Who will win the 2012 presidency? The definitive answer

Predicting 2012 results is on hard. It is sort of pointless at this point however. Any number of GOP candidates can beat Obama in 2012. The reason is simple: the electoral college. A handful of states Obama won in 2008 will most likely go back to the GOP in ’12. They’ve already shown a willingness to vote GOP in a big way. I have a map up here
http://johnwsmart.wordpress.com/2010/12/21/1958/

Wow, cool.

So what happens if Palin has as her VP running mate Paul Ryan or Pawlenty or Jindal?  Does that even increase her odds of winning even more?

-

E.L.I.G.I.B.I.L.I.T.Y.

-  Bobby Jindal’s parents were NOT citizens of the U.S. at the time of
   his birth.

-  Barak Obama:  is Pelosi going to lie for him again?  All 50 States must
   approve.  One already has passed a law that they demand PROOF  of
   proper eligibility.  Other States are thinking of doing same.

It is my understanding that if ONE states disapproves, the bid is null and void.

Bravo SeattleGonz…great topic and a well written post.

The house wins unless it’s Oceans11 again…

Could Obama, U.S. Latinos, be at a disadvantage because of new census numbers?

“Federal law requires that there not be discrimination against Latinos and other under-represented groups during the re-districting process,” Rosalind Gold of the National Association of Latino Elected and Appointed Officials told CNN. “So what that means is, no matter who draws the lines, they have to ensure that Latinos have an opportunity to elect their represented leaders.”

I wish this country would stop using affirmitive action to elect its officials…
I dunno who’s gonna be at 1600 after checkout time comes and goes, but who ever it is, I could give a darn what the “skin color” was just so long as they have leadership skills and don’t resemble a telepromter.

Thanks Teak. A few typos here and there…but, it was my first go. Hopefully I’ll improve over time. (Not having a teleprompter to rely on actually helps one to develop skills.)

I agree about the focus on skin color or racial affiliation in re-districting. I remember when Reagan used to talk about a colorless society. I agree with the idea, but I want a colorful society, just not one where we dividing on the basis of color.

Thanks yttik. 

So, I know you’re all dying to jump in and declare the winners for the 2012 election
=======================
Anyone but Obama and those associated with him.  Truly, we need serious-minded people who aren’t being employed by the White House to further some god-forsaken agenda, people who under stand proces and flow and who also undestand that if something doesn’t work, you shitcan it.  There are any number of government agencies that could be summarily disbanded and no one would even notice a diference, except the bureaucrats that formerly populated them. The list goes on and on. The electorate needs to get down to business and demand more for less–less money and less red tape.

Hey, Margaret,…don’t I know it. That was the lesson for me, of 2008, I can’t trust anyone to investigate or present the truth. I’m a Democrat and I went into 2008 not being sure if I wanted Hillary or not because of all the… All the what I don’t even know. It was verbatim lines from the media that I just repeated like I knew what I was talking about. And, boy was I inspired by Obama when he spoke at the 2004 convention. I sat down with a friend of mine to talk politics and when I started to talk about my concerns about Hillary she stopped me and said, “There’s nothing that you can say that will dissuade me from supporting her.”

That got me to sit up straight. We talked about something else. But her conviction stuck with me and I wanted to know what she saw in Hillary…so I started to read and listern to Hillary in her own words. OMG. She’s brilliant. She’s perhaps the only feminist voice who has been consistent and vocal over her entire life. She’s funny, and personable. I slapped my head, and thought, holy crap this woman is better than Bill.

From then on I compared the coverage of Hillary with what she actually said, and how she actually performed and it blew my mind. Since NH the press said she didn’t have a chance to win…and no one in the press recognizes that she actually won, or that it was those damn representatives that effed up the democratic primary. I wish the voters understood…reid would never  have won re-election.

Yeah, Teak, affirmative action is neither. Either one is competent or one isn’t. No other irrelevant characteristics need be examined. Frankly, I like to surround myself with the best people and I don’t care about other attributes that might be associated with them.

She has potential but I’m not jumping on any bandwagons, yet. I want specifics and not soundbites and repetetive phrases. We’ll see.

I honestly don’t know what to make of the natural born citizenship issue. I do think it’s being used to make those opposed to Obama look crazed and it’s effective because all the media and congress just laugh and say of course he’s eligible.

