deserved defeat, it is this guy who wants to change America into just another weak, dreary Socialist Nation. If it can happen to Britain, France and Germany, it can happen here. People are people. Jim Webster
All you can say in the defense of Britain, France, and Germany is that their form of socialism was sort of new at the time - maybe some of the people who allowed it to happen didn't know any better or were weakened in the post WWII environment. What gets me is that even with their stagnant economies and societies as examples and warnings, there are those here who would knowingly take us down the same path.
The "Mainstream" Media: By liberals. For liberals.
They sold us out and don't do their job TEACHING ABOUT THE PROBLEMS of the world and in history. No objective look at things since many do not hold values that coincide with the values of our constitution. They don't care about the facts and I would think that is TREASON. M-B
"What gets me is that even with their stagnant economies and societies as examples and warnings, there are those here who would knowingly take us down the same path."
That's what's so mind-boggling. These countries are worse off than America in almost every way economically and more, yet so many here in the U.S. insist WE'RE the ones doing everything wrong.
Remember, there's not a single example of government intervention in the U.S., where the intervention has improved cost or quality. Yet, every time liberals are faced with a new big government program, they leap on board. "This time we can do it right!"
It's the same with the socialism examples you just named. Those countries aren't doing badly because socialism is wrong, it's because they implemented it wrong. "This time we can do it right!"
Yet, many liberals point to any number of programs and features of the European model of socialism as examples for us to follow. I think they - at least the well-intentioned among them - sometimes confuse European culture with their economics system. For example, France's economy is permanently stagnant, even though the tourist areas of Paris are still charming and vibrant.
The "Mainstream" Media: By liberals. For liberals.
Having recently traveled in the UK (Scotland, Ireland, Wales, and England) we saw lots of the BBC...ALL of the programs dealing with the "health care" there were negative, dealing with the problems of people trying to deal with the system.
You're right, and even if a lot of Americans fought in WWII, our country did not experience the incredible devastation and loss of civilian lives that Western Europe and Russia did. The only thing comparable for us would be our Civil War. Most Americans, including me, have no idea what that kind of wide scale destruction would be like.
Having said that, I hardly think that a recession such as we are in now is reason to radically transform America into a socialistic nation, which is clearly the goal of the left.
Like past radicals, they will use any crisis as an opportunity to tear down the system and replace it with one where they hold all the power. Just ask ol' Rahm...
The "Mainstream" Media: By liberals. For liberals.
...because Obama is not Der Schlickmeister. He cannot change his spots, as it were.
Obama has not spent his entire life on wanting to become POTUS like Slick Willie did. He, instead, spent it surrounding himself with and listening to socialists, communists, black liberation theologists, free market capitalism haters and similar and we are seeing the result of that tutelage with his poor health care reform pressers and "town halls".
He cannot come up with a few bullet points that can galvanize support for "health care" reform because he is not actually seeking to reform health care in this country. What he really wants is to grow government bigger and expand its power and control over the individuals.
In contrast, Slick Willie was focused 100% on being POTUS, thus he was able to rise above the defeat and backlash against Hillarycare to win a second term. He was willing and able to jettison policy positions that proved to be losers
--
We need to stop calling them "Progressives" when in reality they are big government "Socialists" who no longer value the individual's rights to Life, Liberty and the Pursuit of Happiness.
Long time no see...I did the same...posted somehwhere earlier on the thread...I am praying NO Bill happens as if there is anything passed, it will be the leftists toe in the door to add on to over the years and get what they wanted in the first place when nobody is looking...
Plus, please remember the conference committee will add on so much BS it won't be funny...because they CAN.
Obama's a Community Agitator, a walking, talking destroyer. ~ Rush Limbaugh
We should have learned from Bill Clinton not to count a Democrat out just because he's temporarily down - not with almost the entire media in his corner.
The "Mainstream" Media: By liberals. For liberals.
The last line of this script is far from having been written...we are pending... I don't trust this public option off the table thing...If some bill does get thrown together, it will go into "implementation" for yrs while he preens around, and then we will be hit with it, too late, too late.
