Turn off the damn teleprompter dude. You need to listen for a change.

Oh well shit then, have Palin move in now. By 2012 she'll be ready to quit.

Letus must have recently purchaced the pocket-sized Deflectacon200. Soon to be replaced by the newer version, the Deflectacon1000, with new and improved deflections.

Deflection? What deflecion? Don't count your chickens before they've hatched.

I guess Chevy Chase finally has a career after so many decades without a hit movie.

Sorry, Chevy, Dennis Miller already tried you act.

It killed Monday Night Football as it's last act.

Bullshit. Al Michaels killed Monday Night Football.

Deflection? What deflecion

Your comment was a textbook deflection. It didn't address the point of the article in the least, merely threw some shit out there about someone not even mentioned in said article.

Michaels did MNF for what, 14 or 16 years? One year of Miller and it was all over.

Turn off the damn teleprompter dude. You need to listen for a change.

Yer still doin it wrong!

Still a long way to the next POTUS election. For that matter, much can change between now and the 2010 mid-terms.

All that said, at this juncture one has to be dancing on a pin to spin this as anything but a huge problem for BHO and, by extension, the Dem party.

OOHRAH

"At this juncture" is a good way to put it.

But people are fickle and easily swayed. Look for a flood of good news from the Obama administration prior to the mid-terms. In fact, politicians on both sides seem to save up for it.

Agreed, TWIN. A snapshot of today = bad. Perhaps that'll change.

OK, so then let's look for signs of turnaround. Is there anything Dems can point to and exploit that'll help 'em?

When a poll asks a question that pits Obama againnst GOP contendahs -- the GOPiggies's rotten luck that all they've got taking up room in the party's paddock is a herd of broken down ol' stewballs -- then it'll be worth looking at. But this poll doesn't do that, so it's disconnected from the way American politics actually works.

52% of the country doesn't think Obama deserves a second term?

Understandable.

Public confidence in government has been on the skids fer quite some time now.

Only 20% of the country have any faith in Congress.

The right track/ wrong direction polls have consistently shown the public to be dissatisfied with the status quo fer years now.

Obama still has more support than the senate and the house and many of his initiatives still have public support although there is a lot of disagreement over how to get there from here.

Both parties have been selling out the public's interest in order to satisfy a corporate agenda that provides them with the money they need to stay in or gain political power.

The system itself is inherently broken and no amount of "good actors" can work for the greater good until that grim, greater reality changes.

Spud agrees with Twin's assessment that the admin will trot out some good news in time for the mid terms but also believes that there will still be a few seats lost to the Reps or Indy candidates.

That's politics, innit?

Be Well.

DOC-
I hear what you're saying. Generic ballot polling isn't as accurate.

Still, when you see a poll like this one... and combine it with BHO's approval ratings... and look at polls judging how he's "doing" relative to initiatives... the outlook isn't encouraging to say the least. Wouldn't you agree?

However, anyone wanting to play the game should bear in mind that according to this poll 49% give Obama a positive approval rating; two points higher than they gave Regan at a comparable stage in his presidency. Lol.

The fact that Soc Puppetis can't grasp the easy lesson from this article - that his boy Barry and his friends the "progressives" are as desired as vaginal warts - clearly shows just who is disconnected.

49% give Obama a positive approval rating

Just how is this supposed to be good? LOL. You're supposed to at least raise the bar off the ground.

the outlook isn't encouraging to say the least. Wouldn't you agree?
#16 | Posted by OohRah

I was posting and didn't see your #16. Short answer, yes. Definite problem making situation for Obama. He needs to stop dancing and start flicking some stinging jabs. If he can't do that -- pronto -- he'll soon wish he had.

(By the way, Oohrah, how're you doing?)

#20 - Agreed, DOC.
Now I'll ask you... what sort of flicking stinging jabs would YOU suggest? And, what do you THINK HE'LL actually do?

As to your question... I'm doing well. Cancer's gone... Bob's back at Pendleton. I go back in for another check up in March.

Just wish we'd see some springtime sort of temps around NC. It's been fairly cold and snowier than in typical years.

OOHRAH

It always costs more and takes more time to clean up a mess than it does to make it.

Don't sell Obama short. He inherited a blown head gasket . . . not a leaky water pump.

You gotta admit, at least, that the Republicans aren't doing anything to improve the situation.

Personally I think the Republicans would rather see this country in complete rubble rather than lift a finger to help.

I'm looking forward to the day when Obama's patience runs out.

"Now I'll ask you... what sort of flicking stinging jabs would YOU suggest? And, what do you THINK HE'LL actually do?"

He has to nail the opposition on Capitol Hill as obstructionist. Shot, quick quotes that sting rather than lengthy ruminations about the nature of American government. In short, he's got to get himself back in campaign mode. The presidency, as Teddy Roosevelt pointed out, is a "bully pulpit" and Obama's going to have to start acting like he recognizes that; for the sake of his presidency and, above all, for the wellbeing of the nation. He must explain -- simply but eloquently and persuasively -- why his agenda is a good thing for people (while letting them know that it took a long time for his predecessor's regime, its minions and enablers, to drag us to the point we're at currently and it'll take more time to get us out). In short, he should make the attempt to bind us together in common purpose: getting out of the quicksand; something impossible to do alone but which unity of purpose can achieve. (I'd say "might" but he'll have to say "can.")

In this, I see two models that could work for him (and us): Franklin Roosevelt and Ronald Reagan -- FDR during the Great Depression, and Reagan sticking to his program when the polls showed him down and all but out.

Will Obama do this? I don't know. I sense he's been getting some terrible advice. There will probably be a reshuffling at the White House -- one is always either in the offing, underway, or recently completed during all recent presidencies -- but whether he'll do that and remove and install the right folks, I do not know.

And you? What do you think, Oohrah?

(Good to hear things are moving in a positive direction for you. You had me worried there for a while, Cueball.)

"Shot" on second line = short

DOC-
BHO's not done a press conference in quite some time. But he's gone directly to the people (I'd heard recently) some 400 times.

So he's clearly been in campaign mode all along. How many references to "Bush's fault" "we inherited this mess" "FOX and Rush" have we heard from BHO and company?

I think he'll drive the bus over the cliff. He'll plow forward with as many intitiatives as he can... so as to keep his base pumped up. Absent his base, he's screwed. Libs have wanted this healthcare for generations. This is as close as they've ever been. They'll pull out all stops if possible.

I agree he'll try to further paint Reps as obstructionists. At some point that rings hollow when he's been operating with sizeable majorities.

I've never cared for his policies from the beginning. I think he wants to fundamentally remake this nation. His policies take us in that direction.

So in the end I think he'll want to plow forward with his initiatives, all the while claiming it's the obstructionist Reps to blame for everything. And, like Clinton, at some point he'll probably triangulate.