I can’t tell if they’re just afraid of what it means if it were to be determined that all the legislation, continuing  resolutions and everything signed by Obama was null and void. It wouldn’t be good for economic stability that’s for sure.

Once Obama is out of office a bill should be introduced requiring all president-elects to make their proof of natural born citizenship available to the public as part of public disclosure.

Ryan want to privatize social security. 

-

SG,

I am quite serious here.

All aspirants are supposed to prove their eligibility, don’t they? 

Therefore,  if would-be Candidate X will supply all needed documents etc., 
so will Candidate Obama. 

The law applies to ALL, no?

-  
 
THEY SHOULD BE CALLED  
 
P.I.G.S.T.Y  

Salon Publishes Call for  
Torture, Murder of Sarah Palin  
 
Big Journalism,  
by Kristinn Taylor &  
Andrea Shea King     
 
Original Article  
 
12/21/2010  
 
Liberal online political magazine Salon.com published a letter to the editor Friday that called for the murder of 2008 Republican vice presidential nominee former Alaska Governor Sarah Palin.  
 
The letter was written in response to a mocking article at Salon titled, Good Morning America’s painfully friendly interview with Sarah Palin by Alex Pareene. Pareene snarkily sums up the GMA interview: “The interview was basically split into a couple of distinct sections: How awesome is your family, how bad is Barack …..

LOL!!! I’m in!!!! FrenchNail for President!!!

Well, once I found out I had to work to get on that list… 

I get the visual of the Obama Presidency and all those signed pieces of paper..(if it can call it that) being tossed out, like the sound and visual a mac makes when the trash is emptied….all gone….

Hate to have the Mac sanitation worker come back and say it couldn’t do it because the “file” is in use”…which would suck. In that case I would want to flush ‘em like a toilet bowl.

Teak, on my first mac which was a luggable…those early laptops that were really suitcase typewriters with little screens (sort of)… I had a little app that a guy wrote and whenever you emptied the trash the Oscar would come out of the trash and say, “I love trash.” It was cute. He had a caution with it, though. He said that his daughter loved it so much that she proceded to throw out every file on his computer one by one. “I love trash!”

If Jindal was born in the United States, I don’t think it matters whether or not his parents were. He would be a natural born citizen.

You are absolutely correct makeji. Natural born citizen is English common law language and phraseology that was used at the time the Constitution was written and was understood to apply to place of birth (jus soli) and not through blood line (jus sanguinis), meaning that a child born within US boundaries or in any US territory, is granted citizenship as a natural BIRTHRIGHT, regardless of the citizenship of his parents at the time, unless they were in the US in some official capacity from their country, like diplomats. If anyone wants to argue the point further, let’s do it on the Tues. open thread, and not pollute Seattlegonz’s first thread (YAY) any more.

We need Newt. I like Palin, Christie, Rubio, Jindal etc. But Newt saved us from the last experiment with progressivism and he can do it again. Rather we saved ourselves last time with stern leadership from Newt and we can do it again. It is going to be a long hard road this time around.

Regular people need to show their long form birth certificates all the time and routinely. Enrolling in school, little league, getting a first drivers license etc. I don’t see the problem with people wondering aloud why this isn’t a requirement to be POTUS… or why people have a problem with the wondering aloud part. It isn’t asking a lot. Nothing we don’t ask of sixteen year olds before we et them drive on the streets.

Ahh, but remember Clinton’s Social Security scam?

http://www.dollarsandsense.org/archives/1999/0599clintonbox.html

Doc, it’s OK for Democrats to take our money and cheerfully tell us that “It’s for your own good”, but it’s not OK for Republicans to let us keep our money and maliciously sneer, “It’s for your own good”!

Get with the program Doc, jeeze.

Newt would demolish Boy Barky in a debate on ANY subject! Unfortunately, the intensity of such an intellectually gifted man can intimidate and turn off the growing superficially educated rabble that were the bulk of Obama’s support. Newt is the stern, oncool Father figure in a culture that increasingly wants their flashy BFF at the helm.

And, going even further, at this point if Obama were to be determined to be inelgible for the presidency…then every law, treaty, budget, everything he signed would be null and void and that would create chaos. I’m not sure I really want that to happen.
Yes, I have been thinking of that too. However, I have come to the conclusion that the truth would ultimately be of greater good for the country, if that were the case.

Hey Ellen, did I see a wink and a nod at the end of that post?

I sure as heck can’t imagine anyone moving to CA right now…at least not of their own free will.