Obama is not Clinton. Remember Bill lost the governorship of Arkansas and managed to get re-elected 4 years later by reinventing himself and being responsive to middle Americans in Arkansas. Bill was a liberal but he was hard nose realist with a long association with conservatives. He was able to pull away from the hard left of his party and work with Republicans when they took control of Congress after the midterm election rout in 1992 to end welfare as we knew it and on taxes based on that prior experiences. Obama is a Northern liberal traditionalist with no experience with working with middle Americans, if fact his attitude of treating Republicans, conservatives or just anyone with contempt who disagrees with him is no different than that of the Democrat Party leadership. He seems to have no problem with Dems calling those that dissent un-American, fascists, or evil. Clinton had learned much from that earlier defeat and the hard left was not as organized then as it is now so Bill was not as beholden to them as Obama and he was never a "true" believer as Obama is. Bill believed in Bill. Obama is as personable but I do not see him as flexable as Bill so moderating his agenda will much harder for him to acheive.
There is a world of difference between Bill Clinton and Barak Hussein Obama.
Clinton was truly a very intelligent self-made man who did govern a state. Obama never governed or ran anything in his life.
Clinton was a very skilled politician. Obama is an inexperienced, thin-skinned thug who is taking his direction from Rahm Emanuel.
There is no comeback for a completely unqualified, inexperienced ideologue who thought his community organizing skills was all he needed to run this country.
I think Carter was in better shape than Obama will be in his re-election bid.
GOP takeover in 2010 - 1994 all over again and a GOP victory in 2012, but we've been down this road before, and the Republicans ended up punting on first and goal, benching the conservatives and putting the RINOs on the field; if they do that nothing will change...
Just because the MsM is pushing so hard for Obama. But people are furious with their Congresscritters, and I think they'll be turned out in droves, particularly if the economy doesn't improve substantially. Despite all of the "good news"....we're in for another very difficult year, IMO.
The key to victory in 2012 will be NOT to put up another RINO or (as with Bob Dole)....a republican whose turn it is. Sheesh.
I sincerely hope Michael Steele will get with the program and actually LEAD....particularly in the area of realigning the republican primaries, closing them to independent voters, and ensuring that the little states of Iowa and New Hampshire lose their political influence by being first.
I think we should be cautiously optimistic about 2010 and 2012. Yes, many trends are starting to work in our favor. However, I see some critical differences between 1994 and today.
1) There was a clear leader for the GOP in 1994: Newt Gingrich. As of yet, I see no clear leader for the GOP today.
2) Libertarians were not disillusioned with the GOP in 1994, whereas many of us are today. We thought we were going to be equal partners with the social conservatives and other members of the Reagan Coalition, but it didn't work out that way. Other than the 1996 Welfare Reform Act, we can't really point to any legislative accomplishment that furthered our goals the last time the GOP controlled Congress. The actions of the Bush Administration created a lot of rifts between Libertarians and the GOP. It will not be easy to bring all of us back into the fold, and those of us who do come back will not accept being second-class members of the party any more.
3) The media bias today is a hundred times worse than it was in 1994. They will do anything to protect Obama, no matter how ridiculous it makes them look. And everything the GOP does will be heavily scrutinized. They will assume the worst from the GOP and they will portray everything we do in the worst possible light. We need to have an effective strategy in place to combat this, but I see no evidence that anyone is even thinking about one.
We might win back Congress because of the backlash against the excesses of Obama and Democrats in Congress. But our long-term success will depend on having something better of our own and having the ability to sell it to the public.
If you're not outraged at the media, you haven't been paying attention.
You just described a real conservative in 2009. Any true conservative will be made to be polarizing by the MSM. If you have a true conservative who isn't yet identified as polarizing, that's only because the MSM hasn't paid attention to him/her yet.
The only way we get a non-polarizing figure as a leader is if it's a RINO, and even then the MSM will do their very best to portray him/her that way.
And they'll succeed. I have liberal friends who even today complain to me about how far right GWB was. Other than the war on terror, Supreme Court Justices, and a little bit on taxes, this is a man who spent his entire 8 years governing from the center. Maybe even left-of-center. I'm constantly reminding them of NCLB, his views on illegal immigration, size of gov't, the bailouts, prescription drugs, etc.
