9, 2012 9:32 AM EST

http://www.newsmax.com/InsideCover/Daily-Kos-Bullseyed-Giffords/2011/01/10/id/382350?s=al&promo_code=B6E7-1

Can you back up this assertion citing a reputable source instead of nonsense like WND, wavesofgrain?

And you expect Obama to OK this news to be released to the mainstream media? WND reported facts. Loughner DID attend that radical school, Ayers and Obama DID run the ANNENBERG CHALLENGE. Do you think ABC would proudly headline that fact? NO, instead they deflected and tried to blame it on Palin's site...although the Daily Kos also had bulls eye marks on Giffords...and scrubbed it after the incident. Read the link below. Obama's press CERTAINLY would not authorize any release of those facts. They just wanted to destroy Palin.

5 votes

#15.17 - Mon Jan 9, 2012 9:33 AM EST

http://p.washingtontimes.com/news/2012/jan/4/inside-the-ring-215329133/?page=2

Obama says that he can't work with the Congress, so that is the reason he must bypass Congress for exec orders and recess appointments. But he just made a "recess" appointment when Congress was NOT in recess, against the constitution. He also is ignoring our constitutional sovereignity by not recognizing illegal entry in this country. Yet, in this link below, he gives the constitution as his reasoning for giving military secrets to Russia.

OBAMA TO SHARE MISSLED DEFENSE SECRETS WITH RUSSIA

""""""President Obama signaled Congress this week that he is prepared to share U.S. missile defense secrets with Russia.

In the president’s signing statement issued Saturday in passing into law the fiscal 2012 defense authorization bill, Mr. Obama said restrictions aimed at protecting top-secret technical data on U.S. Standard Missile-3 velocity burnout parameters might impinge on his constitutional foreign policy authority.""""""

Looks like his statement "he can't work with Congress" is just an excuse to exhibit dictatorial powers over the citizens.

14 votes

#16 - Sun Jan 8, 2012 2:43 PM EST

Obama says that he can't work with the Congress, so that is the reason he must bypass Congress for exec orders and recess appointments. But he just made a "recess" appointment when Congress was NOT in recess,

Wow, way to ignore policial history, wavesofgrain (see post #8.1 for actual history)...

16 votes

#16.1 - Sun Jan 8, 2012 2:54 PM EST

wavwsofgrain-that missle item has been debunked. As usual the republican propaganda machine has twisted that to meet their agenda. Look it up.

16 votes

#16.2 - Sun Jan 8, 2012 3:44 PM EST

Debunk link, please. I just want to make sure yours isn't another Politifact or Soros funded debunk.

8 votes

#16.3 - Sun Jan 8, 2012 5:20 PM EST

I guess you didn't read this part of my post, wavesofgrain...

(see post #8.1 for actual history)...

11 votes

#16.4 - Sun Jan 8, 2012 5:24 PM EST

There wont be enough republicans left to cause a problem after this year.

Ignore them Mr President, they wont work with you anyway, so lets get some things done.

23 votes

#17 - Sun Jan 8, 2012 2:45 PM EST

so lets get some things done.

Yes, please do!

9 votes

#17.1 - Sun Jan 8, 2012 3:03 PM EST

Yes, Mr. President. Please, ignore them. We love you and want you to be our new Emperor. We know you are the smartest man in the world, that you have no flaws or weaknesses and that you love us. Therefore, Mr. President, we are encouraging you to destroy the constitution, eradicate all the republicans (using whatever means necessary) and please, place the yoke of serfdom on our shoulders, we don't understand the concept of freedom, we want to be your willing vassals and will give up all our rights and freedoms if you will just take care of us...

6 votes

#17.2 - Sun Jan 8, 2012 8:33 PM EST

jupmod

The title is all wrong. It should be "GOP's 2012 Slogan: Can't Work With You Unless You Are One of Us". Go figure.

19 votes

#18 - Sun Jan 8, 2012 2:53 PM EST

Just remember. Thanks to Obama, whoever is President in 2013 will have the power to send you to Gitmo without charge or trial. That signing statement is worth less than the paper it's written on.

I don't know why you people insist on playing this left/right game. None of these people the media puppets are trying to force on you care about you or your freedom

5 votes

#19 - Sun Jan 8, 2012 2:55 PM EST

Id rather Obama have that power than a Cheney clone or a drunk cowboy from texas.

