Obama Opens Battle for Virginia with Rally in Richmond

Sherese A. Gore – Capital News Service

RICHMOND – President Barack Obama kicked off his re-election bid Saturday with a rally at Virginia Commonwealth University, calling the campaign a “make-or-break moment” for the middle class.
After stumping at Ohio State University, Obama flew to Richmond to address an enthusiastic crowd of about 8,000 supporters at VCU’s Siegel Center.

Taking the stage, Obama immediately set about criticizing his Republican opponents – including presumptive presidential nominee Mitt Romney – for their plans on tackling the economy.
“We believe that the free market is one of the greatest forces for progress in human history … that risk-takers and innovators should be rewarded,” the president said. “But we also believe that, at its best, a free market’s never been a license to take whatever you want, however you can get it.”

Obama seemed to distance himself from high levels of unemployment that have dogged his term. The nation’s unemployment rate is more than 8 percent nearly four years after Obama took office.
“This crisis took years to develop … so it’s going to take sustained, persistent effort, yours and mine, for America to fully recover,” Obama said.

He accused the Republicans of pushing an agenda that is not just conservative but “on steroids.” Obama admonished them for proposed cuts to education and Medicare.

“The Republicans in Congress have found a champion – they have found a nominee for president – who has promised to rubber-stamp this agenda if he gets a chance,” Obama said, referring to Romney.
“Virginia, I tell you what: We can’t give him the chance. This is a make-or-break moment for America’s middle class.”
It’s also a decisive moment for Obama, who holds a slim lead over Romney in many polls. It’s no surprise that Obama officially launched his re-election effort in Ohio and Virginia, two swing states that could be critical to winning in November.

Obama praised Romney as “a patriotic American” but accused the former governor of Massachusetts of drawing the “wrong lessons” from his business success.
“He sincerely believes that [as] the CEOs and wealthy investors make money, the rest of us will automatically prosper as well,” Obama said.

He cited what he sees as the highlights of his administration, including reducing dependence on foreign oil, killing Osama bin Laden and ending the war in Iraq. Obama’s promise to end the war in Afghanistan by 2014 drew cheers from the crowd.

“After a decade of war … the nation we need to build is right here,” Obama said.

Look to the future, the president urged supporters.“When you look back four years from now or 20 … won’t we be better off if we had the courage to keep moving forward?” he asked. “That’s the question of this election.”
Republicans are urging voters to ask themselves a somewhat different question: whether Obama has delivered on the promises he made four years ago to revitalize the U.S. economy.

In a statement supporting Romney’s candidacy, Lt. Gov. Bill Bolling responded to the president’s rally.
“In 2008, candidate Barack Obama came to Virginia and promised to create jobs and fix the economy. Three and a half years later, the president has more than just rhetoric to offer – he has a record. Virginians – and all Americans – will hold President Obama accountable for his inability to create jobs, rein in spending or offer a coherent energy policy,” Bolling said.

“Mitt Romney knows that we need new ideas and a new approach to get America back on track. He has the experience and the record of achievement we need to grow our economy and strengthen America at home and abroad. That’s why I’m proud to support his candidacy for president.”
Shaka Smart, coach of the VCU men’s basketball team, served as host for the Siegel Center rally. He urged the audience to re-elect Obama.

“I support President Obama because he is what a leader should be. He has a clear vision for the future, he possesses unshakable character, and he demonstrates a genuine caring and concern for the people he leads,” Smart said.
Obama was introduced by Tim Kaine, a former governor and the Democratic nominee for the U.S. Senate.
Kaine called Republicans “reckless” for proposals such as privatizing Social Security and requiring women to get an ultrasound before having an abortion.

“We’re at a crossroads again,” said Kaine, who co-chaired Obama’s 2008 campaign. “Do we go forward or do we go backward? President Obama knows we need to out-build, out-educate, out-innovate. That’s the way to go forward.”

 

Comments

  1. Another View says:

    Obama wants to raise taxes. High tax rates retarded growth in the early 20s, the thirties, forties, fifties, sixties and seventies. But every time taxes were lowered–in 1922, 1962, 1981, 1996 and 2003, the economy boomed.