Liberals are doing their best to make her polarizing. Don't fall for their tactics and aid them in destroying our best candidates. As I have heard, Liberals will always let you know who they are the most afraid of by attacking them the hardest. They attack no one harder than Sarah Palin. My dear departed mother told me this long ago and it is a great lesson: Always consider the source. Jim Webster
Liberals over health care. Get in their face when they stray from Conservative ideals. Let them know we want lower taxes AND less (much less) spending. Tell them often enough and they will get the idea or else. Unlike prior years, we now have the means (the internet) to do it, as well as talk radio and Fox News (for the most part) on our side. Jim Webster
I partly based my decision,(bad, defeat) in --- that the Magic Messiah will push the amnesty envelope later this year. That. I believe will result in riotous tumult in America and cries for impeachment. Nonetheless, depending on how many Reid-Pelosi mindsets there are in Congress, amnesty may get passed. I sincerely believe this old man will be hunkered down behind locked doors as violence erupts in our once great country.
"the Magic Messiah will push the amnesty envelope later this year"
I see this coming, too. If the amnesty thing passes, there will be no more "illegals". Then Obama can say, "See I told you this HealthCare bill wouldn't cover "illegals", because there's no such thing as "illegals. anymore."
No citizen's right to life, liberty, pursuit of happiness, or property is safe as long as Obama is President of the United States.
If nothing else the discourse (or lack of) surrounding health care exposes how wide but shallow the support for Barack and his vision of "government by the few" really is. The real America finally woke up and has been speaking loudly that they wanted change but not this change.
Now Barack should also dump the job killing cap and tax bill and try something a little less drastic and more in line with the job he was hired to do like preserve protect and defend the constitution!
We shook off a thugocracy once and can do it again if necessary.
(I always vote "other" for some reason; I think I'm developing an attitude)
I suspect we'll pick up some seats in 2010 but it's so far off- the landscape can change back and forth 20 times between now and then. I think something will get done about healthcare reform, but when, and who'll get credit will probably shape the midterm election. As for 2012? I'm struggling with 2010 right now- in fact, Friday is still up in the air for me at this point. Anybody's guess...
The Dems probably have a date on which they'll all crawl back into their demure shells and be good children. Memories fade. We need a way to keep this power grab fresh in people's minds.
And, without the assistance of the MSM The GOP will need a really good closer to get through. I have yet to see one. Also knowing the GOP they'll let themselves get tangled in the minutia and forget the big picture. ___________________________________________ "The tax imposed under this section shall not be treated as tax" - HR 3200 (Health Care Bill) Pg. 203. Ln 14 & 15
It really doesn't matter if obama is in office in 2012, as long as we can get rid of the corrupt congress. They have forgotten, or don't care, who are the servants and who is in charge. The Constitution can be repaired from the damage done by these polititians, who think the congress is their personal playground and our tax dollars belong to them. Remember the things they have done when we vote in 2010!
could be rough for the Dems, but you never know...2010 is still a long way off. As far as Obama is concerned, unfortunately, I think that if the economy does a turn around (although with his policies, I don't know how it could) and he manages to survive his healthcare fiasco, the nimrods in this country that put him in office, will likely re-elect him...Lord only knows why. Americans (as a group) today, seem to have the attention span and memory of a gnat, and I'm afraid that, given the right conditions, too many of us will be willing to give him a second term in the WH...
"The problem is not that people are taxed too little...the problem is that government spends too much." ~President Ronald Reagan
Given the crook currently running the "Justice" Dept., I don't anticipate them being stopped before they have had a chance to rig both the census data and the 2010 mid-term election.
I actually think it quite possible, if the infiltration of this criminal organization runs as deep as some are saying, that the democrats may very well gain seats in the next election.
And don't underestimate the stoopidity of the average voting idiot, either.