OOHRAH -

Could be. Clinton was, in my view, certainly better than what the GOP had on offer. And his triangulating ways, while apprently benefiicial poitically, really rubbed me the wrong way. Then again, I have a feeling ol' Bill didn't lie awake at night worrying about what I thought. My sense is that pols are pols and they see things in a political light and that's why other folks -- me and, I imagine, you -- are often sorely disappointed (even though we probably disagree on some fundamental ideas about what government should and shouldn't be doing). Idealism too often gives way to practicality. And as I write this I wonder: does this perhaps help account for the drop off in youthful interest in politics (not just Obama but aficianados of others as well)?

I'm off now, traveling part of the day, but will check back later. You take care.

Anybody who thinks Obama is the problem in Washington is in for severe disappointment.

52 percent say Obama doesn't deserve re-election.

Wait until they get around to polling the other 48 percent.

Obama is in a different position then Clinton---Clinton wasn't the ideologue Obama is---Clinton could make an easier transition (and had executive experience)then Obama plus Clinton was controlled by a republican congress---the irony is Obama who had no executive experience showed it in the whole healthcare mess when ideologically he wanted to move in a certain direction but was compromised by the very lack of skills needed to get there. The even greater irony will be when we have a turnover in Nov. in congress and Obama will be a lameduck for 2 years---he is not a leader and will just be a guy that exists in the presidency without a plan reacting to situations---never in our history have we had a person so unqualified to be POTUS.

However, anyone wanting to play the game should bear in mind that according to this poll 49% give Obama a positive approval rating; two points higher than they gave Regan at a comparable stage in his presidency. Lol.

#17 | Posted by Doc_Sarvis

Bears repeating.

I'd like to see a poll of Obama vs a GNOPer. Obama vs Romney? Obama vs Huckabee? Palin?

Some of you folks are counting your chickens before they were a gleam in Cookfish's eyes.

I'd like to see a poll of Obama vs a GNOPer. Obama vs Romney? Obama vs Huckabee? Palin?

Some of you folks are counting your chickens before they were a gleam in Cookfish's eyes.

#30 | Posted by Corky

There was a poll awhile back and the repub Obama would have lost to was Huckabee.

-Clinton wasn't the ideologue Obama is

I needed a good laugh this morning. Thanks!

Both men are more pragmatic than ideological, Clinton was a DLCer when it wasn't that popular, and Obama has always been a compromiser and rewarder of the other side.

At Harvard, he chose conservatives to balance his Law Review committee over libs who helped him get the job, and as Pres he let the GNOP get the upper hand on health care over the summer by somewhat naively expecting responsible, patriotic consideration of issues important to the American people from GNOPers who had no such intentions in mind, only his Pres demise.

To say that he is an ideologue is to admit indoctrination by nonsensical and paranoid Muslim, Socialist, and Birther propaganda.

There was a poll awhile back and the repub Obama would have lost to was Huckabee.

#31 | Posted by matsop at 2010-02-17 09:28 AM

-There was a poll awhile back and the repub Obama would have lost to was Huckabee.

Must have been a Fox Gnus, World Nut Daily poll.

"Clinton wasn't the ideologue Obama is"

You can pretend all you want but Obama is far from an ideologue, however the majority of the Republicans in the Senate would qualify for that label. The one's who don't are simply yes men willing to obey their leadership and say NO to anything and everything, even ideas like the deficit commission which they co-sponsored.

I actually feel sorry for Obammy. After GWB destroyed America with Alan Greenspan and friends, I don't think anyone could have come in and wave a wand and made this better.

HOWEVER, We need to take AMERICA back.

1. ORDER A NEW 9/11 INVESTIGATION. If Obama could just do this one thing and see it through...

2. RON PAUL 2012.

3. END THE FED.

Until we show up with pitchforks and fire on the White House lawn I think it will just be assraping, I mean business as usual.

I'M NOT GONNA LEAVE YOU ALONE! YOU'VE GOT TO GET MAD! I AM A HUMAN BEING GOD DAMN IT! MY LIFE IS WORTH SOMETHING!

horribly misquoted from Network......

LOL! Huckabee's a fucking idiot

Capiitol = Capitol

Be Well.

This guy speaks according to the way the wind blows. Not presidential material. Fools put him there.

One can always count on a stupid comment from Betty O.

as Pres he let the GNOP get the upper hand on health care over the summer by somewhat naively expecting responsible, patriotic consideration of issues important to the American people from GNOPers who had no such intentions in mind, only his Pres demise.

#32 | Posted by Corky

A good laugh in return---?let the GNOP---give me a break---this guy blew it---a leader would not have allowed Pelosi and Reid unchecked movement to create something that a good percentage of "patriotic" Americans fought to stop. If he had been bipartisan from the start (as he promised)he had a chance to come to the American people with a good product---how in the world could he have "let the GNOP" when he held cards with the kind of majorities no other president in years held---just showed his weaknesses of lack of executive skills and lack of leadership. Cork, you're a fun guy supporting an incompetent that was a freak candidate in the history of this country manufactured by the usual power brokers.

I wonder what % of Americans still believe that the president is relevant?

My guess is that about an hour after the inauguration, the new POTUS is introduced to his controllers from the NSA. From that point on, he's just a figurehead till the next placeholder gets "elected" by "The People". What 52%, or 92%, of those people think, is irrelevant, yet entertaining.

Obama has aged ten years already. That's not just normal high-pressure stress, it's the effect of a terrible shock.

Another poll not in B.O.'s favor, another thread of excuses from the Masters Disciples.

The disapproval of Congress is much like 1994 and 2002. However, CNN's broadcast yesterday had one of the commentators making an interesting point. In both those years when a swing in Congress occurred, the majority of dissatisfaction was with the incumbent party. Today, there is greater dissatisfaction with the GOP than with the Dems according to national polling. Moreover, the GOP is deeply divided to the Tea Part movement (deeply divided itself). Unless the GOP pulls itself together, he can't hope to capitalize on any incumbent distaste.

Obama has aged ten years already. That's not just normal high-pressure stress, it's the effect of a terrible shock.

#42 | Posted by bellaspapa

After the election this poor guy with all his hubris probably was educated what it was all about.

Obama has aged ten years already. That's not just normal high-pressure stress, it's the effect of a terrible shock.

#42 | Posted by bellaspapa

After the election this poor guy with all his hubris probably was educated what it was all about.

#45 | Posted by matsop

In fact, Obama's naivete reminds me of corky.

Obama has aged ten years already. That's not just normal high-pressure stress, it's the effect of a terrible shock.

#42 | Posted by bellaspapa

Those Wednesday night shin digs at the crib aren't helping either.

48% said he shouldn't have been elected the first time.

#37 | Posted by dethspud at 2010-02-17 09:53 AM

The clip of our former governor Vilsack congratulating Canada on switching to 24 hour time was classic as well.