    Obama wants to redistribute wealth, taking monies from those who make it and funneling through Washington to those who do not. This is nothing more than theft. It is immoral to take from some to give to others, all the while proclaiming yourself to be compassionate.

    Obama wants us to forsake the oil, gas and coal industries that have given us a high standard of living, in favor of windmills and solar panels that don’t work, cost a fortune, and will lower our standard of living to 17th century levels. Abraham Lincoln read by firelight, but I am confident he would have preferred electricity and the incandescent light bulb.

    Obama wants to impose socialized medicine and industrial policies on the American people, despite that Europe, socialism’s home, is on its last legs, due to socialism. People from countries with “free” healthcare flock here for medical treatment that they have to pay for; why?

    “Forward”? Obama is taking us backwards, at high speed. It’s time for him to retire.

  2. Clarke Life says:

    Better to have him than that of Mitt Romney……………

    • Another View says:

      Really? Have you noticed the economy the last three (3) years? Have you noticed the explosion in government debt? Have you noticed the dollar’s devaluation? How about inflation? Food prices, gasoline, and other staples are up, home prices are down, credit remains tight, and the only growth is in government.

      Mitt Romney is way too liberal; that said, compared to Obama he is just what the doctor ordered.

      • Clarke Life says:

        Did you think that it would all be fixed in 3 yrs Another View? What took 8 yrs to break will take some time to repair. That is just common sense..

        • Reagan fixed Carter mess in four years. Are you old enough to remember stagflation and 19% interests rates?

          • Old Enough says:

            I am old enough to remember Reagan raising taxes on working people multiple times and busting unions that provided pensions and health care to their members. I have also witnessed his “Supply Side” or “Trickle Down” economics erode and reduce the standard of living for our middle class. Reagan simply shifted the burden to the states and counties and rewarded his conservative base. I have lived it and only hope that we never go back there again.

          • Another View says:

            Ronald Reagan’s policies lowered taxes significantly on all Americans. Ronald Reagan’s policies rescued America from Jimmy Carter’s stagflation, and started an economic boom that lasted, largely uninterrupted, until 2008. Ronald Reagan won the Cold War without firing a shot, freeing millions who had been imprisoned for decades behind the Iron Curtain.

            And Ronald Reagan was supported by working union folks. His policies were largely supported by blue collar workers throughout the country. He busted no union; rather, he decertified PATCO, after its members BROKE THE LAW and went on strike, paralyzing air travel in the United States, and then ignored his demand that they return to their jobs. PATCO workers forfeited their jobs. It was their fault.

          • Old Enough says:

            Reagan did not lower my state and local taxes which had to go up the cover his federal cuts. He raised my employment tax to pay for my Dad’s retirement and created the anti-union sentiment that still exists today. He deserves credit for his foreign policy accomplishments just as Carter does for his Mid-East treaty and for restoring our moral compass after Watergate. Unions have always set the benchmark for a fair and living wage even for non-union workers and serve as a voice aganist greed and worker abuse. Without this voice we end up with stagnant wages and a declining middle class. When I look back on my 50 years of employment, I see 1980 as the beginning of the decline and the beginning of a polarized America.

          • Another View says:

            Ronald Reagan–as President–could not lower your state and local taxes. Also, Ronald Reagan did not cut any federal spending; rather, he convinced the DEMOCRAT House of Representatives to slow the GROWTH of federal spending. So . . .

            if your state taxes went up during Reagan’s presidency, perhaps you should complain to DEMOCRAT Governor Charles Robb, or DEMOCRAT Governor Gerald Baliles, along with the DEMOCRAT controlled General Assembly.

            President Reagan halted America’s decline, and worked to unleash the power and genius of its economy, by freeing citizens and maximizing their liberties. Everyone should give thanks for his efforts.

          • Old Enough says:

            I can see now that you never have nor ever will understand my life experience. Of course the president doesn’t set state and local tax policy. The point I was making is that when federal funding is cut or revenues fall, the state and local governments must make up the slack to provide basic services. Public schools received 18% of their funding under LBJ and now receive less than 8%. Who pays the difference? My intentions are not to change minds but to help defend and clarify attacks against liberal values when they disagree with yours. I will now give you the last word but please don’t ever expect me to believe that Reagan “halted America’s decline” because the “Greatest Generation” used the government to build this country during post-war America and left a stronger middle class which has been declining since Reagan. We should give thanks to them and ask where we would be if modern conservatives eliminated the GI bill, VA loans, social security etc. for them. We will never agree on the role of the federal government, but hopefully we realize we each base our beliefs on true principles and observations.