I heard on Fox today that 60,000 of AARP's members have cancelled their memberships since July 1st, as a result of the organization's apparent position on Obamacare. What's interesting is despite AARP's commercial, which appears to support it, the powers-that-be have made a point to say that they haven't "endorsed any plan" as of yet...You'd never know that by the commercial they're running and their cozy little forum that they held with Obama, laying out all the "benefits" that healthcare reform would bring...blah, blah, blah.
"The problem is not that people are taxed too little...the problem is that government spends too much." ~President Ronald Reagan
Editor at Large
Comments Policy
Other. Any discussion to
Tue, 08/18/2009 - 11:18 ET by QueenMumOther. Any discussion to the contrary is premature, IMO.
"The problem with socialism is that eventually you run out
of other people's money."
—Margaret Thatcher
70 % (so far) are wishing and a hoping. If anyone ever...
Tue, 08/18/2009 - 11:18 ET by jawebster1deserved defeat, it is this guy who wants to change America into just another weak, dreary Socialist Nation. If it can happen to Britain, France and Germany, it can happen here. People are people. Jim Webster
All you can say in the
Tue, 08/18/2009 - 11:50 ET by Chris NormanAll you can say in the defense of Britain, France, and Germany is that their form of socialism was sort of new at the time - maybe some of the people who allowed it to happen didn't know any better or were weakened in the post WWII environment. What gets me is that even with their stagnant economies and societies as examples and warnings, there are those here who would knowingly take us down the same path.
The "Mainstream" Media: By liberals. For liberals.
Hang that on the Media & Schools
Tue, 08/18/2009 - 12:06 ET by MaximusBraveheartThey sold us out and don't do their job TEACHING ABOUT THE PROBLEMS of the world and in history. No objective look at things since many do not hold values that coincide with the values of our constitution. They don't care about the facts and I would think that is TREASON. M-B
"What gets me is that even
Tue, 08/18/2009 - 12:13 ET by ckc1227"What gets me is that even with their stagnant economies and societies as examples and warnings, there are those here who would knowingly take us down the same path."
That's what's so mind-boggling. These countries are worse off than America in almost every way economically and more, yet so many here in the U.S. insist WE'RE the ones doing everything wrong.
You have to understand the liberal mindset
Tue, 08/18/2009 - 12:43 ET by cjbreischRemember, there's not a single example of government intervention in the U.S., where the intervention has improved cost or quality. Yet, every time liberals are faced with a new big government program, they leap on board. "This time we can do it right!"
It's the same with the socialism examples you just named. Those countries aren't doing badly because socialism is wrong, it's because they implemented it wrong. "This time we can do it right!"
Yet, liebrals point to any
Tue, 08/18/2009 - 12:50 ET by Chris NormanYet, many liberals point to any number of programs and features of the European model of socialism as examples for us to follow. I think they - at least the well-intentioned among them - sometimes confuse European culture with their economics system. For example, France's economy is permanently stagnant, even though the tourist areas of Paris are still charming and vibrant.
The "Mainstream" Media: By liberals. For liberals.
'liberals point to any number of programs and features'
Tue, 08/18/2009 - 16:02 ET by JDWYou are correct. Today TIME defends the British system. Imagine reading this in your MD's office
JDW
DAILY WAVE
Jobs, jobs, jobs ... Spending, spending, spending
Even the BBC does not defend the system
Tue, 08/18/2009 - 22:05 ET by DEVILDOCMOMHaving recently traveled in the UK (Scotland, Ireland, Wales, and England) we saw lots of the BBC...ALL of the programs dealing with the "health care" there were negative, dealing with the problems of people trying to deal with the system.
You're right, and even if a
Tue, 08/18/2009 - 12:38 ET by FranksamYou're right, and even if a lot of Americans fought in WWII, our country did not experience the incredible devastation and loss of civilian lives that Western Europe and Russia did. The only thing comparable for us would be our Civil War. Most Americans, including me, have no idea what that kind of wide scale destruction would be like.
Having said that, I hardly think that a recession such as we are in now is reason to radically transform America into a socialistic nation, which is clearly the goal of the left.
Like past radicals, they
Tue, 08/18/2009 - 12:52 ET by Chris NormanLike past radicals, they will use any crisis as an opportunity to tear down the system and replace it with one where they hold all the power. Just ask ol' Rahm...