Obama still has more support than the senate and the house

WTF? And strokes kill fewer people than cancer or heart disease.

Good try Spudly...now back to your bong and mens figure skating.

The disapproval of Congress is much like 1994 and 2002. However, CNN's broadcast yesterday had one of the commentators making an interesting point. In both those years when a swing in Congress occurred, the majority of dissatisfaction was with the incumbent party. Today, there is greater dissatisfaction with the GOP than with the Dems according to national polling. Moreover, the GOP is deeply divided to the Tea Part movement (deeply divided itself). Unless the GOP pulls itself together, he can't hope to capitalize on any incumbent distaste.

#44 | Posted by Sycophant

Whistling past the graveyard. There's a large group of voters that will never trust the Obummer again because of what they see as his early "radical" policies---they'll make sure in Nov. that they elect people that'll keep him in check in the future until 2012.

Syco - you keep telling yourself that. Total up the people that say they are Republican - 27% and those who say they would support the Tparty 33%.

That is 60% of the population. The T Partier's are not Republican because they see the Repubs as selling out the country - They were supposed to be the party that cut spending - kept the budget under control - reduced the impact of government - but they didn't.

So you have 33% being strict constitutionalist and wanting to MASSIVELY reduce government - and the Rep. that have continued to spend - but slower than the DEMS.

This does not bode well for either liberal republicans (like McCain / Snow ect), Conservative Democrats (which is why Byah is out) and it CERTAINLY means that LIBERAL politians are on the ropes (Reid, Pelosi, Boxer).

We will see a swing but I think this is the start of the movement to dismantel the federal government.

"they'll make sure in Nov. that they elect people that'll keep him in check in the future until 2012."

And make sure those 39% increases in premiums keep on coming! Brilliant.

"Total up the people that say they are Republican - 27% and those who say they would support the Tparty 33%."

Never mind that many of them are both Teapartiers and Republicans.

Every Teapartier I know is also a registered Republican.

A question for my R friends-Who do you see
beating Obama in 2012?

A question for my R friends-Who do you see
beating Obama in 2012?

#55 | Posted by tiger150

Hillary

A question for my R friends-Who do you see
beating Obama in 2012?

Way too early to tell. Four years ago, I barely had heard the name "Obama", much less considered he'd be in the race and furthermore in the WH! In fact if you had asked that question to the D's four years ago, I'm sure 90% of them would have said that Hillary was the heir apparent

-Who do you see
beating Obama in 2012?

#55 | Posted by tiger150

Hillary

#56 | Posted by matsop a

If anyone here represents monumental naivete, it's this poster.

We will see a swing but I think this is the start of the movement to dismantel the federal government.

#52 | Posted by foshaffer at 2010-02-17 10:18 AM | Reply | Flag:

Say the federal government is dismantled---then what?

Only 20% of the country have any faith in Congress.

And yet 90% of them will be re-elected.

I think this is the start of the movement to dismantel the federal government.

#52 | Posted by foshaffer at 2010-02-17 10:18 AM | Reply | Flag:

Say the federal government is dismantled---then what?

#59 | Posted by Buffalo_Bob at 2010-02-17 10:40 AM | Reply

All of our problems will be magically solved.

A question for my R friends-Who do you see
beating Obama in 2012?

#55 | Posted by tiger150

Dick Cheney

Dick Cheney

The question was about beating, not shooting.

Total up the people that say they are Republican - 27% and those who say they would support the Tparty 33%.

That is 60% of the population.

It does not work that way.

However, when the poll participants were asked about their preferences in a three-way congressional contest with a Tea Party candidate on the ballot, the Democrat garnered 36 percent of votes, while the GOP candidate's support fell to around 25 percent. The hypothetical Tea Party candidate picked up 17 percent of the vote.

#55 - Paul Ryan or Mike Pence - or any combo of the two. (for now) Just about anybody could beat 000 right about now.

A question for my R friends-Who do you see
beating Obama in 2012?

#55 | Posted by tiger150 at 2010-02-17 10:28 AM

-Who do you see
beating Obama in 2012?

#55 | Posted by tiger150

Hillary

#56 | Posted by matsop a

If anyone here represents monumental naivete, it's this poster.

#58 | Posted by Corky at 2010-02-17 10:39 AM | Reply | Flag:

Hillary was the best candidate in 2012. Had the dem primary been held like the republican primary---Hillary wins. Had the dem primary been held like the general election---Hillary wins. Obama is in ofice only because the dem primary is flawed. If Hillary runs again, she wins. No one else has a chance. In three years many of the problems will be sorted out. But Hillary has very strong support.

Yeah, Bob. But she says she won't run again, and I think that's prolly true.

When you cave in to the imbedded world rulers on every issue, then it frankly doesn't matter if you get a second term, the next guy will do the same thing he would have done. You either obey or get scandalized, I bet they even offered him a Nobel Peace Prize if he were to increase afganistans military force.

they can do anything almost, except one thing
they can't fix the coming collapse this year.

Serves them right.

She's never recovered from the way her spineless backers suddenly vanished into The Darkness.

I fall in the undecided group. I am disappointed in his term thus far, but there is still time for him to learn from his mistakes and I believe he is a man who can learn from mistakes which is why I voted for him.

Don't take this POLLS to serious you Fox-Republicans. Remember one Fox Poll said that 35% Of their audience believes that we found WMD in IRAQ, WTF!!!!! An another poll found that 40% of Fox-Republicans believe that President of the United States is not a CITIZEN, WTF!!!!!! So see you Fucks in 2012 when we Re-Elect President Obama!!!!!

"Paul Ryan or Mike Pence"

Yeah, privatizing Social Security is a winning campaign promise.

Obama will produce Osama bin Laden just before the elections....

But this is NOT a Fox poll, it is a CNN/Opinion Research Corp poll.

"Hillary was the best candidate in 2012."

I don't know if that is true or not, I would have voted for her if she was the nominee. I think though, that right about now Hillary is thinking she dodged a bullet, even her husband Bill would have sinking poll numbers in the midst of a depression, with GNOPers preventing any reform of health care or anything else, two wars still draining the Treasury, etc. She even said her job as Sec. of State is too demanding to serve a second term and I think the job of President would only be more so.

Obama will produce Osama bin Laden just before the elections....

#74 | Posted by daprof at 2010-02-17 10:59 AM | Reply | Flag

Osama will never go to trial. Osama will never be caught or killed by the US. He may already be dead.

Who do you see
beating Obama in 2012?

#55 | Posted by tiger150

Hillary

#56 | Posted by matsop a

If anyone here represents monumental naivete, it's this poster.