No you had it on the money….even the maker can’t keep her eyes open for ever…Cheers.

Although I sometimes enjoy listening to Newt, something about him just turns me off.  I can’t explain it, but I just don’t like him.
.

CA population is over 38 million.

Ferd, you speak for me!

I certainly agree with Newt’s brain power. But his personal indiscretions will be his undoing, imo. I would like to see that debate !

Is the video of the debate between That One and Bobby Rush available. I hear Rush wiped the floor with him. On second thought, it’s probably secreted with the rest of his documents.

I haven’t a clue who the GOP candidate will be and in spite of all the blather about it from the Pundidiots, neither do they.

What I do have is a very long list of those I do not want to see run. Starting with Newt, Romney, Barbour, Huckabee, Petraeus, Guilianni, Jeb Bush, Bobby Jindal, Crist, and Chris Christie. (Christie simply because he said he wasn’t running and if he broke his word I would lose respect for him. I am so damn sick of these pols that say, “no, no, I’m not running” just before they throw their hat in the ring. Out here in the real world we used to call it lying. And that goes for Hillary too.)

Ones I would be able to vote for without Angst: Palin, Daniels, and Pawlenty.

very good question.  In fact some states are introducing legislation that in order for a candidate to get on the their ballot they must show absolute proof of citizenship.  It may be in our best interest to not revert what he has already signed in the middle of his presidency.  But if he were prevented from being on the ballot for 2012 and not re-elected, it likely would have a minimal effect and I doubt Congress would try to pursue it.

I totally agree on all.

In America, there are only two types of citizens. One type is a naturalized citizen which the Constitution, treaties, and Congressional Acts call a “citizen of the United States.” The other type is a natural born citizen which Article II calls a “natural born Citizen.” “The Constitution of the United States recognizes the division of the people into the two classes named by Blackstone – natural born and naturalized citizens.”  Rep. Wilson Cong. Globe, 39th Cong., 1st Sess. 1116 (1866). Only a “natural born Citizen” is eligible to be President under Article II, Section 1, Clause 5. A naturalized citizen, whether naturalized at birth or after birth, is not so eligible. The “natural born Citizen” clause is nothing more than the people of the United States expressing their power of self-preservation. 

A naturalized citizen, whether at birth or after birth, is made by positive law, to wit, the 14th Amendment which makes born naturalized citizens and treaties or acts made by Congress, which makes both born and after-born naturalized citizens under its Article I, Section 8, Clause 4 power to make uniform the laws of naturalization.

A natural born citizen is made by nature and not by any positive law such as the 14th Amendment, treaties, or Congressional acts. The overwhelming majority of citizens are natural born citizens. If a person needs the 14th Amendment, a treaty, or Congressional act to make him or her a citizen, then that person cannot be a natural born citizen. Also, Congress or a court could for some social or political reason enact some law denying a natural born citizen that very status but to do so would be contrary to the law of nature and also unconstitutional.

Kenoshamarge — isn’t it funny or sad that our bottom line is people we can vote for without angst. In today’s polictical climate being able to vote without angst is a miracle. (Maybe it has always been that way…I think voting for Bill Clinton was my only angst-free vote.)

Just to  be clear wodiej, I think those rules established by the states only apply to general election ballots. I don’t think the state has say over who is on the primary ballot.

I agree the congress wouldn’t want to pursue overturning obama’s fraudulent presidency (if that is how it played out) however, if anyone or several people filed suits against any of the legislation he signed it would be a problem that we’ve never faced before.

Representative Posey (FL) had such a bill in Congress but could not get enough representatives to co-sponsor to bring it up for a vote.  Perhaps he will try again with the change in Congress coming up in 2011.

Whomever is elected, I pray it is the electorate who are the winners!  It is tiring being on the short end of the stick over and over again….we need a new America we can be proud of…

Note to Seattlegonz….if you ever would like to write a piece for my site, I would be honored.

“Say What You Will…It Feels So Good”

http://www.saywhatyouwill.proboards.com

That would be “public” not “pubkic”

Let’s keep this thread going until they bring us more SeattleG! Whooo!

As far as the Repub primary candidates, I have to agree with the boys at Hillbuzz: Please, no more dull mayonnaise on whitebread (I’m talking personality, not race). Tim Pawlenty was the gov of my state and I fall asleep just looking at him.

That’s sweet. You guys have inspired me to keep going…the press and polls will be exposed, even if it means delaying my shower for another hour.