17 votes

#19.1 - Sun Jan 8, 2012 3:00 PM EST

You've got three types of candidates:

Those who are openly pro-war like the majority of the Republican field

Those who are secretly pro-war like Obama

Or those who are actually anti-war and have their foreign policy labeled as insane by the media like Ron Paul

3 votes

#19.2 - Sun Jan 8, 2012 3:05 PM EST

Boudicea

You just lost the game - You are absolutely right. Neither party has any intentions of actually doing what is right for the people of this country. They are all acting like they RULE America, instead of the truth - that they serve ONLY because we have allowed them to.

6 votes

#19.3 - Sun Jan 8, 2012 3:10 PM EST

Those who are secretly pro-war like Obama

You mean the Obama that brought the troops home from Bush's fiasco in the wrong place?

Riiiiiight.

9 votes

#19.4 - Sun Jan 8, 2012 4:23 PM EST

You mean having to search for the bad guy that was handed to Clinton on a silver platter but refused it. See how that works, every President has had to deal with previous Administration actions. Too bad we had to suffer 9/11 huh? The next President is going to inherit this stinking spending spree, do you think he or she will be off the hook if they can't fix it? No, they won't if that's what they campaigned on. See the point?

6 votes

#19.5 - Sun Jan 8, 2012 4:31 PM EST

As Obama seems to prefer a global United Nations treaty than our constitution, he just puts our troops under Nato command...........

7 votes

#19.6 - Sun Jan 8, 2012 4:34 PM EST

More silliness and speculation. :-)

you guys are really funny.

9 votes

#19.7 - Sun Jan 8, 2012 5:01 PM EST

Guess Libya escaped your notice?

4 votes

#19.8 - Sun Jan 8, 2012 8:37 PM EST

Guess Libya escaped your notice?

I guess the fact that there was no US soliders even involved in Libya seem to escape your notice, mygirl1...

7 votes

#19.9 - Sun Jan 8, 2012 8:48 PM EST

Uhm, there were lots of NATO 'advisors' on the ground in Libya. Someone had to direct the missiles to their targets. Was it one or two US billion spent on missiles and other supportive armaments?

Guess the fact that America funds over 27% of NATO escaped your notice? Did you read the post above mine?

5 votes

#19.10 - Sun Jan 8, 2012 9:02 PM EST

wavesofgrain:

As Obama seems to prefer a global United Nations treaty than our constitution, he just puts our troops under Nato command...........

I know, those Democratic Presidents and their love of NATO, I wonder where they got that sentiment, Maybe from Eisnhower, who in 1960 had this to say:

As a constructive step for improving the political cohesion of the West, I feel that NATO consultation, covering all areas of the world, should be further developed and strengthened. The U.S. has itself sought to make maximum use of the NATO Council for this purpose, and we certainly intend to continue this effort in view of the obvious need to achieve the maximum harmonization of Free World policies in the light of the world-wide Communist threat.

This is not some campaign slogan, but a private discussion with Konrad Adenauer in 1960. Maybe Obama supports NATO because he recognizes that the alternative is unilaterally financing over 40% of global military expenditures, instead of working with other nations to ensure stability and level-headed policy.

2 votes

#19.11 - Tue Jan 10, 2012 4:06 PM EST

republicans can't work with others, and that's why this measure was taken. As the article points out, republicans don't have a problem with the appointee. So they should have no problem with him being appointed then.

What's happening is they don't want anyone appointed to head the consumer protection agency, because they don't want consumers protected. They're all on the side of big business and want to uphold all the sleazy tactics they use to predate on consumers.

20 votes

#20 - Sun Jan 8, 2012 2:55 PM EST

Yup. That's the way to do it. Just parrot the Dem's meme:

What's happening is they don't want anyone appointed to head the consumer protection agency, because they don't want consumers protected. They're all on the side of big business and want to uphold all the sleazy tactics they use to predate on consumers.

You have got to be kidding. Do you really think people are that ignorant as to believe this vitriol?

Republicans did not have had a problem with the appointee; their chief problem is that they wanted a 5 member board for oversight - not just one person.

It's entirely too much power to put into the hands of one person but that's all in line with "King Barry's" proclamation.

Why Michelle has already stated that she "sort of likes" being referred to as "your excellency".

Well, guess what, people are not that gullible. They have learned a great deal from the vapid useless tagline of "hope and change".