#58 | Posted by Corky

If anyone here represents monumental naivete, it's the bobbing cork---that answer was tongue in cheek and Cork, stranger things have happened like a guy writing 2 books (for experience) becoming president. Let's see, Hillary now has her experience in international affairs (which she lacked last time) and Obummer may be so ineffective in 3 years the Clintons may mount their challenge---it'll be her last chance---don't count it out my naive fishing bobber.

oh man...just read all of the excuses and people getting ready to make some sort of reason why this is happening other than he sucks.
and look REAL close at the headline..
it says..CNN POLL........not exactly the network of choice for the KKK or john birch society..,.(is that even still around)

THE END IS NEAR BOys....so lets get those mental health for liberals clinics up and running for suicide watches.....

hee hee hee hee hee hee

Yeah, Bob. But she says she won't run again, and I think that's prolly true.

#68 | Posted by Corky

Hillary--truth---oxymoron?---
once again, Cork you show your naivete---if the opportunity is there she'll run.

Osama will never go to trial. Osama will never be caught or killed by the US. He may already be dead.

#77 | Posted by Buffalo_Bob

I agree, Bob, the odds are this guy is history.

-She even said her job as Sec. of State is too demanding to serve a second term and I think the job of President would only be more so.

True enough. But then, Oxy morons like Matslop and His Rushians wouldn't know the truth if it bit them on the ass...... they would just think that was David Dreier again.

The question was about beating, not shooting.

#63 | Posted by Corky

Oh, OK. Your Weiner.

The void is having a leader, who sans rhetoric, can define a real agenda and the underlying steps to get there and deliver the 'entire' program to Congress... noone really knows, past the campaign rhetoric, where Oboner really wants to go.. or any detail of how to get there... this is a serious flaw that shows the absence of real leadership.. he sits back and lets pelosi and reed carry the ball and destroy any real sense of partisanship... he is careful to stay on the perimeter until his wags can get a pulse of which side to come down with in support...
he can claim that he reaches out, but as long as that pair are given full control, this country will continue to spiral down... his reaching out is also just more rhetoric, without substance.. not to defend the Repubs.. just the facts
this guy needs some serious training in leadership.. sad, that as a country, we have to suffer over his real voids..

Hillary was the best candidate in 2012. Had the dem primary been held like the republican primary---Hillary wins. Had the dem primary been held like the general election---Hillary wins. Obama is in ofice only because the dem primary is flawed. If Hillary runs again, she wins. No one else has a chance. In three years many of the problems will be sorted out. But Hillary has very strong support.

#67 | Posted by Buffalo_Bob at 2010-02-17 10:49 AM | Reply | Flag: Flag: (Choose)
FunnyNewsworthyOffensiveAbusiv
e

Yeah, Bob. But she says she won't run again, and I think that's prolly true.

#68 | Posted by Corky

Now, Cork, let's be consistent. Bob seems to think Hillary may run in 3 years. Where's your monumental naivete post for ol Bob?

The void is having a leader, who sans rhetoric, can define a real agenda and the underlying steps to get there and deliver the 'entire' program to Congress... noone really knows, past the campaign rhetoric, where Oboner really wants to go.. or any detail of how to get there... this is a serious flaw that shows the absence of real leadership.. he sits back and lets pelosi and reed carry the ball and destroy any real sense of partisanship... he is careful to stay on the perimeter until his wags can get a pulse of which side to come down with in support...
he can claim that he reaches out, but as long as that pair are given full control, this country will continue to spiral down... his reaching out is also just more rhetoric, without substance.. not to defend the Repubs.. just the facts
this guy needs some serious training in leadership.. sad, that as a country, we have to suffer over his real voids..

#84 | Posted by drsoul

Thank you for a lucid and rational post.

Hillary was the best candidate in 2012.

Is BoOB from the future? WAS the best in 2012? Last I checked, the year was 2010.

Last I checked, the year was 2010.

#87 | Posted by kanrei

He'll post a youtube video proving it's 2012.

All the anti-Obama posts depend on one thing.....that the poster ignore the elephant in the room.....the deep recession. You can pretend all you want but anyone willing to consider the poll numbers honestly would have to admit that his poll numbers are connected directly to employment numbers. If jobs begin to appear his numbers will go right back up just like Clinton's did. As the Clintons proved, "it's the economy stupid." Obama is dealing with the worst economic disaster since the Great Depression, his future will depend on how well he can revive the patient left to die by Bush/Paulson/Greenspan. If he does indeed revive it he may actually start to qualify for that Messiah nickname because it will be much like Jesus raising Lazarus from the dead.

"Is BoOB from the future? WAS the best in 2012? Last I checked, the year was 2010."

Maybe he thinks Howard Dean will go back to running the DNC. I seem to remember Dean touting Obama, Hillary and Edwards as the three best candidates the dems have ever fielded in a presidential election.lol

You can pretend all you want but anyone willing to consider the poll numbers honestly would have to admit that his poll numbers are connected directly to employment numbers.

#89 | Posted by danni at 2010-02-17 11:30 AM

I don't know if that is true or not, I would have voted for her if she was the nominee. I think though, that right about now Hillary is thinking she dodged a bullet, even her husband Bill would have sinking poll numbers in the midst of a depression, with GNOPers preventing any reform of health care or anything else, two wars still draining the Treasury, etc. She even said her job as Sec. of State is too demanding to serve a second term and I think the job of President would only be more so.

#76 | Posted by danni

It's not about dodging bullets; it's the title and the power these type of folks pine for----even with this situation, she would have given her left ovary to be president and go down in history as the first woman president---with these folks it's all about ME and hillary is right on the top of the list.

"Perhaps Obama can write up another bailout for big bankers"

You mean like the one Bush pushed through???

It's a bit far to predict 2012--let's wait for the weekedn before the election to make solid predictions.

We have to get through the mid term elections and see how the country votes on that...

The one John McCain supported??

The one Hank Paulson said we needed so that we could avoid a deep depression???

Is BoOB from the future? WAS the best in 2012? Last I checked, the year was 2010."

#90 | Posted by crispee_oc

Maybe you've been giving Bob the short stick all the time and he's way ahead of you with his Time Machine. Maybe that gives him knowledge he's been criticized for having---smokestacks on the moon--don't sell Bob short.

#92 | Posted by matsop

Old Clinton Haters never die, they just smel....er, post like it.

"don't sell Bob short."

He's a tremendous slouch...

danni post 89

I dont know young lady...this time seems to be quite different in many aspects.
there is a lot more people who know whats going on and a lot more who are involved now than every before..irony is that OBAMA and dems are responsible for all those NEW people to this process.

Yes, the economy does ring true in people's minds and disposition, but it does not change the fact that there is no real leadership substance in Oboner.. that has been displayed in many ways other than the issues of the economy... leaders are born, actors are trained... the real difference..

Bayh Bayh Obama!

ah yes hillary

anyone see the interviews with ken starr about the trouble that hillary was ALMOST in concerning whitewater.........ah but its all going to be okay...

dems...it wont hurt but for just a little while..and while we are at it.