The "Mainstream" Media: By liberals. For liberals.
And there it is, CN
Tue, 08/18/2009 - 16:01 ET by boomerconThey don't care what kind of system we have, so long as THEY are the ones in power, and staying in power. Ruling elites is their aspiration.
I Voted Bad Defeat 2010, Defeat 2012...
Tue, 08/18/2009 - 14:44 ET by Wildcatter1980...because Obama is not Der Schlickmeister. He cannot change his spots, as it were.
Obama has not spent his entire life on wanting to become POTUS like Slick Willie did. He, instead, spent it surrounding himself with and listening to socialists, communists, black liberation theologists, free market capitalism haters and similar and we are seeing the result of that tutelage with his poor health care reform pressers and "town halls".
He cannot come up with a few bullet points that can galvanize support for "health care" reform because he is not actually seeking to reform health care in this country. What he really wants is to grow government bigger and expand its power and control over the individuals.
In contrast, Slick Willie was focused 100% on being POTUS, thus he was able to rise above the defeat and backlash against Hillarycare to win a second term. He was willing and able to jettison policy positions that proved to be losers
--
We need to stop calling them "Progressives" when in reality they are big government "Socialists" who no longer value the individual's rights to Life, Liberty and the Pursuit of Happiness.
I voted
Tue, 08/18/2009 - 22:07 ET by DEVILDOCMOMthe same, purely for hope...
Hey DDM... Long time no
Tue, 08/18/2009 - 22:13 ET by bigtimerHey DDM...
Long time no see...I did the same...posted somehwhere earlier on the thread...I am praying NO Bill happens as if there is anything passed, it will be the leftists toe in the door to add on to over the years and get what they wanted in the first place when nobody is looking...
Plus, please remember the conference committee will add on so much BS it won't be funny...because they CAN.
Obama's a Community Agitator, a walking, talking destroyer. ~ Rush Limbaugh
We should learn from Bill
Tue, 08/18/2009 - 11:19 ET by Chris NormanWe should have learned from Bill Clinton not to count a Democrat out just because he's temporarily down - not with almost the entire media in his corner.
The "Mainstream" Media: By liberals. For liberals.
I'd like to think this would defeat him
Tue, 08/18/2009 - 11:21 ET by StarAZThe last line of this script is far from having been written...we are pending... I don't trust this public option off the table thing...If some bill does get thrown together, it will go into "implementation" for yrs while he preens around, and then we will be hit with it, too late, too late.
tired of liberal
Tue, 08/18/2009 - 12:08 ET by stunnedtired of liberal lies
Obama is not Clinton. Remember Bill lost the governorship of Arkansas and managed to get re-elected 4 years later by reinventing himself and being responsive to middle Americans in Arkansas. Bill was a liberal but he was hard nose realist with a long association with conservatives. He was able to pull away from the hard left of his party and work with Republicans when they took control of Congress after the midterm election rout in 1992 to end welfare as we knew it and on taxes based on that prior experiences. Obama is a Northern liberal traditionalist with no experience with working with middle Americans, if fact his attitude of treating Republicans, conservatives or just anyone with contempt who disagrees with him is no different than that of the Democrat Party leadership. He seems to have no problem with Dems calling those that dissent un-American, fascists, or evil. Clinton had learned much from that earlier defeat and the hard left was not as organized then as it is now so Bill was not as beholden to them as Obama and he was never a "true" believer as Obama is. Bill believed in Bill. Obama is as personable but I do not see him as flexable as Bill so moderating his agenda will much harder for him to acheive.
You beat me to it. You said what I was going to say...
Tue, 08/18/2009 - 17:23 ET by jawebster1(but in twice as many words.) ;) Obama is no Bill Clinton and that is why he will be a one term President. Jim Webster
There is a world of
Tue, 08/18/2009 - 12:56 ET by Gat New YorkThere is a world of difference between Bill Clinton and Barak Hussein Obama.
Clinton was truly a very intelligent self-made man who did govern a state. Obama never governed or ran anything in his life.