I know it’s not proper to drink before noon, when should one be out of one’s pajamas?

FLDem are you sure that the “record of birth” isn’t the matter of public record. That the certificate itself is personal? I don’t know.

You’ve been reading too much right wing crapola.  The SS is NOT insolvent and will not even reach a point where an adjustment in income will have to be made for about 30 or 40 years,  Eliminating any future problems can be fixed by simply raising the “break point” for FICA.

It’s been the right wing’s wet dream to get their hands on that money; they want to establish a private system where the wealthy, i.e. Pete Peterson, can establish accounts and get their hands on enormous commissions.  It’s all about $$ and the repubs and libertarians ever-increasing greed fetish.  Think what would have happened to SS IF a private system would have been in place during the latest stock market crash.  ZERO funds to make promised payments.  Also, look at how many PRIVATE pension funds went down the tubes over the past few years. If it ain’t broke, don’t fix it – and don’t mess with it, either.

NOTHING is to stop you or anyone else from investing in their own private pension plans – if one can afford it. In fact, it would be a very wise thing to do.  Maybe.  I have friends who lost $60,000 overnight during the first crash and were dumb enough to reinvest their funds and lost another giant chunk just a few months ago.

SS was NEVER intended to be a retirement income – just a bit to help people who really needed it.  Unfortunately with times such as they are, too many people actually need this money in order to keep on living.

The births are not only recorded at the courthouse, but are published in newspapers, etc. Ask any bunco cop how easy it is to get the birth certificate of a dead person and use their identity. All you have to do is write in and ask for a copy. Some states require that you turn up in person, but most do not. It seems that the only birth certificate that is not available for copies is Barack Obama’s. I was born overseas, to diplomatic parents, and every time I have to have a birth certificate, I have to get the State Department to write a letter to the relevant person or agency stating that I was born an American citizen, albeit overseas, and with all the other info, date of birth, place, parents, etc. It would be so much easier to be able to just write in and get a copy..sigh. I used to have a plate, blue on white porcelain, issued to me when I was born with the name of the hospital, my stats, etc. on it, but it got broken in one of our many moves. My sister still has hers, and takes it in when asked for a birth certificate. You can imagine the reactions. Heh.

Daniels is the governor of my state.  He has strong Republican Party credentials, and I expect him to run.

He’s been on the news every day for years, and I am starting to get the creeps just looking at him.

Well, it would be a mistake to suggest I’ve been reading too much right wing crapola. I’m a democrat after all, and while I try to read various viewpoints I have become completely distrustful of journalism. Basically, I’m skeptical of everything I read.

While I agree that SS was designed as a mandated lowest level of “insurance” against catastrophe in the event one is unable to work due to age, or illness, the reality is that everyone is entitled to receive their social security checks regardless of their income. Wealthy receive them just the same as the poor…only the wealthy, typically, would be larger since they usually paid more into the program.

Pension programs are all designed (at least every one that I know of) to subtract the social security disbursement from the pension payment. Meaning, whatever you are getting from Social Security is paid first, then the pension supplements that up to the pension promise.

I agree with you that privatizing social security completely would be a very bad idea. I mean, ultimately, if economic times are bad then the elderly are going to become “our” problem, concern, responsibility…however you want to say it. I don’t want to live in a world where elderly moms and dads are living in the street, or where elderly patients, without a home, are dumped off at the skid row shelters like they are in CA. If it’s going to be the governments reponsibility to make sure that all citizens are ensured the basics of life then the Govt needs money for that. Soc Security is that money.

But, I completely disagree with you about its solvency. I’m approaching retirment and every administration — democrat, republican — everyone has been pointing to a problem of baby boomers, extended life expectancy, inflation, insufficient fund growth, etc. as a marker that the numbers are upside down. At the time that Soc Sec was implemented it wasn’t expected that people would live for 25 years post retirement.

We’re now looking at the second wave of “boomers” because the number of people having families, and families of 2 or more, is considerably higher over the past 10 years than it was 10 years before that.

Anyway…we just see it differently.

I hate to see you going into retirement with uncertainty hanging over your head.  Google Social Security Trust Fund and there are others out there who explain how it NOT in any fiscal problems.  Unfortunately, the MSM is playing to the right wing crowd as well as the fools that made up the cat food commission. 