No one is buying the narrative that the GOP does not want to protect people.

8 votes

#20.1 - Sun Jan 8, 2012 3:20 PM EST

blindsided-1194485

Exactly.

2 votes

#20.2 - Sun Jan 8, 2012 3:22 PM EST

newsflash for ya-just by the actions and/or inactions of congress, I can say the Republicans have no intention of protecting the American people from anything.

Unless you have lots of zero's in your paycheck.

Please post a credible link so we can see where:

Why Michelle has already stated that she "sort of likes" being referred to as "your excellency".

12 votes

#20.3 - Sun Jan 8, 2012 3:49 PM EST

caballojoe

What's happening is they don't want anyone appointed to head the consumer protection agency, because they don't want consumers protected. They're all on the side of big business and want to uphold all the sleazy tactics they use to predate on consumers.

"You have got to be kidding. Do you really think people are that ignorant as to believe this vitriol?"

Call me ignorant if you like, but I believe it. Not only that, but it seems factual and doesn't appear to be a bit vitriolic.

9 votes

#20.4 - Sun Jan 8, 2012 4:14 PM EST

their chief problem is that they wanted a 5 member board for oversight - not just one person.

Yeah, to pretty much stymie any action to protect the public at the expense of business profit. Look how the super committee for debt and deficit reduction worked out.

Not everyone is as ignorant as the leaders of the GOP assume. Just because they can fool a big group of followers to support policies that in no way help those followers (see middle class income growth since Reagan) does not mean all are blinded by the bait and switch.

9 votes

#20.5 - Sun Jan 8, 2012 4:37 PM EST

Yeah, to pretty much stymie any action to protect the public at the expense of business profit. Look how the super committee for debt and deficit reduction worked out.

Yes - but they came to an agreement amongst themselves. It's only when the proposal went back to one man (let me see....who appointed that commission again???) that the debt and deficit reduction plan was stymied.

BO would not take the advice from his own commission.

Thanks Fla Pat. You have perfectly illustrated the problem with one man in charge.

7 votes

#20.6 - Sun Jan 8, 2012 4:53 PM EST

http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/statements/2011/apr/28/john-boehner/john-boehner-says-obama-took-exactly-none-his-own-/

BO would not take the advice from his own commission.

Really, Patriot 8888?

Explain this to me then...

Thanks Fla Pat. You have perfectly illustrated the problem with one man in charge.

And you are perfectly illistrating why David Frum was correct in stating that the GOP are divorced from reality...

11 votes

#20.7 - Sun Jan 8, 2012 5:01 PM EST

Again with Politifact Super??

6 votes

#20.8 - Sun Jan 8, 2012 5:22 PM EST

(let me see....who appointed that commission again???)

Each Party chose the members to serve on the committe:

House Speaker John Boehnerchose House Republican Conference Chairman Jeb Hensarling of Texas, House Ways and Means Committee Chairman Dave Camp of Michigan and House Energy and Commerce Committee Chairman Fred Upton of Michigan.

Senate Republican leader Mitch McConnell chose Sens. Jon Kyl of Arizona, Pat Toomey of Pennsylvania and Rob Portman of Ohio to represent the Senate GOP.

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2011/08/10/republicans-appoint-their-six-to-super-debt-committee/

The point here is you do not assign a committee to head a regulatory agency unless you want ineffecutal results and performance. In this case that is the best the GOP could hope for.

6 votes

#20.9 - Sun Jan 8, 2012 6:35 PM EST

Again with Politifact Super??

Much more accurate than the opinions you try and use as fact 8888

7 votes

#20.10 - Sun Jan 8, 2012 6:39 PM EST

Accurate vs. what Don?

Fairy tales? Unicorns? Santa Claus?

5 votes

#20.11 - Sun Jan 8, 2012 6:49 PM EST

Fairy tales? Unicorns? Santa Claus?

I knew it, that's where you get your opinions.

9 votes

#20.12 - Sun Jan 8, 2012 6:56 PM EST

But they beat yours hands down.

5 votes

#20.13 - Sun Jan 8, 2012 7:07 PM EST

http://money.cnn.com/2011/04/13/news/economy/debt_commission_obama/index.htm

Fla Pat

Each Party chose the members to serve on the committe:

I was referring to Simpson-Bowles appointed by Obama. It had bipartisan support and Obama never took their recommendations.