Im reading an interesting book by fred barnes.
an inside look into the bush presidency and its pretty revealing.

FOR instance....in 04 bush read a book by M chrichton called "state of fear" that had in it a story line of 'the villian falsifies sceintific studies to justify draconian steps to curb global warming".,...

pretty ironic huh?

He's set to outspend FDR... Which would seem almost impossible when you realize that FDR fought WWII. Hard times coming to the USA for sure. We are going to need a new party to replace the Democrats which seem to be facing extinction in the House and Senate. GO Tea Party!

NO I Know what many of you are asking yourslef

you are wondering what my post 103 has to do with the subject and you are also wondering why IM posting that when I have such other groundbreaking and marvelous other posts to make.

well let me ESPLAIN it to you LUCY>..( for you young punks, thats a tv reference..)

global warming HOAX is yet another reason why dems are out of thier ass in a few months and why barry may be also.

We are going to need a new party to replace the Democrats which seem to be facing extinction in the House and Senate.

Riiiiiiiiiiiiiiight.

If they lose another 40 or so seats, they'll only have as many as the current Republicans.

#100...you are right in many ways.. this guy came in on a new wave of what will probably also prove to be a mass of 'one time voters' for change, but also the first black President, where certain ones want that prominence of being able to say they voted the first black in office (and the point of this is about leadership, not race). Even a lot of those voters are disenchanted by the lack of leadership.. a lot of them will not be back at the polls..
but, the new generation of voters are much more aware and not as apathetic about Congress.. like it or not, Byah does have a point..there needs to be a cleanup and new faces... a seat in Congress was never meant to be a 'career civil service' position...

"..irony is that OBAMA and dems are responsible for all those NEW people to this process."

I don't doubt that is true, our first black president certainly did provoke a dramatic reaction from those screaming "I want my country back!"
Now whether you think that was due to anything he proposed or if you think it had to do with "other" considerations is a matter that we all have to decide for ourselves. I know what I think and I am quite sure it is different from what you admit you think.

"Even a lot of those voters are disenchanted by the lack of leadership.. a lot of them will not be back at the polls.."

Is "lack of leadership" the talking point for today???
Meaningless nonsense.
You want to talk "lack of leadership"...try "just go shopping" as advice for citizens after 9-11.

New 000 billboard:

so obama tauts bipartisanship and reaching out blah, blah, blah, after losing mass. then bayh quits and talks about the brain dead partisanhip killing dc, but your boy does a speech, mocking, bashing and lying about repubs. this is why he is killing his own party, arrogance, stupidity and incompentence like bush never displayed. i cant understand his thinking. whatever fuck this piece of shit, he is done.

It is really amusing when discussing a point about the lack of leadership in the present administration, that the ONLY response some can come up with is to contiually compare to Bush or some other President...very elementary minds..
we have to deal with what we have today..yesterday is gone, regardless of what always rolls forward..and, I felt the same about Bush as Oboner
hard to stick on point when you have no real answer, I understand...!!
his reelection is a lot about his leadership...
leadership is certainly not 'meaningless nonsense'.. we elect leaders to be just that.. when there is a complete void, it does make a huge difference..

"then bayh quits and talks about the brain dead partisanhip killing dc"

Did you even listen to Bayh??? When he mentioned the Republicans who co-sponsored the deficit commission bill and then voted against it???

"Perhaps Obama can write up another bailout for big bankers"

You mean like the one Bush pushed through???

#93 | Posted by danni

You mean like the one Bush pushed through a Democrat-controlled House of Representatives???

This is why some people actually think Bush was great.

How much was passed by the Democrat-controlled House under Bush compared to what was not passed by the Republican-uncontrolled House under Obama.

"contiually compare to Bush or some other President..."

Who else would you compare a president to???

In order to evaluate anything you need criteria with which to judge performance, really the only criteria available is the historical record.
You righties don't like references to Bush because you know just as I know he fucked up the country and now you want to distance yourselves from the man you voted for twice so you can shift the blame to the guy who INHERITED the worst economic disaster since the Great Depression.
I don't care how many times y'all say we can't look back, I will continue to remind you and remind everyone who created this mess.

"How much was passed by the Democrat-controlled House under Bush compared to what was not passed by the Republican-uncontrolled House under Obama."

Says much more about the willingness of Democrats to work bi-partisanly than it does about the willingness of REpublicans to actually deal with the problems the country faces.

i wrote this little ditty after reading the current White House, congressional and senate poll numbers.... Hope ya like it....

Well.... Here goes....

Bayh Bahy Pelosi..... Bayh Bayh Harry Reid.... Bayh Bayh Democrats.... The left is gonna cry......... The left is gonna cry....

Bayh Bahy Pelosi..... Bayh Bayh Harry Reid.... Bayh Bayh Democrats.... The left is gonna cry......... The left is gonna cry....

Hello higher insurance rates, hello deficits

If Republicans gain back power.

In order to evaluate anything you need criteria with which to judge performance, really the only criteria available is the historical record.

Wow. Obama has his bar set pretty low. I was hoping for better. I'm getting tired of hearing the obamamamas claiming that Obama is great because he's better than Bush. LOL Why not compare him to FDR, Ike, or other good presidents? Or more recently, the darling of the left, Clinton? Why use the bottom of the barrel for your standard?

"Says much more about the willingness of Democrats to work bi-partisanly than it does about the willingness of REpublicans to actually deal with the problems the country faces." - Danni

So long as the bill had more spending the Democrats were all for it.

Kind of makes the argument "its all Republicans fault the last 8 years" fall on deaf ears, it would appear from your statement the Democrats had a willing hand in them.

You mean like the one Bush pushed through???

#93 | Posted by danni at 2010-02-17 11:37 AM

#115...Analyzing performance has really nothing to do with a predecessor or anyone else, only the person who is being analyzed.. you base it on a measurement of his own success based on the performance of his directives and influence, and on the merits of any achievements on his own... maybe you have never been in management or on a board of directors where you had this responsibility..
as to being a rightie and voting for Bush, you obviously still do not understand 'independent' and people like you, for self defense, have to always 'box' someone in for your triteness..
yes, Oboner inherited a mess, but there are MANY other components to his job responsibility and he has not had a good report card on any of them.. as to references to Bush, I do not think there is really a 'dimes difference' in the two... much more alike than people can honestly admit...

The one Obama voted with Bush on, then appointed Geithner (of all the people) to oversee!

"Did you even listen to Bayh??? When he mentioned the Republicans who co-sponsored the deficit commission bill and then voted against it???'

I believe he also said to vote out all incumbents. Of course in your world that only means repubs, seeing as the dems have done such a fine job since 2007.

don't doubt that is true, our first black president certainly did provoke a dramatic reaction from those screaming "I want my country back!"
Now whether you think that was due to anything he proposed or if you think it had to do with "other" considerations is a matter that we all have to decide for ourselves. I know what I think and I am quite sure it is different from what you admit you think.