Clinton was a very skilled politician. Obama is an inexperienced, thin-skinned thug who is taking his direction from Rahm Emanuel.
There is no comeback for a completely unqualified, inexperienced ideologue who thought his community organizing skills was all he needed to run this country.
I think Carter was in better shape than Obama will be in his re-election bid.
I'd like to think....
Tue, 08/18/2009 - 11:20 ET by mattmGOP takeover in 2010 - 1994 all over again and a GOP victory in 2012, but we've been down this road before, and the Republicans ended up punting on first and goal, benching the conservatives and putting the RINOs on the field; if they do that nothing will change...
Yeah.... but!!!
Tue, 08/18/2009 - 11:26 ET by Willis_Leon_JohnsonIt will be OUR fools screwing the nation instead of THEIR fools.
http://gjresult.com
I voted defeat in 2010, maybe relected in 2012
Tue, 08/18/2009 - 11:38 ET by BlondeJust because the MsM is pushing so hard for Obama. But people are furious with their Congresscritters, and I think they'll be turned out in droves, particularly if the economy doesn't improve substantially. Despite all of the "good news"....we're in for another very difficult year, IMO.
The key to victory in 2012 will be NOT to put up another RINO or (as with Bob Dole)....a republican whose turn it is. Sheesh.
I sincerely hope Michael Steele will get with the program and actually LEAD....particularly in the area of realigning the republican primaries, closing them to independent voters, and ensuring that the little states of Iowa and New Hampshire lose their political influence by being first.
Time will tell.
I hope he fails, too.
1994 v. 2010 & 2012
Tue, 08/18/2009 - 12:11 ET by EllisWyattI think we should be cautiously optimistic about 2010 and 2012. Yes, many trends are starting to work in our favor. However, I see some critical differences between 1994 and today.
1) There was a clear leader for the GOP in 1994: Newt Gingrich. As of yet, I see no clear leader for the GOP today.
2) Libertarians were not disillusioned with the GOP in 1994, whereas many of us are today. We thought we were going to be equal partners with the social conservatives and other members of the Reagan Coalition, but it didn't work out that way. Other than the 1996 Welfare Reform Act, we can't really point to any legislative accomplishment that furthered our goals the last time the GOP controlled Congress. The actions of the Bush Administration created a lot of rifts between Libertarians and the GOP. It will not be easy to bring all of us back into the fold, and those of us who do come back will not accept being second-class members of the party any more.
3) The media bias today is a hundred times worse than it was in 1994. They will do anything to protect Obama, no matter how ridiculous it makes them look. And everything the GOP does will be heavily scrutinized. They will assume the worst from the GOP and they will portray everything we do in the worst possible light. We need to have an effective strategy in place to combat this, but I see no evidence that anyone is even thinking about one.
We might win back Congress because of the backlash against the excesses of Obama and Democrats in Congress. But our long-term success will depend on having something better of our own and having the ability to sell it to the public.
If you're not outraged at the media, you haven't been paying attention.
Light a fire...
Tue, 08/18/2009 - 12:41 ET by AgentAmericanLight a fire under John Boehner's ass. Sarah is too polarizing.
A new Contract with America.
Pound Less Government, Lower Taxes. Now.
2010: A GOP Hill
Polarizing?
Tue, 08/18/2009 - 12:52 ET by cjbreischYou just described a real conservative in 2009. Any true conservative will be made to be polarizing by the MSM. If you have a true conservative who isn't yet identified as polarizing, that's only because the MSM hasn't paid attention to him/her yet.
The only way we get a non-polarizing figure as a leader is if it's a RINO, and even then the MSM will do their very best to portray him/her that way.
And they'll succeed. I have liberal friends who even today complain to me about how far right GWB was. Other than the war on terror, Supreme Court Justices, and a little bit on taxes, this is a man who spent his entire 8 years governing from the center. Maybe even left-of-center. I'm constantly reminding them of NCLB, his views on illegal immigration, size of gov't, the bailouts, prescription drugs, etc.
National elections are
Tue, 08/18/2009 - 13:26 ET by NonArabOmarNational elections are about extremes... the polarizers always win.