6 votes

#20.14 - Sun Jan 8, 2012 8:24 PM EST

http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/statements/2011/apr/28/john-boehner/john-boehner-says-obama-took-exactly-none-his-own-/

It had bipartisan support and Obama never took their recommendations.

Many of the recommendations were used. The link below is from Super's comment at #20.7. I can only assume you did not take the time to read it.

6 votes

#20.15 - Sun Jan 8, 2012 9:02 PM EST

"Republicans did not have had a problem with the appointee"

so they shouldn't have a problem with his appointment. This was not an issue of who it is, but what he is being appointed for, and blocking all appointments to try and kill off a legally created bureau passed through congress. You want deceptively side stepping the legislative process? 44 republican senators have vowed to vote down ANY appointee for this legally passed LAW.

" their chief problem is that they wanted a 5 member board for oversight - not just one person.

It's entirely too much power to put into the hands of one person but that's all in line with "King Barry's" proclamation."

Bull, all government agencies have one chief person in charge. From the president, the majority leader, the speaker of the house, the director of the FBI, the commissioner of the FDA. They disagree with the agency itself, the protection of consumers. Disagreeing with one person heading the bureau is fake outrage, because that's how every other government agency works.

"Why Michelle has already stated that she "sort of likes" being referred to as "your excellency"."

Would you like to add the context to that? That this was a joke she says when appearing on a comedy show?

"No one is buying the narrative that the GOP does not want to protect people."

not enough people are buying the fact the GOP doesn't want to protect people. They aaaall voted against a bill to curb outsourcing. Because they aaaall support it.

3 votes

#20.16 - Mon Jan 9, 2012 1:57 AM EST

Bull, all government agencies have one chief person in charge. From the president, the majority leader, the speaker of the house, the director of the FBI, the commissioner of the FDA. They disagree with the agency itself, the protection of consumers. Disagreeing with one person heading the bureau is fake outrage, because that's how every other government agency works.

None that wield this kind of power.

Would you like to add the context to that? That this was a joke she says when appearing on a comedy show?

The context is that it was a rather crass thing to say for a First Lady of the United States, joke or no joke.

I thought Mrs. Obama had much more class than that to make a mockery of the democratic republic the her husband heads. It shows disrespect to those who died for the sake of freedom from the Monarchy 235 years ago.

3 votes

#20.17 - Mon Jan 9, 2012 2:02 AM EST

"Yes - but they came to an agreement amongst themselves."

no, they failed. You're not rewriting this history, the super committee did not come to an agreement. The democrats proposed hundreds of billions of spending cuts, and republicans turned them down because it also included debt busting tax increases. Because that would upset their big business masters. The retarded @!$%#ing republicans offered tax CUTS! The debt steroid! Clinton left with a balanced budget. Then Bush came in, cut taxes, and the flood gates of deficit burst open again. Did you see how that worked out? Democrats compromised, they offered massive spending cuts, and democrats hate that. What did the republicans do? They offered a beyond republican strategy, they shifted further to the right instead of trying to meet somewhere in the middle.

5 votes

#20.18 - Mon Jan 9, 2012 2:11 AM EST

"None that wield this kind of power."

the president? The director of the FBI? ALL directors wield this kind of power.

"The context is that it was a rather crass thing to say for a First Lady of the United States, joke or no joke."

that's not the context. Your opinion is not what the word "context" means. The context, is the setting, and the setting was a JOKE on a COMEDY show. It was a JOKE. Framing it as anything else is DECEPTIVE.

5 votes

#20.19 - Mon Jan 9, 2012 2:13 AM EST

Obama is a Chicago styled thug. He believes he can bully his way every time.

8 votes

#21 - Sun Jan 8, 2012 3:16 PM EST

LOL what world do you live in?????!!!!!

17 votes

#21.1 - Sun Jan 8, 2012 3:20 PM EST

Well his most recent appointment declaring Congress on recess that was a bully move.

6 votes

#21.2 - Sun Jan 8, 2012 3:24 PM EST

Yeah the right is the only ones allowed to be bullies....bullies never like it when people stand up to their stupid ass.

16 votes

#21.3 - Sun Jan 8, 2012 3:25 PM EST

Obama is a Chicago styled thug. He believes he can bully his way every time...

...Well his most recent appointment declaring Congress on recess that was a bully move.

I guess that you never bothered to read post #8.1 for actual politicial history, WILDWONDERFUL...