#108 | Posted by danni at

your racist attack on tea party people is tired and old...come up with something new UNLIKE the liberal media..
its tired and old because of an interview I heard just this morning from a black woman conservative who proves that your racist attack is unfounded when you paint the old movement with it.

Hello higher insurance rates, hello deficits

If Republicans gain back power.

#118 | Posted by danni at 2010

oh danni girl

TELL ME you didnt just predict deficits as some sort of BAD thing.
uh...have you read anything about the OBAMA DEFICITS lately...

surely you must have spilled your coffee and typed that by mistake...

DANNI......

"other" considerations

The Racial Card?? Are you for real man?

How about the OUT OF CONTROL SPENDING?

Folks on both sides here are constantly full of it...

You let your side slide for ANYTHING.

President Obama is just as white as anyone else.....

Race has nothing to do with it, Obama is just as white as Jimmy Carter

Also a one term president.

This notion that Race is always the deciding factor when it comes to this President is absurd and getting very old.

The health plan and the Blatant BRIBERY that went on in order to get Democrats to vote for it are to blame....

The Constant use of Executive Powers, People want to know how the hell HUGO CHAVEZ got into the White House... Because that is how this President is Acting.

Putting America on a path to an 16 TRILLION DOLLAR DEBT may be fine with most of the Left leaning folks here on the drudge.....

From the last poll numbers, It would seem that 56% of the people in America do not agree with you.

78% of the American people do not agree with you when it comes to the House and the Shenanigans that went on with the Democrats STEALING MONEY to pay for votes and then BRAGGING ABOUT IT ON TELEVISION

Remember this phrase because it is without a doubt and unequivocally what led to the future demise of the Democratic Party in America. "It's not $100 million, it's $300 million, and I'm proud of it" Also known as "The Louisiana Purchase."

The fact that Democratic voters didn't revolt over this statement and what went on with that issue is further proof that Liberalism is a Mental Disorder

Bailing out casino capitalist speculators on the winning side of A.I.G.'s debt swaps and CDO derivatives didn't save a single job. It certainly hasn't lowered the economy's debt overhead. But matters will soon improve, if Congress will dispel the present cloud of "uncertainty" as to whether any agency less friendly than the Federal Reserve might regulate the banks.

Paulson spelled out in step-by-step detail the strategy of "doing God's work," as his Goldman Sachs colleague Larry Blankfein sanctimoniously explained Adam Smith's invisible hand. The pro-financial free-market doctrine is achieving the status of religion. Neoliberal economics may be a travesty of religion, but it is the closest thing to a Church that Americans have these days, replete with its Inquisition operating out of Chicago, Harvard and Columbia.

Having created the crisis, Wall Street wants to use its momentum to knock out any potential checks to its power. Blame the victims! (We've heard plenty of that bullshit on this site)

Paulson explains that the Treasury is bare, having used $13 trillion to bail out high finance in 2008-09. So he warns us not to run a Keynesian-type budget deficit. The economy thus is to be sacrificed to Wall Street rather than reforming finance so that it serves the economy more productively.

What is left out of account is that today's financial crisis, centered on public debts, is largely a fiscal caused by replacing progressive taxation with regressive taxes and untaxing finance and real estate. Since American independence, education has been financed by the property tax. But California's Prop 13 has "freed" property from taxation so that its rental value can be borrowed against and turned into interest payments to banks. California's real estate costs are just as high with its property taxes frozen, but the rising rental value of land has been paid to the banks forcing the state to slash its fiscal budget or else raise taxes on labor and consumers. (Prop 13 was written to save elderly retired people but Courts have applied it to Corporate property thus escaping tax increases as long as the Corporation lives)

Throughout the world, scaling back the 20th century's legacy of progressive taxation and untaxing real estate and finance has led to a public debt crisis. Property income hitherto paid to governments is now paid to the banks. And although Wall Street has extracted $13 trillion in bailouts just since October 2008, the thought of raising taxes on wealth to pay just $1 trillion over an entire decade for Social Security or health insurance is deemed a crisis that would lead Wall Street to shut down the economy. It is telling governments to shift to a regressive tax system to make up the fiscal shortfall by raising taxes on labor and cutting back public spending on the economy at large. This is what is plunging economies from California to Greece and the Baltics into fiscal and financial crisis. Wall Street's solution to balance the budget by cutting back the government's social contract and deregulating finance all the more will shrink the economy and make the budget deficits even more severe.

Financial speculators no doubt will clean up on the turmoil.

Excerpted from Michael Hudson @ Counterpunch

"TELL ME you didnt just predict deficits as some sort of BAD thing."

Unlike you I thought they were a bad thing when REagan, Bush 1 and Bush 2 were creating them.
Unlike you my opinion of deficits isn't dependent upon who is in the WH.
I never read a single post of yours mentioning the word deficit until Obama became president.

"Race has nothing to do with it, Obama is just as white as Jimmy Carter

Also a one term president."

Possibly so, I sure hope he doesn't get replaced with another advocate of Voo Doo economics and big deficits like Reagan.

Hello higher insurance rates, hello deficits

If Republicans gain back power.

#118 | Posted by danni at 2010-02-17 12:35 PM | Reply | Flag:

Exactly - which is why a CONSERVATIVE needs to gain power.

RCADE, can you please place a disclaimer at the begining of all DANNIs posts: DEM=GOOD, REPUB=BAD
It would save the rest of us having to read her nonsense.

DANNI - name one good thing Bush did. I can name one good thing obammy did just this week. But I bet you will have a stroke if you even attempt to type something good about a Republican. You are the most ideologically misguided individual on the DR - well, you and HERM. You are wrong on almost everything. How is that possible? Economics, social issues, foreign policy.

If Cheney really believes the things he has
been saying, he should run. Does anyone really
believe he could win? Obama entered the national
stage at the DNC convention in 2004 when he delivered
the keynote address. Its difficult to see a
strong challenger who could emerge the way he did in
2008.

I know so many of you love Palin, but you have
to figure that she would be savaged during the
primaries over quitting mid term. Where would
she get strong support outside of the South?
Romney? Too stiff and uptight-he's a handsome
version of John Kerry. Pawlenty or Jindhal?
Too wimpy. I think it is revealing that in a
recent poll, Scott Brown was the 4th most popular
R for the Presidency. Palin was 1st.

Unless someone comes out of nowhere, Obama could win in 2012 by default. Especially if the job
numbers improve and they probably will.

P.S. Hillary is not going to challenge him for
the nomination.

DANNI - name one good thing Bush did.

#131 | Posted by ELCIDCE90 at 2010-02-17 01:03 PM

"DANNI - name one good thing Bush did."