Obama won as a freaking ultra liberal that the conservatives really disliked.
Bush won 2 elections as a freaking lightning rod. Gore and Kerry lost for being too "boring" and trying to portray themselves as "centrists."
The public likes "cohones." People like those who wear their coat of arms. Has there ever been a more polarizing figure than 2004 GW Bush?
The only reason she is polarizing is because the...
Tue, 08/18/2009 - 18:05 ET by jawebster1Liberals are doing their best to make her polarizing. Don't fall for their tactics and aid them in destroying our best candidates. As I have heard, Liberals will always let you know who they are the most afraid of by attacking them the hardest. They attack no one harder than Sarah Palin. My dear departed mother told me this long ago and it is a great lesson: Always consider the source. Jim Webster
Let's do to the Republicans what we did to the...
Tue, 08/18/2009 - 17:53 ET by jawebster1Liberals over health care. Get in their face when they stray from Conservative ideals. Let them know we want lower taxes AND less (much less) spending. Tell them often enough and they will get the idea or else. Unlike prior years, we now have the means (the internet) to do it, as well as talk radio and Fox News (for the most part) on our side. Jim Webster
I partly based my decision in ---
Tue, 08/18/2009 - 11:32 ET by misterbillI partly based my decision,(bad, defeat) in --- that the Magic Messiah will push the amnesty envelope later this year. That. I believe will result in riotous tumult in America and cries for impeachment. Nonetheless, depending on how many Reid-Pelosi mindsets there are in Congress, amnesty may get passed. I sincerely believe this old man will be hunkered down behind locked doors as violence erupts in our once great country.
"the Magic Messiah will push
Tue, 08/18/2009 - 13:17 ET by celator"the Magic Messiah will push the amnesty envelope later this year"
I see this coming, too. If the amnesty thing passes, there will be no more "illegals". Then Obama can say, "See I told you this HealthCare bill wouldn't cover "illegals", because there's no such thing as "illegals. anymore."
No citizen's right to life, liberty, pursuit of happiness, or property is safe as long as Obama is President of the United States.
One more nail
Tue, 08/18/2009 - 12:08 ET by IamTinmanIf nothing else the discourse (or lack of) surrounding health care exposes how wide but shallow the support for Barack and his vision of "government by the few" really is. The real America finally woke up and has been speaking loudly that they wanted change but not this change.
Now Barack should also dump the job killing cap and tax bill and try something a little less drastic and more in line with the job he was hired to do like preserve protect and defend the constitution!
We shook off a thugocracy once and can do it again if necessary.
Other
Tue, 08/18/2009 - 12:08 ET by BKeyser(I always vote "other" for some reason; I think I'm developing an attitude)
I suspect we'll pick up some seats in 2010 but it's so far off- the landscape can change back and forth 20 times between now and then. I think something will get done about healthcare reform, but when, and who'll get credit will probably shape the midterm election. As for 2012? I'm struggling with 2010 right now- in fact, Friday is still up in the air for me at this point. Anybody's guess...
Look out chairman maobama!
Tue, 08/18/2009 - 12:38 ET by RD King"No Recovery until Nobama!!!!!" me and at least 59,934,786 other Americans.
M-words
Tue, 08/18/2009 - 12:47 ET by StarAZMaybe we are seeing what happens when you elect a Messiah and not a Manager.
X
Tue, 08/18/2009 - 12:50 ET by serfer62Hey folks
We're talking Republicans here. From out of the jaws of Victory the amazing GOP Llses its ass cause it just stayed on the sidelines
Other
Tue, 08/18/2009 - 13:02 ET by katainkentThe Dems probably have a date on which they'll all crawl back into their demure shells and be good children. Memories fade. We need a way to keep this power grab fresh in people's minds.
And, without the assistance of the MSM The GOP will need a really good closer to get through. I have yet to see one. Also knowing the GOP they'll let themselves get tangled in the minutia and forget the big picture. ___________________________________________
"The tax imposed under this section shall not be treated as tax" - HR 3200 (Health Care Bill) Pg. 203. Ln 14 & 15
Impeachment?