15 votes

#21.4 - Sun Jan 8, 2012 3:26 PM EST

You haven't got a clue about the history of your own country or of recent events. Reagan had the most recess appointments then Bush jr. but if Obama does it, its thuggish. No dog whistle code words there btw.

Obama has been caving to the repubs for 3 years and now that he has a backbone he's a thug. This is all so utterly predictable.

16 votes

#21.5 - Sun Jan 8, 2012 3:28 PM EST

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052970203471004577140770647994692.html

The last clause of Section 5 of Article 1 of the Constitution says that "Neither House" of Congress can adjourn for more than three days "without the Consent of the other" house. In this case, the House of Representatives had not formally consented to Senate adjournment. It's true the House did this to block the President from making recess appointments, but it is following the Constitution in doing so. Let's hear Mr. Obama's legal justification.

8 votes

#21.6 - Sun Jan 8, 2012 3:53 PM EST

Honor

They were not in recess

5 votes

#21.7 - Sun Jan 8, 2012 4:47 PM EST

WILDWONDERFUL: Have you ever been to Chicago? What's A Chicago style thug,and how are they different from say,a Memphis style thug?

10 votes

#21.8 - Sun Jan 8, 2012 4:49 PM EST

Culture and the Enduring myth of Chicago

The reputation for thuggery in Chicago is legendary.

Here's an entire book devoted to the folklore of Chicago:

5 votes

#21.9 - Sun Jan 8, 2012 5:00 PM EST

Plus do not tell me Obama did not know about Blagojevich selling his seat.

6 votes

#21.10 - Sun Jan 8, 2012 5:02 PM EST

OMG-some real active imaginations here. WOW-this is getting really funny now- THANK YOU!!!

6 votes

#21.11 - Sun Jan 8, 2012 5:03 PM EST

PATRIOT/WILDWONDERFUL: Thanks for NOT answering my question.But then that would require having some knowledge of the subject,which obviously neither of you do.

9 votes

#21.12 - Sun Jan 8, 2012 5:08 PM EST

chit

If you do not know the slime of Chicago politicians then you must have been somewhere in hiding.

5 votes

#21.13 - Sun Jan 8, 2012 5:13 PM EST

If you are so full of knowledge Chitownty, please, educate us.

5 votes

#21.14 - Sun Jan 8, 2012 5:23 PM EST

Educate you? So in other words,please give us some information because up till now we've just been shooting off our mouths.

9 votes

#21.15 - Sun Jan 8, 2012 5:36 PM EST

No, just to show us that you have nothing to back up your rhetoric.

4 votes

#21.16 - Sun Jan 8, 2012 6:17 PM EST

No, just to show us that you have nothing to back up your rhetoric.

You mean like Wildwonderful does.

6 votes

#21.17 - Sun Jan 8, 2012 6:40 PM EST

Plus do not tell me Obama did not know about Blagojevich selling his seat.

Wildwonderful, let's say PRes Obama did know, how do you know he wasn't the one who clued the authorities in?

I'm just saying...

4 votes

#21.18 - Sun Jan 8, 2012 9:44 PM EST

Right LOL

3 votes

#21.19 - Wed Jan 11, 2012 10:27 AM EST

LOL the repubs idea of working together equates to everyone doing it the repub way period. The repubs dug themselves into a hole on this and all the anti-worker legislation all over the country, the latest being indiana. This should be his slogan because its true. It's the information age repubs, everything you have been doing for the last 3 years is on video, you will be destroyed with your own damn words and actions.

11 votes

#22 - Sun Jan 8, 2012 3:19 PM EST

Yup, bring it on in 2012.

We see how far that got the Dems in 2010.

7 votes

#22.1 - Sun Jan 8, 2012 3:22 PM EST

2010 was a fluke.....a hiccup, People have had those 2 years to see what the repubs have to offer...nothing besides reaffirming in god we trust and bitching.

Plus look at the cream of the crop they have up there....their best people are Romney Santorum and Gingrich.....HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA

Good luck guys...of course you will just scream "voter fraud" after the elections.

18 votes

#22.2 - Sun Jan 8, 2012 3:24 PM EST

Yup, keep telling yourself:

It's only a fluke,

It's only a fluke

Repetition worked great in the Wizard of Oz.

People have had those 2 years to see what the repubs have to offer...

People have also had 3 years to see what Barry has to offer. And it's even less than the GOP.