Fired Rumsfeld.
Left office.

There that's two things, now you ELCID name something Obama has done right.

"Exactly - which is why a CONSERVATIVE needs to gain power."

You and every other REPUBLICAN pretending to be a conservative this week will vote for whoever the Republicans nominate.
Y'all aren't conservatives, you don't even know what a conservative is.

I love that in a thread that's supposed to be about how much of a turd Obama is, ElCid comes in with his Bush butt-hurtedness and unintentionally reminds us all that it's difficult to think of one thing Bush did right.

Unlike you I thought they were a bad thing when REagan, Bush 1 and Bush 2 were creating them.
Unlike you my opinion of deficits isn't dependent upon who is in the WH.
I never read a single post of yours mentioning the word deficit until Obama became president.

#129 | Posted by danni

you may have to look it up but I have stated for a long time that he spent too much money but you avoided my point..

YOU are the one who is excusing the deficits..RECORD HIGH deficits because of who is in the WH...

I think this is the start of the movement to dismantel the federal government.
#52 | Posted by foshaffer at 2010-02-17 10:18 AM | Reply | Flag:
Say the federal government is dismantled---then what?
#59 | Posted by Buffalo_Bob at 2010-02-17 10:40 AM | Reply

All of our problems will be magically solved.
#61 | Posted by 726 at 2010-02-17 10:41 AM | Reply | Flag: Flag: (Choose)
FunnyNewsworthyOffensiveAbusiv
e

726 & Bob,

The answer is we would get the Government back to where it should be 1) Defend the country 2) create a level playing field for business 3) get the hell out of the way.

For every 71K employee in the federal government (which is now the average pay in DC) a business has to produce 1.33M in revenue. The large the amount of government employees the more drain on the private sector.

Removing just 50,000 from government would result in a reduction of 15B in government overhead and an increase of 93 B in available capital to businesses. This would result in an increase of 98,000 more PRIVATE employees. A net increase 48K jobs, a reduction of the deficit from the cost side an increase of 4B in tax revenue to the government creating a total reduction of 19B.

This is out of 3M employees for the Fed and 5M for the states - less than .006 of the total government employment. Think the magnitude of impact by cutting the work force by 10%. 800K government jobs gone would result in the creation of 1.56M private sector jobs, a reduction of 340 B in the deficit. Take out the Pork (kill the "Stimulas") and you save another 800B ...we can almost get to the point of balancing the budget.

More Freedom, more people employed, lower taxes, less red tape, more financially supportable government.

No ..not all problems solved - but a great step in the right direction.

big deficits like Reagan.

#130 | Posted by danni at 2010-02-17 01:00 PM | Reply | Flag: Flag: (Choose)
FunnyNewsworthyOffensiveAbusiv
e

and you say it again...
damn...I wouldnt be worried about the deficit getting bigger...can IT GET ANY Bigger than obama's deficits.

Ill tell you some good things about bush since IM reading about him rather than just remembering what the lying sack of shit media and dems keep going with..

LIBS WARNED him that killing the anti ballistic missle treaty would restart the cold war
russias response? putin called it a 'mistake'
LIBS WRONG AGAIN

when he withdrew from the comprehensive test ban treaty...libs said that all the world would rush to get nukes..
ONCE AGAin libS wrong except for iran and n korea which they all have a part in

and at the state of the union in 05 just after dan rather LIED his ass off about "W" he STILl invited the lying sack of shit to the white house anchor lunch..a sign of class and integrity....MISSING in the white house from 92-2000 and NOW on the missing list as well.

OOPS forgot his best comment

when tony blair told "W" that chirac was someone who he needed to talk to.
bush's response?? NO>.."he's an asshole"..

ah yes...RIGHT ON bro

so you see..I prefer to read history rather than to just make it up

Woot, and there is danni, blaming bush...lol what a libtard. keep making up your own.. "facts" as you want to call them, the truth is, your a socialist, 100% just like obama

"Removing just 50,000 from government would result in a reduction of 15B in government overhead and an increase of 93 B in available capital to businesses. This would result in an increase of 98,000 more PRIVATE employees."

Where did you get this fairy tale???

AND TODAY>>
|TWO MORE reasons why barry HAS TO GO

jamie goerlick says....remember her...

that in the case of a 'cyber crisis' that we THE PEOPLE should not expect for our cell phones to remain..'private'....
WOW just imagine if someone in the bush WH had said this...

and his appointee to a MIDDLE EAST advisory committe MAY have made statments SUPPORTING a terrorists who is IN JAIL TODAY for raising money for alguaida..

and THOSE are just two reasons why

barak hussein obama
barak hussien obama
hey hey ho ho
HE"s got to go

mmmmmm mmmmmmmmmmmmm mmmmmmmmmmmm

I'm willing to wager the homeless do not vote for him next time around:

keep trying danni
Ill check in later to see if you still havent given it up...lol

hasta laredo

Warning to fed:

I think these numbers are staggeringly good for Obama, considering the high unemployment out there.

Your President Obama has QUADRUPLED the Deficit in little more than one year... Comparing that to the deficit of the Reagan years is like comparing the size of the moon to the size of the sun......

In case you need to look that up, The Sun is somewhat bigger there Danni.

Snoofy... You're killing me dude...

"Comparing that to the deficit of the Reagan years is like comparing the size of the moon to the size of the sun......"

First Reagan had little interest to pay on the small debt he inherited. Obama's budget has to include hundreds of billions just to cover the interest on the debts left behind by REagan, Bush and Bush. Secondly, Reagan didn't inherit two wars.
Third Reagan didn't inherit a depression requiring government stimulus to prevent the economy from getting even worse.

Hello Danni..

Proof that I am not an ass in total..

Never thought I would be typing thus

President Obama is doing an awesome job with killing Terrorists in Pakistan. All the Partisan blathering about the Underwear bomber aside.... The man is a stone killer when it comes to the Taliban and Al-Qaeda. He should be commended for his efforts. I think we are safer in this nation due to his efforts in regard to Al-Qaeda having opportunity to plan attacks on the US.. The only thing those assholes are planning in Pakistan is where to hide next.

This is why we saw a shift in planning to YEMEN. Which also seems to be getting addressed.

GOOD JOB MISTER PRESIDENT!

Could it be possible that I'M only Half assed?

Hmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmm

Reagan-BushI-BushII $10.3 Trillion in deficits (a back door attack on entitlements by evil motherfuckers)

Carter-Clinton $700 billion in deficits

Bernanke-Greenspan-Geithner- Paulson-Rubin-Summers RIPPOFF $13 trillion so far.

Obama $1.3 trillion in deficits.

Now we have no political will to find $1 trillion for entitlements. Wake up America, you are being screwed again, by the same greedfuckers.