This doesn’t really address, though, what it would mean if the president did sign a bill and was found to have done so illegally or fraudulently. One couldn’t look at it as a simple failure to sign, because the failure to sign process is, as you stated, meant to acknowledge that the congress is making the law, but the fact that the bill is returned to them without the presidents signature means that they have an opportunity to act on it knowing that the president won’t sign it as it is. That’s why the bill doesn’t become law if the congress has adjourned, because they didn’t have time to act on it sans signature.

In the case of Obama, the congress would have adjourned several times for each bill signed…so there would be no precident or constitutional or legal rule that would cover what should be done if a person has been elected and enacted laws while being an illegitimate president.

It’s the reason why Nixon was allowed to resign without ever being tried or jailed for his crimes.

Well, thanks for thinking of me. I haven’t counted on soc security being there for me in a long, long time, so I’m okay.

It’s laughable to me though that you think the MSM is playing to the right wing crowd. I’m not sure we’re occupying the same time space continuum.

When I google soc security and look at the OASI all I see are numbers that are upside down and the boomer generation hasn’t retired yet. But, you can’t begin with a find that pays out less than one percent and is now paying out almost all of it on an annual basis and have those numbers work.

specially them warm flannel ones ,on these long cold winter nights

Breeze and FLDemFem, There is another option that just occurred to me as I was putting out our Family Bible as the centerpiece on our Christmas table which is a tradition in our family, but the POINT, LOL, Where my Mom was born the courthouse in her county burned down, she could not get a Birth Certificate when they reopened, but THEY USED OUR FAMILY BIBLE AS A LEGAL DOCUMENT TO GIVE HER ANOTHER ONE as proof of her birth, it has in our Family Bible, the date, time, place, weight, etc., this has also been used in the past for others as a LEGAL DOCUMENT, so if someone has a birth record of babyO in the family bible or whatever bible his family uses, that might solve some hidden mysteries and I am sure his Grandmother in Kenya has this recorded somewhere bc she stated she was there at his birth and he was born in Kenya.  JUST A THOUGHT!!

It seems the front runner, Romney has been consistently losing ground and Gov Palin has been increasing her numbers.

Even Clarus Research Group that did their last poll in July claimed “Palin losing support” , now has Romney down 25 pts and Palin just 2 pts from Romney.

http://thehill.com/blogs/blog-briefing-room/news/134815-romney-huckabee-palin-lead-gop-field-for-2012-nomination

The front page of the New York Times says it all.  Here are the first 4 headlines, in order:

Senate Passes 9/11 Health Bill as Republicans Back Down

Senate Passes Arms Treaty With Russia

With Obama’s Signature, “Don’t Ask” Is Repealed

Obama’s Day Of Accomplishment


Yes, it certainly is!

(And Congratulations to SeattleGonz on your first NQ column.  Nicely done)

I’ve been in enough “arguments” here with people whose mind has been made up, and by God, nothing’s going to change it.  Especially facts. 
==============
Try a sound argument using cogent thought processes and you might change a few minds.

Oh, there are no sound reasons for you to believe the way you do.

Mea culpa

As long as Gregoire is guv here in WA, nothing will change for the D’s.  WA’s a sancturary state, King Co.  and Seattle are sanctuary destinations for every free-floating Peter and Wendy and illegal who looks upon this area as a place to start over.  Just talked to a guy (late middle-aged) who moved here from MI, via CA (also lived in OH) who is house sitting for a friend’s mom’s house.  He moved here to explore the idea of what “being in community” means.   Time for this native-born Washingtonian to move to Fairbanks.  I hate what’s happened here!  This used to be a “normal”, mainstream values place where people worked hard, played hard and didn’t use terms like “being in community.”  Now we’ve got best-selling books on “How to Raise the Perfect Dog” for crying out loud.  WTH!!

rant off.  

Hmmmm, what are today’s actual “Accomplishments” that Obama can claim sole ownership of?  
 
1. He managed to sign his own name to legislation in which he had very little, if any, meaningful role in creating…………………without drooling on the document. And we thought it couldn’t be done!  
 
2.?  
 
Jackie’s absolutely right, this IS Obama’s DAY OF ACCOMPLISHMENT!!!! 

Yes, it certainly is!

“Hmmmm, what are today’s actual “Accomplishments” that Obama can claim sole ownership of?”

Onofre,  you may not be aware of this, but his title is not “Emperor Obama”–it’s President Obama. 