7 votes

#22.3 - Sun Jan 8, 2012 3:30 PM EST

2010 happened because the dems stayed home because Obama wouldn't stand up to the repubs. The left and center and energized and pizzed off at all the anti-worker, voter disenfranchisement, and gridlock done by the repubs.

Funny how repubs are supposedly worried about voter fraud but the repub primaries allow same day registration and no need for voter ID, Iowa being the latest example.

13 votes

#22.4 - Sun Jan 8, 2012 3:31 PM EST

And it's even less than the GOP.

The why is the current congress considered as the worst in American History?

Yup, keep telling yourself:

It's only a fluke,

It's only a fluke

And you can keep telling yourself that the GOP is popular...

17 votes

#22.5 - Sun Jan 8, 2012 3:33 PM EST

You're grasping patriot. I don't think you believe what your typing. There seems to be some desperation in those words you are typing. LOL

12 votes

#22.6 - Sun Jan 8, 2012 3:33 PM EST

I guess all the recalls are a joke as well????? How about the 2008 election? the 2006? The corporate tea party is now despised and many of the those people are walking around looking like dupes. 2012 is going to be a great year for the Democrats regardless of how much corporate money the repubs have and the voter suppression.

12 votes

#22.7 - Sun Jan 8, 2012 3:39 PM EST

Patriot-I'm still waiting for you to tell me why Congress only has a 9% approval rate, particularly since you are trumpeting the 2010 election.

Looks to me like folks saw they were taken for a sleigh ride by the GOP and all those lies they told to get into office.

Explain 9% approval for the Republican led congress.

Yep-all America loves that Republican led congress. Not.

10 votes

#22.8 - Sun Jan 8, 2012 3:54 PM EST

kappa_man_stew

Patriot 8888

Yup, bring it on in 2012.

We see how far that got the Dems in 2010.

and what happened after the 2010 election. a million anti abortion bills. and another half million tax cuts for the rich bills.

the people are not happy or fooled. tha tis why you conservatives are so adamant about all the id bills to resolve a problem that does not exist.

10 votes

#22.9 - Sun Jan 8, 2012 4:33 PM EST

Democrat-controlled Congress 2008-2010 has 13% approval rating

Explain 9% approval for the Republican led congress.

Republican-led Congress? Did I miss an election? We have a Dem Senate and a GOP House

Patriot-I'm still waiting for you to tell me why Congress only has a 9% approval rate,

Can we compare and contrast that with:

Looks like you are talking about a differential of 4%. That's like picking flysh*t out of pepper.

7 votes

#22.10 - Sun Jan 8, 2012 4:34 PM EST

Patriot-I'm still waiting for you to tell me why Congress only has a 9% approval rate, particularly since you are trumpeting the 2010 election.

Why Ted, are you trying to tell me that the Dem-controlled Congress approval rating of 13% was so much better?

ROFLMAO

6 votes

#22.11 - Sun Jan 8, 2012 5:02 PM EST

13% vs 9%?

Yes-13% is better.

Let's see if they can get it even lower shall we? The year is young. Like 5% approval?

14 votes

#22.12 - Sun Jan 8, 2012 5:25 PM EST

I did not say better. I said so much better.

But what makes the 13% so much worse is that it was a Dem controlled Congress working with a Dem President.

Not saying much for BO's skillsets to work with his own team.

9 votes

#22.13 - Sun Jan 8, 2012 5:29 PM EST

Patriot: I admire your attempts at reasoning with those who can't or won't or refuse to try and understand what you are saying. I am going to get shot down because I'm using a Christian text but the context is sooo apt: They have ears but they will not hear, they have eyes, but they will not see.

5 votes

#22.14 - Sun Jan 8, 2012 8:44 PM EST

Patriot are you really paying attention to what's going on in the political arena or just running on blind hatred? Dude, you can spin facts but you can't change em. You are definitely a republican.

9 votes

#22.15 - Sun Jan 8, 2012 8:44 PM EST

Blind hatred? Once again out comes the hyperbole when anyone questions Obama. Oh, and being a republican, it is no more an epitaph than being a democrat. You are definitely a democrat when you seek to stifle discourse or dissenting opinion. If you were paying real attention to what recently happened in the political arena you'd be remarkable...if you're a democrat. See how this works?