#155 | Posted by nutcase at 2010-02-17 02:28 PM | Reply | Flag

I don't agree that Obama should have 1.3 trillion attributed to him. Most of that was stimulus started by the last administration, and the remainder wasn't really an option. Had Obama not followed through, banks would have failed and with them, many businesses, and with the businesses, hundreds of thousands, if not millions of jobs would have been lost. People say---let the banks fail---until they realise that the business they work for would have lost everything and they would be out of a job. That money had to be spent because of the economic conditions Obama inherited from the republicans---why people want more of republican mismanagement is really confusing---they want more Bush. Obama is faulted by me for not placing more regulations on the banks to prevent the same thing from happening again---but not for the stimulus money spent.

#92 | Posted by matsop

Old Clinton Haters never die, they just smel....er, post like it.

#98 | Posted by Corky

Don't hate the Clintons---just stating what is so predictable about them---just as it's so predictable about what Corky is going to post before he posts it---Corky is so easy.

obama sucks the big dick

This must be a racist poll.

I love that obama's also has managed to piss off a on on the left also.

"someone else" ALWAYS wins this kind of poll.

Try substituting a name of an actual politician in place of 'someone else' and things get a lot more meaningful.

Any of you 'tards like to suggest a single GOPiggie or Teabagger that could get within 30%?

BB,

I'm not picking on Obama with that number, which is his own projection. The numbers show the Rethuglicans are the primary problem. But, everything Reagan-BushI-BushII did is dwarfed by what Wall Street did in a blink, through fraud. They are the problem and they own Washington. Not only do they tax everyone without representation through a variety of skimming schemes, they routinely defraud others through marketing schemes and manipulation of commodity markets.

I not pleased or surprised by Obama's seeming failure to change. He has promised less than people think and after defeating Hillary that became so apparent Nader entered the race and he became the only honest choice.

Clinton looked dead in the water in '94 and he won a second term.

Polls such as these are meaningless.

I love that obama's also has managed to piss off a on on the left also.

Do you think it might be an indication Obama isn't actually a leftist?

Snoopy,

He's been about as far left as he's able on domestic issues, but he's (so far) shown genuine resolve toward righting Afghanistan and has pissed off his base in the process. He campaigned on that shit and actually appears poised to follow-through on it.

Credit to our prez. on this one.

obama sucks the big dick

#158 | Posted by reinsurelaw

I have to disagree with you on that one--- I won't let him near me.

MATS-
It's a smaller issue for me.

MATS-
It's a smaller issue for me.

#168 | Posted by OohRah

It's one of those hardships I've had to accept my entire life.

he's (so far) shown genuine resolve toward righting Afghanistan and has pissed off his base in the process.

I'm borderline on this. I'm not sure how to tell if our presence in Afghanistan is doing more harm than good. I don't have a sense of what a metric for success in Afghanistan might be.

I do feel that one thing has improved -- we are at least allowed to use diplomacy now. If our plan is in part to pit the Taliban against A.Q., it seems unlikely that could happen if we refuse to talk to either.

In other news, I just made some soup and it's really delicious.

MATS-
It's a smaller issue for me.

#168 | Posted by OohRah

That surprises me----I would think your moniker is equivalent to your progenitor and when it's observed the response is probably OooooooooooRaaaah.

I'm borderline on this.

In other news, I just made some soup and it's really delicious.

#170 | Posted by snoofy

Oorah, Snoop obviously is borderline on this and don't you think if he spent less time in the soup and worked out, he could enhance his situation?

I had some delicious beef and cabbage soup for dinner.

I had some delicious beef and cabbage soup for dinner.

#173 | Posted by goatman

Goat probably wonders where the beef is.

How amazing it is that Only 52% think he should be sent packing!

If we had a decent education system in this country that actually taught our Constitution and our history to students, perhaps we wouldn't have a citizenry that accepts a president that is taking over (or wishes to take over) one industry after another (including our health care system) raising taxes despite his promise not to raise taxes on 95 % of the people, appointing Czars answerable only to him that are making policy decisions that affect our freedoms and our wallets (how can a Pay Czar be American!"), cap and tax legislation (despite the whole global warming hoax coming to light), and telling us his stimulus package has created or saved millions of jobs as the reality of it is so evident before our eyes with overall 17% unemployment.

Maybe the pres can't see the misery outside Washington, since that town is literally booming with all the government (union) workers he has put on Our payroll.

This president is a professorial dufus who couldn't run a 7-11 if his life depended on it, and very few of his advisers, etc., have ever done anything other than live off the government tit. No wonder they don't know what they are doing...

We will be lucky to survive this president, given his policy of giving Miranda rights to terrorists and spending our country into bankruptcy.

kssntell is profoundly delusional

Thus far the unfinished health care bill is a giveaway to Big Pharma & Insurance just like Shrub. The correct 17% unemployment figure he quotes is a result of selling out to Wall Street by offshoring. Rethuglicans are waiting anxiously for their turn at the trough and if Obama doesn't concede to more of Wall Street's demands they will move all donations to the pigs in the other party.

Incompetent idiot! IMPEACH THE zero before he weakens this nation beyond repair!

Blah blah blah more stupidity from Betty O. Hey dipshit what law has he broken?

"The President, Vice President, and all civil officers of the United States" who may only be impeached and removed for "treason, bribery, or other high crimes and misdemeanors"

Sorry, BETTY. Bush's last day in office was January 20th, 2009. "Mission Accomplished" on weakening this nation (possibly) beyond repair - in only 8 years!!

Betty is a hit and run idiot, one comment and the brain dead idiot usually slithers out of here.

what law has he broken?

I was about to ask the same question.

He won fair and square - deal with it.

Most of that was stimulus started by the last administration, and the remainder wasn't really an option. Had Obama not followed through, banks would have failed and with them, many businesses, and with the businesses, hundreds of thousands, if not millions of jobs would have been lost. People say---let the banks fail---until they realise that the business they work for would have lost everything and they would be out of a job. That money had to be spent because of the economic conditions Obama inherited from the republicans---why people want more of republican mismanagement is really confusing---they want more Bush. Obama is faulted by me for not placing more regulations on the banks to prevent the same thing from happening again---but not for the stimulus money spent.

#156 | Posted by Buffalo_Bob at 2010-02-17 03:06 PM | Reply | Flag: Flag: (Choose)
FunnyNewsworthyOffensiveAbusiv
e

one thing you and others refuse to even mention most of the time..
OBAMA VOTED FOR each of the bush votes like on tarp and such....

its tired and old because of an interview I heard just this morning from a black woman conservative who proves that your racist attack is unfounded when you paint the old movement with it.
babler

once again no source, no name. i'll take a stab.....condi rice?

and goerlick is correct and anybody that is in the IT community knows that.

go back to teachin 6th grade band you idiot.

OBAMA VOTED FOR each of the bush votes like on tarp and such....
babbler

bush had a vote? what were other bush votes?