No President “can claim sole ownership of” any legislation that Congress shapes and passes, and the President signs.  But the President does and did guide and lobby for said legislation, and is ultimately responsible for whether or not it becomes law, once it reaches their desk for signature.  That is how it actually works. 

As GWB said, it would be a lot easier if he were a dictator instead of a president.  Thankfully for all sides, the office of the president is not that of a dictator.  Only a dictator could claim “sole ownership” of legislative accomplishments.

New NQ Logic: Presidents do not deserve any credit for the bills they sign in to law.

Congrats and thank you Seattlegonz!

It’s too soon to tell but if I had to guess at this point I think the POTUS will be re-elected (she said, while ducking virtual flying objects).  In spite of how badly he’s done vis a vis the unpopular healthcare legislation, the ineffective and costly gift-to-public-employees stimulus bill, the chronically high unemployment rate, Afghanistan, etc, etc, his average approval rating on Real Clear Politics’ list of polls continues to hover around 45%, give or take a point or two either way.  

Now, add to this the very large field of GOP contenders who will cannabilize each other during the primaries, PLUS the rift between conservative and moderate Republicans/Independents/Tea Partiers – unfortunately makes me think the POTUS will come out ahead.

Romney has the huge onus of MA healthcare enacted on his watch. 

Gingrich can be a bomb thrower and has too much old baggage.  

Pawlenty, Jindal and Daniels seem to lack the charisma necessary to captivate a majority of voters.

Huckabee mainly appeals to Evangelicals.   

Christie seems to appeal to those who like to use the epithet RINO, and some others.  This is important when it comes to delegate-types.  But I honestly wonder if someone who is nearly-obese can win national office in this superficial and video-centric age? 

As well, the lesser-knowns such as Mitch Daniels, Haley Barbour and Bobby Jindal may not be physically attractive enough to pass muster.  This seems crass, but unfortunately it’s been the case that LOOKS MATTER, especially to younger voters, at least since the Age of Television took hold.  I’ve wondered if Palin would command all of the media attention showered on her if she weren’t so beautiful?

If Palin’s the nominee, Big Media will savage her like never before.  They simply won’t promote the narrative of First Female POTUS like they did the First AA POTUS.  And if the GOP nominates anyone that allows Palin to smell blood for any reason, I have a feeling she’ll run as a Third Party candidate and divide the Moderate/Conservative/Independent vote. 

After having said all that, I hope I’m dead wrong.  I would be very happy if Obama were a One Termer.  I’m a Centrist and while he’s moved to the center in some ways, I simply do not like the man at all.

It’ll be interesting to see Patience. I’m still not convinced that Obama will run. I think there might be some deal for him to not run. It seems clear to me that he doesn’t like the job very much, and I think he’d love being an ex-president, a supreme court justice, another “first”…you know something more his speed.

I can’t imagine him running and maybe losing. It seems so much more like him to want to say he’s not running because of his family, or because he thinks justice needs him more, or something grand.

It’ll be interesting.

Huckabee mainly appeals to Evangelicals.
=========================
He does appeal to them. But then, after listening to him speak, I find he does have a firm grasp on many issues about which I am concerned and he isn’t way out in right field, either. Moreover, he’s no dummy.

“I don’t know what your problem is, (other than your congenital need to be argumentative) I was agreeing with you”

Right.  That’s a good one.

The ability to vote “present” must be another, highly-prised characteristic, OA.

Really, though, Jackie, those articles about how much wrangling Obama has done have only appeared recently, and as such are disingenuous. When Obama first came to office he may have wrangled democrats but his words to republicans was, “I won.” Now that he’s been shellacked, but still “presiding” over a democratic congress the idea is being touted that he’s a determined negotiator.

The congress is majority democrats, it should’ve been easy for Obama to enact the democratic agenda.

“Really, though, Jackie, those articles about how much wrangling Obama has done have only appeared recently, and as such are disingenuous.”

That’s not the case.  There were numerous articles about this during the healthcare legislation, during the financial reform legislation, during the stimulus fight, during Sotomayor and Kagan, etc.

“The congress is majority democrats, it should’ve been easy for Obama to enact the democratic agenda.”

Then why wasn’t it?  Maybe is has to do with the fact that, in addition to standard-issue Democrats and progressive Democrats, the Democratic majority coalition was also composed of a large chunk of conservative Democrats from red states, who demanded an incredible amount of cover and compromise before they would even consider a liberal President’s agenda. 