          • Another View says:

            I expect we are the same age, so I understand you just fine. But government did not build society, individuals did.

            Where do you think federal dollars come from? The federal government cannot spend any monies it does not first take from the people. So why not leave the monies with the people to spend in the first place, as opposed to having the federal government take it in taxes and then recycle it back?

            American greatness and prosperity comes from the genius of its people, not its government!

          • Fly on the wall says:

            On Reagan’s watch, America went from being the #1 lender nation to being the #1 borrower nation, and we haven’t looked back. “Sarge” got his military employment from this buildup and burst of “gung-ho” pride during that timeframe, and it fits his stuck-in-middle-school sensibilities. Yep…that build-up “won the Cold War” because we out-spent the USSR, and our debt flew through the stratosphere.

            The tough economic times lingered for the bulk of Reagan’s 1st term, though 1984 was a great wrap-yourself-in-Old-Glory year with the Olympics in LA and all that. It “lasted, largely uninterrupted, until 2008”? Really? So, that whole dot-com-bust-fueled recession in the mid-1990s was just a minor thing, eh? The S&L scandal, just atrivial matter? The tax increase that Bush I had to enact because the economy wasn’t doing well enough…just a hiccup? It was on Clinton’s watch that the budget mess finally ended up on a path to surpluses and all, but Bush II changed all that with his tax cuts and lack of fiscal restraint post-9/11 (no means of funding two wars, that Medicare Part D, those cuts, etc.).

            I agree that Obama has added a LOT to the debt, and I openly scoffed at the talk of those “shovel-ready jobs” like he was some 2nd-coming of FDR. But to continually hold up Reagan as some demigod of conservative jurisprudence and fiscal magic is just as ridiculous.

          • Another View says:

            Bush 1’s agreeing to the tax increase enacted by the DEMOCRAT Congress HURT the economy. The economy picked up before his term ended, but then recessed again in the fact of the Clinton inspired tax hikes enacted by the DEMOCRAT Congress.

            The economy picked up under Clinton after 1) the Republican Congress cut capital gains taxes; and, 2) balanced the budget. FYI, President Clinton never proposed a balanced budget.

            The Bush 2 tax cuts increased tax revenues into the Treasury. And the Republican Congress spent too much. BUT, the real spending explosion, and of the debt, occurred during 2007-08 when the Congress was under DEMOCRAT control, and continued during 2009-10 under DEMOCRAT control. Spending and borrowing has slowed dramatically after the Republicans took control of the House of Representatives in 2011.

            Ronald Reagan was the greatest President since George Washington. If we had stayed the course and followed his prescriptions, we would be in the middle of a thriving economy today, instead of teetering on the edge of socialistic collapse. We need to return to free markets.

          • Dave M says:

            The middle class lifestyle of the 50’s was a once in a lifetime thing. The rest of the world was still recovering from a little thing called WWII. The world had no manufacturing capability at all, as it was bombed out. Eventually the rest of the world recovered, leaving those with simple menial skills competing against similar people who can live at the fraction of the cost.

        • Another View says:

          But Obama is not fixing it. To borrow a phrase, government is not the solution to our problems, government is the problem.

          Obama believes in government. He believes that he and a group of elites should be able to dictate to the American people what they will do, consume, produce, eat, etc. He is a tyrant in the making.

          What America needs is to return to its roots, to liberty and freedom. We need less government. We need to keep more of our own money. We need to be able to take risks, absorbing failure and enjoying successes.

          We do not need to become a caricature of European style socialism. We do not need to be taken care of by the government. We can decide as individuals what our destiny shall be. Let us seize our future, and put the government back in its place.

          • That’s because Obama, before 08, had never run anything. Not even a Lemonade stand. He has no clue about business. But he’s surrounded himself with people that are of a mind that government is the solution, that the New Deal is the way to go. Heck, they’re giving out government grants for organizations to sign even more people up for Food Stamps.