5 votes

#22.16 - Sun Jan 8, 2012 8:54 PM EST

mygirl -- your republicans are trying to take away EVERY human right you have as a woman and if you're down with that -- more power to you. I forget -- you republican woman need men to think for you. It's hard talking to -- 'you people.' And yeah I said blind hatred because that's what it is when 'ya boys' Cantor and his cronies screw the American people because of their Blind Hatred and Ignorance... I know, I know -- just like the others, YOU CAN'T HANDLE the TRUTH!

8 votes

#22.17 - Sun Jan 8, 2012 9:12 PM EST

Patriot are you really paying attention to what's going on in the political arena or just running on blind hatred? Dude, you can spin facts but you can't change em

Would you please qualify that that ad hominem attack Linda?

And it's dudess if you don't mind.

4 votes

#22.18 - Sun Jan 8, 2012 9:32 PM EST

Linda: Before you run off making absurd assumptions that I am a republican, sorry, I'm an independent. I can't stand either party, the establishment wings of either party. Two extremes do not a government make. I am pro-choice and I am a tree-hugger. I am also pro-constitution and fiscally conservative. I dislike Obama because in many ways he is Bush II. I defend republicans against foolish accusations made out of ignorance.

I despair of any of our choices for president. Once again, the lesser of two evils. I will vote for Ron Paul, he may be a crazy old coot, as some have described him, but I do believe he is not easily bought and sold, unlike Obama. When I go after Obama it is because I dislike slavish idolatry that attempts to gloss over gross malfeasance (NDAA) and gives him a pass because 'Bush did it.'

We cannot afford stupidity, our nation is at a crossroads and slavish adoration of anyone is not the answer. I don't want a theocracy nor do I want socialism ala Europe, we all see how well that is working.

6 votes

#22.19 - Sun Jan 8, 2012 9:54 PM EST

to you both: You can't handle the truth if it bit you on your a$$!

3 votes

#22.20 - Mon Jan 9, 2012 11:40 AM EST

pot/kettle my friend.

The sad truth is that the situation in this country is an unmitigated disaster.

The manchild pretending to be President is spending us into oblivion (now chime in with the GWB did it mantra).

I thought that Barack was supposed to know better......

3 votes

#22.21 - Mon Jan 9, 2012 11:47 AM EST

What are the republicans plans to make things better -- other than getting rid of the President? Have you heard any? And for the record it's President Barack Obama -- whether you like or respect it or not! You guys are classless with your great morals and wonderful values. What do you teach your children? I'm real curious and afraid...

6 votes

#22.22 - Mon Jan 9, 2012 12:08 PM EST

No, he's not spending us into oblivion.

The Republicans are Tax Cutting us into oblivion.

7 votes

#22.23 - Mon Jan 9, 2012 12:11 PM EST

The Republicans are Tax Cutting us into oblivion

Now that is something I would really like to see.

4 votes

#22.24 - Mon Jan 9, 2012 12:29 PM EST

The Republicans are Tax Cutting us into oblivion

Now that is something I would really like to see.

It is easy to see. Go to any state or local government agency, and ask them if they can effectively do their jobs after tax cuts. Wait for the next news story in which some mentally ill person kills their kids and everyone is up in arms about how the state agency did not prevent it due to increased staff "efficiencies" Wait for the next news article in which a fire department watches a person's house burn down, or the next bridge collapse. Go to the VA and look at the long lines. Go to any university and look at the ratio of foreign students to domestic students.

If you would really like to see, I suggest opening your eyes.

3 votes

#22.25 - Tue Jan 10, 2012 4:28 PM EST

Go to any state or local government agency, and ask them if they can effectively do their jobs after tax cuts.

The implication here seems to be that they were effective without tax cuts.

5 votes

#22.26 - Tue Jan 10, 2012 6:07 PM EST

Yes, most of the metrics and data support the implication that they were more effective.

1 vote

#22.27 - Fri Jan 13, 2012 11:54 AM EST

Yes, most of the metrics and data support the implication that they were more effective.

I'm not sure I'm going to concede the use of the word "effective" at all. I will however concede "less ineffective".

It may indeed be true that government agencies were less ineffective with more money.

1 vote

#22.28 - Fri Jan 13, 2012 11:58 AM EST

Fair enough. Classy rebuttal. No petty attacks or defensiveness

1 vote

#22.29 - Fri Jan 13, 2012 1:12 PM EST

This article is a joke. It's the GOP that refuses to work with the president. It's the obvious position of the GOP leadership that the president will have to do things their way or nothing will get done at all. "Real Clear Politics" should be renamed "Real Clear Bull@!$%#" for this waste of bandwidth.