Maybe it also has to do with the fact that the U.S. Senate is no longer a body that operates on majority rule.  Just imagine how much easier these bills would have been passed if they had just required 51 votes to end debate.

Well, I’m not going to get into a “numerous” articles fight with you. If Obama has done a lot of phone calling, compromise, deal making, he’s done a terrible job in promoting it. To most people who aren’t as inclined to like the man as you are, it appears he’s been vacationing and playing golf more than anything. (And that’s a story that has also been written about numerous times.)

Be careful though, what you’re describing is democrats as the party of no, and I don’t think that’s what the Obama campaign wants. That’s the story that’s being told about republicans.

ANd not to worry, every bill has to be funded through the House, the new housethe people’s house, wonder how that will go.

LMAO

The Democrats ARE the party of “YES”. I’m agreeing with Jackie on this one. 

YES! To monster, 2000 page bills that they’ve never read, or have a clue about their contents or eventual effects.

YES! To unprecedented record deficits far into the future.

YES! To Keynesian economic idiocy.

YES! To screwing GM stockholders and rewarding unions.

YES! To paying billions of borrowed money to pay off political supporters.

YES! To ignoring the overwhelming public sentiment on multiple issues.

YES! To draconian EPA intrusiveness, from light bulbs to home remodels to CO2 hysteria.

YES! To trashing our allies and praising our enemies.

YES! To killing our lucrative and job creating offshore oil drilling industry.

YES! To major strides that will bring this country ruins.

YES Jackie, you and I agree about more than you thought. 

Facts ? Here is the thing, donjo…When you take the position without citing any piticular reference and base your position on asking someelse to “Google Social Security Trust Fund “, you
1) do yourself a disservice by attempting to make a specific point using a generality.
2) do yourself a disservice by asking others to grant you passage based on your word, as an act of faith, instead of the citation of specific facts you say are out there.
3)  do yourself a disservice by asking others to keep an open mind and then be a whiny absolutist, in coloring your fellow human as being rigid in their views.

for example…today i had an exchange with a co-worker, who said that “one more and Obama has a trifecta”, we were discussing the ratification of the “NEW START” treaty. He used the same arguement as you, in that he said, others have said it is a good treaty.
I asked him if he had read the treaty, as I asked for who or what source that he had informed himself to arrive at his position.
He had not read the treaty, instead leaving it to the say so of others, that it was worthy of encumbering our soverignty.

So as I wish you and yours a very Merry Chistmas, I would ask, Why, when there is the document itself all of 17 pages, would one leave it to others to inform oneself?
But please do not assume everyone else is inflexible if they choose to disagree when they have read the dam thing.

Senate gave consent as is and to my knowledge it did not go through any markup or revision in committee in the Senate, yet both house of the Russian parlimentust ratify it as well. Will they seek changes?

Will a “signing statement/memo” from the POTUS assuage the the VALID concerns of the Senators we elected? who after classified briefings do not want to give away any advancements in missle defense?

Just saying.

Watch if Obama doesn’t suddenly “accomplish” a lot more with a republican led house. It worked for Clinton. Actually it saved his presidency. Neither of these two “great” democrat leaders could stand up to their own parties… even to save their own presidencies… let alone their own country.

Thankfully for all sides, the office of the president is not that of a dictator.  Only a dictator could claim “sole ownership” of legislative accomplishments.

Wrap it up and put a bow on it. It’s the fruitcake assertion again.

I think we might be looking at a future Clinton II. No, not Hillary but Obama. The republican house will temper him and everything the republicans do to help right the economy will be credited to Obama in the media. Newt saved Clinton from failure and the republicans in the house will save Obama from becoming Jimmy Carter II. Maybe it will be fine for us in the end however… Obama becoming the republicans puppet instead of the democrats puppet. He will take the path of least resistence… always has and always will. So long as he gets the credit he will do the bidding of whoever… i don’t think he cares one way or the other.

Then why wasn’t it?

No leadership coming from the office of the President.

Yes well done Onofre’s Arm!

Ferd , do you think Jackie gets the reference to the Holiday Inn Express?

Yes Ferd, he is the ass they were waiting for.