            Here ya go Clarke 1

            http://www.grants.gov/search/search.do?mode=VIEW&oppId=40074

        • Dave M says:

          There is no evidence to support the statement that “it took eight years….” in fact, it is so bereft of logic i expect it to be a Democratic slogan. Most of the damage was done by democrats blocking Secretary Snows desires to regulate Fannie and Freddie.

        • Glen Poe says:

          Especially when you created it on purpose and have no intention of repairing it.

    • Glen Poe says:

      Don’t be fooled again by either one of them. There is a better choice and he’s still in the race. His name is Ron Paul and despite all the medias attempts to marginalize his candidacy and promote the elites chosen one he is doing extremely well where it counts. Instead of buying the main stream medias slant do your own home work and check his voting record. His policys are well founded in fact and the constitution, including his foreign policy. The wonks want you to believe otherwise so their corporations like Halliburton can continue to rake taxpayers over the coals on no bid contracts making money hand over fist. Obama has been just as bad if not worse than the previous administration with little notable difference other than to expand the most aggregious policys and continue the attack on liberty and the constitution. He needs to go, but Romney in my opinion is not the answer either. Both Romney and Obama’s biggest contributors are the likes of Goldman Sacs which should be all you need to know to reject either choice. Time is short and before long we won’t have a country. This conversation could go on all day but Obama is no more forward than Romney both are bad choices in my opinion. Given his performance compared to his previous promises that swept him into office Obama’s new slogan should be FORWARNED. Real change needs to start with voters. Being lead by corporate owned, agenda driven media, choosing the lesser of 2 evils or just plain apathy and avoidance are not going to cut it unless you just want to go down with the ship. Why trust the ones who lead us here to now resolve what they created. Romney and Obama, they have no intention of doing what they say and will do or say just about anything to get elected. In your heart of hearts I hope people realize that ……despite what they tell you. They have a plan and they don’t care what you say or think about it and both parties are trying to move the same ball down the field in the same direction. Most people realize that its the wrong direction. Trust the man that has been right (mostly) and certainly lately on all the big issues. He may not be perfect and maybe you don’t agree with everything but its time to listen and make real changes before this opportunity is lost and you wake up an outsider in your own country…or worse. They say dogs and children are good judges of character. They also say that the youth is a major supporter of Ron Paul as well as the military….maybe you should listen to the children as they are the ones who will be stuck with the decision you make now. We’ve all suffered with these bad choices from both parties for the last several administrations and its time to give peace a chance. Its time for real change before its too late. The power elite don’t care whether you elect Obama or Romney they will win either way, one will just pass the baton off to the other and keep the same agenda. Its up to you…please do your own homework. The mainstream media cannot be trusted.

  3. life is good says:

    If people are saying Romney is too liberal that is indeed very scary and sad.

    You of course ignore the Bush years and the tab we still have on that.

    • Another View says:

      Romney is too liberal. While he may be “conservative”, he is not a “conservative”. If you follow politics, are familiar with his Senate run, gubernatorial term, or even watched the Republican primary process, you would realize that Mitt Romney is best described as a “moderate”.

      As for debt, George W. Bush was a big spender. But compared to Barack Hussein Obama, George W. Bush is a skinflint.

      Truth be told, both parties–in their Washington incarnation–are more about them, and less about us. This must change. We need to get back to constitutional government, cutting public spending, and permitting/requiring people to assume responsibility for their own lives. This was our Founders’ dream. This is liberty and freedom.

    • The deficit was a ridiculous ten trillion when Bush left. Obama has added nearly six TRILLION to the deficit all by himself. And what do we have to show for it? Mythical “shovel ready ” jobs that Obama himself later admitted did not exist

      Fool me once…………………….

      • The debt number is a bogey. It all depends on the GDP. If you make 150K, is owing 10K on a credit card too much? So the answer is, depends on your income. To make the debt equal or greater than the GDP, should only be done when someone is lobbing ordinance at you. Recessions come and go. Average lasting 18 months. The borrowing made this one longer.
        .