13 votes

#23 - Sun Jan 8, 2012 3:41 PM EST

Philip Grant

Can't work with others? Are you kidding?

This President has tried so hard to "work" with the opposition that his supporters are pissed off with him half the time.

After he wins this election, and he will, I hope he undergoes a personality change and starts treating his opponents with the same contempt that they treat him.

12 votes

#24 - Sun Jan 8, 2012 3:51 PM EST

If I "tried" that hard at my job, I would have been fired the first month.

9 votes

#24.1 - Sun Jan 8, 2012 5:04 PM EST

If I "tried" that hard at my job, I would have been fired the first month.

And with that resume, or lack of, you probably wouldn't have been hired in the first place.

If only this president had to go through the same scrutiny that a General Manager of a WalMart had to go through, we would not be in this mess. I am talking about 'performance' not dreams. His dreams became OUR nightmares.

10 votes

#24.2 - Sun Jan 8, 2012 6:04 PM EST

His dreams became OUR nightmares

Well said, Freedom Ranger!

5 votes

#24.3 - Sun Jan 8, 2012 8:26 PM EST

This president got a 'pass' when it came to the press. Note how Jarrett, after the election, confessed that they essentially controlled the message as well as the media. Then there are the outright threats and nastygrams sent to members of the Press Corps who don't follow the Obama party line. Don't like the awkward questions posed? Why, we'll ban you from the press corp. Look at the deal with Fox and how they were excluded from interviews. Now, in an open society that is a no-no. In Obamaland, it is par for the course. Oh, it is also par for the course in repressive regimes like say, Iran.

6 votes

#24.4 - Sun Jan 8, 2012 8:48 PM EST

This president got a 'pass' when it came to the press

mygirl1...

Journalism schools/journalists have been funded by Soros for years. Between his NGO's and underhanded journalists, America has been brainwashed. They started years ago planning this social/media invasion. The leftist orgs are even funding/controlling most of the fact checking sites!

You most likely will no longer find ANYTHING negative about Obama/Democrats in any mainstream media. I posted a couple links about this.

1. He has set up a 'RAPID RESPONSE TEAM" to deal with anything in the media Obama does not like
.
2. A major supporter billionaire couple, The Sandlers, have formed a non profit group, ProPublica, to obtain all their news sources. This couple also funds MoveOn.org, Acorn, Center for American Progress (Soros), etc.

3. They also have banned media that reported negatively about Obama from White House. So..this is the back-door, underhanded way Obama gets what he wants. Dictator in Chief

Can you imagine all the filth and dirt the mainstream will dish on opposing views? There will be no more wrongdoing revealed about this president. Soros' journalists will destroy our country. We might as well be living in China. There is an internet restriction bill coming up soon. I'm sure that will be kept under wraps until they've passed that SOPA bill.

NBC newsroom gets fresh leftist invasion. Network teams up with ‘journalism’ outfit founded by Barack Obama Campaigners

http://kleinonline.wnd.com/2011/12/06/new-nbc-newsroom-acorn-moveon-funders-network-teams-up-with-%E2%80%98journalism%E2%80%99-outfit-founded-by-billionaire-obama-campaigners/

White House sets up “Rapid Response Team” to deal with news stories it doesn’t

http://www.greeleygazette.com/press/?p=10001

5 votes

#24.5 - Mon Jan 9, 2012 9:08 AM EST

voxrationis

Another article where I read a couple of paragraphs and bail because of the obvious bias. Of course this is the stuff like Limbaugh that the Right absorbs.

Really, the nerve of these TP nuts to suggest Obama doesn't work well with others when they have been nothing but obstructionists. When they have signed pledges locking themselves into rigid positions. To hell with them!

8 votes

#25 - Sun Jan 8, 2012 4:28 PM EST

No bias - just truth.

Might do you some good to read the entire article.

6 votes

#25.1 - Sun Jan 8, 2012 5:04 PM EST

Republicans in Congress would not know the truth if it walked up and slapped them on the forehead.

14 votes

#25.2 - Sun Jan 8, 2012 5:28 PM EST

One might say the same applies to the Dems.

5 votes

#25.3 - Sun Jan 8, 2012 5:31 PM EST