No, Nixon was “allowed” to resign because the country had just been through the Watergate hearings, all broadcast on radio which the country was glued to for the duration. The Republican leadership went to the White House and informed Nixon that impeachment papers were being drawn in the House. They told him that if he resigned he would keep his pension, etc. If he was convicted, no pension or anything else. So he resigned. An impeachment hearing and trial would have been too much for the country to endure and would have further interfered with the actual governing of the country. And it cost less to let him resign and keep his pension than it would have to impeach, convict and thereby rendering him ineligible for his pension, etc. And Nixon was born in the US, no question. He was a legitimate president. He was a paranoid person who kept an enemies list and used government resources, FBI, IRS, to harrass and intimidate them. And he also illegally taped people in the White House. There was never any question of the laws he had signed being legally signed. If you are going to make statements regarding political history, you should at least get your facts straight.

“I thought you said BO could not claim “sole ownership”, you are saying literally he is not the one who SIGNED it?”

I have no idea what this question means.  Try again. 

I’ll reiterate, Obama negotiated the terms of the New Start treaty directly with Dmitry Medvedev.  This contradicts the claims by many here that Obama did nothing on the bill beyond signing it.  It then had to be ratified in the U.S. by a 2/3rds majority of the U.S. Senate.  Which Obama lobbied very, very hard for, after 8 months of negotiations, and many close calls that almost killed the treaty.  He is now signing it into law.

I think you misunderstood me, FLDem, you and I are saying the same thing.

I wasn’t saying Nixon wasn’t an American citizen, I was saying that impeachment and trial would be too much for the country to endure and would have interfered with the governing of America.

If there is a question of Obama’s legitimacy as a president (hold your horses all of you who want to chime in with questions and accusations about his legitimacy…I know, I know.) then there would be impeachment, trial for treason, question of prior legislation, succession, who knew what when, how far does the cover-up go…etc. I think it would throw America into a hell of a lot more turmoil than Nixon’s crimes.

I do know the history of watergate…too well.

The problem I have with witnesses from Kenya is that Barack Obama, Sr. returned to Kenya with a white wife, he met her while at Harvard. He did not return to Kenya between leaving Hawaii and leaving Harvard. So it is very likely that she was the wife they remember rather than Ann Dunham, who was in the US with a young BO, Jr. BO,Sr. stayed at Harvard for two years after he left Ann and his son in Hawaii. And the cost of shuttling back and forth to Africa in those days was prohibitive. Not something the Dunhams could afford. No cheap airfare in those days. And they were prop planes, mostly. Few jets in service domestically at that time. And planes were much smaller then, too. I remember, I was flying at the time, all over. And it wasn’t a trip you made when pregnant, airlines didn’t allow near-term pregnant women to fly, and travelling with a young infant was just about as difficult. So, I think Ann wasn’t Ann, she was the second wife who showed up with BO, Sr. in Africa.

Oh, I just remembered one thing…this time in 2006…Hillary Clinton, after repeatedly answering ‘no’ to the question of whether she was going to run for the presidency in 2008, was touted by every poll, newscaster, talking head as the next president of the US. Rove came out and repeatedly said she’d be the next president. (He’s been trying to agitate his followers for a long time.)

FLDem it isn’t that straight forward. Obama being an illegitimate president means, in effect, that his signature has no standing on any bill. Therefore, one could conclude, that no bill was ever signed by the president in the years he’s been governing, and we just don’t have any precident to say how that effects the laws, budgets, executive orders, etc.

I agree Onofre…I’m not advocating it as a topic of pursuit, I’m just saying that there’s a reason why no one in politics wants to pursue it.

The point I was making, seattlegonz, was that his signature is not needed on laws to make them valid. The Executive Orders would be a different matter, they would be invalid. Treaties would also not be affected since the President signs them, but the Senate approves and consents to them. So the treaties would be valid even if he was found to be ineligible. It all depends on what the process for each thing is. If the majority of the responsibility of the process is on Congress, ie. laws, treaties, etc. the signature of the president is just a formality. A formality is not necessary to the process or the legality of the law, treaty, etc. Both can go into effect without the signature of the president.

Hillary Clinton

I predict that Barack Obama will lose by at least 150,000 votes in Nov 2012.

Obama should win. Republicans only care about lining there pockets ad protecting the rich. Dont beleave me come to Maine our Gov is an Idiot.

It’s hilarious going back and reading this. The out-of-touchness of someone who thinks Sarah Palin would be a good general election candidate is hard to measure. 

Obama is the worst President in the history of the Republic. He hates the military and has made our country a laughing stock in the eyes of our enemies. He needs to be tried as a traitor. I put him right along with the scumbag Jane Fonda.