Tue, 08/18/2009 - 14:09 ET by Dragonsbreathfollowed hopefully with treason trials for all of them no matter what letter is after their name in some news stories.
“Less 1984 — More 1776"
Tue, 08/18/2009 - 14:55 ET by jessieHIt really doesn't matter if obama is in office in 2012, as long as we can get rid of the corrupt congress. They have forgotten, or don't care, who are the servants and who is in charge. The Constitution can be repaired from the damage done by these polititians, who think the congress is their personal playground and our tax dollars belong to them. Remember the things they have done when we vote in 2010!
I chose good midterm and
Tue, 08/18/2009 - 15:24 ET by JackrvI chose good midterm and reelection.
I have confidence in the stupidity of the electorate.
Jack
I think that as of now, the election in 2010...
Tue, 08/18/2009 - 15:57 ET by PrairieSkycould be rough for the Dems, but you never know...2010 is still a long way off. As far as Obama is concerned, unfortunately, I think that if the economy does a turn around (although with his policies, I don't know how it could) and he manages to survive his healthcare fiasco, the nimrods in this country that put him in office, will likely re-elect him...Lord only knows why. Americans (as a group) today, seem to have the attention span and memory of a gnat, and I'm afraid that, given the right conditions, too many of us will be willing to give him a second term in the WH...
"The problem is not that people are taxed too little...the problem is that government spends too much." ~President Ronald Reagan
Other. It all depends on what happens with the ObamACORNS
Tue, 08/18/2009 - 16:07 ET by R D HelmGiven the crook currently running the "Justice" Dept., I don't anticipate them being stopped before they have had a chance to rig both the census data and the 2010 mid-term election.
I actually think it quite possible, if the infiltration of this criminal organization runs as deep as some are saying, that the democrats may very well gain seats in the next election.
And don't underestimate the stoopidity of the average voting idiot, either.
Call me crazy, but there it is.
-Dave
I picked 'A'...look what
Tue, 08/18/2009 - 16:11 ET by bigtimerI picked 'A'...look what he's done for our side of the aisle in just 6 months...what a guy!
Btw...here is what a lot of AARP members really think, what the acronym AARP really stands for...great caption-fest!
I love Eastwood!
Obama's a Community Agitator, a walking, talking destroyer. ~ Rush Limbaugh
bt...I love that!
Tue, 08/18/2009 - 18:04 ET by PrairieSkyI heard on Fox today that 60,000 of AARP's members have cancelled their memberships since July 1st, as a result of the organization's apparent position on Obamacare. What's interesting is despite AARP's commercial, which appears to support it, the powers-that-be have made a point to say that they haven't "endorsed any plan" as of yet...You'd never know that by the commercial they're running and their cozy little forum that they held with Obama, laying out all the "benefits" that healthcare reform would bring...blah, blah, blah.
"The problem is not that people are taxed too little...the problem is that government spends too much." ~President Ronald Reagan
Hey Sky...I heard the same
Tue, 08/18/2009 - 18:09 ET by bigtimerHey Sky...I heard the same on Fox as well today.
Glad someone finally clicked the link...my Aunt sent it to me this morning...fitting caption too!
Obama's a Community Agitator, a walking, talking destroyer. ~ Rush Limbaugh
bt...Please tell your Aunt...
Tue, 08/18/2009 - 18:15 ET by PrairieSkythank you for me! I'm going to show that to my husband when he gets home from work...he'll love it.
"The problem is not that people are taxed too little...the problem is that government spends too much." ~President Ronald Reagan
Too High expectations vs. Obama?
Tue, 08/18/2009 - 21:35 ET by Rod PatrickCareful.
We have nothing to celebrate yet.
I think the progressives are going to shove Obama's Rationed
Tue, 08/18/2009 - 23:27 ET by WorriedHealthcare Bill down our throats but the Americans are overwhelmingly against it and we do not forget.
1994 all over in 2010. Count on it.
I've let my Democrat sentators and congressman know that is what will happen.
Glory now for their base or loss of a job in Jan. 2011.
Take your pick.