    • Glen Poe says:

      While I agree that the Bush years were not good for this country the Obama administration just continued ,extended and expanded what they did. He is no better and his effect is far worse if you can’t admit that you are just kidding yourself and condeming future generations to your desire to have your time win despite the fact that both would be disasterous. Romney will make it any better. In fact if you listen to the little he has said about what he would do it sounds just like Obama and then some. Both will destroy this country. FORWARNED

  4. Honestly, what has this guy done to deserve re-election? He has added six TRILLION to the national deficit. And what’s funny about it is that while democrats talk about how George Bush, “Darth” Cheney and other ebil republicans were just there to help their rich buddies. Obama has done the exact same thing, only it’s been a different set of rich buddies. Look up how Goldman Sachs has made out in the past four years under Obama and then look up how much money they’ve given to Obama.

    The Middle East is on fire because of Obama’s “foreign policy”. Egypt, controller of the Suez Canal (One of the world’s seven strategic oil chokepoints) is in turmoil and the choice the people have been left with is military rule or the rule of the Muslim Brotherhood. Libya, (which Obama’s own Sec Def admitted was of no strategic importance to the US) has deteriorated to tribal fighting and thousands of surface to air missiles disappeared during the overthrow of Kaddaffi. Think about that next time you take off from Dulles. Obama has stiffed traditional US allies around the world while bowing and apologizing for this country to dictators.

    Obama has already cut half a TRILLION dollars from Medicare, and yet goes around talking about how republicans want to throw Granny in the street. All while shoving ObamaCAre down our throats. Oh, and Obamacare, like many people were saying in 09, has already been borne out to be a budget buster. But hey, it’s just money, right? We’ll just print more.

    Obama has already started deep military cuts, even before the congressionally mandated cuts that are coming next year.

    Gas prices have doubles since Obama took office. And while Obama blames “speculators”, what he fails to comprehend is that those same “speculators” are speculating on him continuing to make it hard for energy companies to find and bring to market oil and gas in this country. And the sad part of it all is that he told us energy prices were going to “skyrocket” under his cap and trade program, which he has initiated not through congress, but through EPA regulations

    Due to Obama’s stagnate economy, there are more people than ever before on Food Stamps. There are 80 million people that have given up looking for work and are on some kind of government subsidy. There are more people than ever before in this country living in poverty.

    Between Obama’s comments over the Martin kids incident and his absurd comments about how the “cops acted stupidly” when his professor buddy got arrested, Obama has managed to set race relations back to almost the 1960’s. I won’t even go into his appointee Eric Holder, who failed to prosecute the Black Panthers for voter intimidation not for putting a bounty out on George Zimmerman. Funny, I thought putting bounties on people in this country was illegal. But not a peep about that from Obama, huh?

    How sad is that? And people want more of this?

    What is Obama’s plan to fix any of this, aside from more government spending?

    Mitt Romney is no Ronald Reagan. I don’t even think he’s all that conservative. But I do think he can get the economy straightened out. And I’ll surely sleep better with him as CiC than the street agitator we have in there now

    • Clarke 1 says:

      Sarge, do you just live on Fox news? Sounds like you subscribe to their transcript.Same ole talking points everyday!

      • I’ll be happy to back up everything I said, and without links to Fox News. Perhaps you or someone else can explain why Obama deserves to be re-elected?

      • Clarke Eagle says:

        I guess you follow MSNBC’s talking points. Lean Left Comrade. Talk about your same old same old

    • Glen Poe says:

      Sarge, I won’t sleep well with either one of them and i think you are kidding yourself if you think the goal should be to just get the other one out. We need better goals than that. Please!

  5. Oh, I forgot to mention that real unemployment, according to the governments own website and not the manipulated fiction Obama’s White House puts out, is currently 14.5%

    http://www.bls.gov/news.release/empsit.t15.htm

    But I think most of us probably have that figured out, don’t we?

    • Jeremy Carter says:

      Sarge:

      You do realize that what you’ve linked here is actually from the Dept of Labor? And not ‘Obama’s White House’? Just want to make that distinction first. Okay..now onto your 14.5%….

      I’m not quite sure if you understand how an unemployment rate is reached. I would venture to say, since you just linked this and quoted 14.5…that you don’t quite have it….but let me try and help.

      You do realize that the rate that you’ve quoted…also includes what’s called the ‘discouraged workers’. In case you don’t know what that actually means….that is, people that are not looking for a job b/c of a market reason or just don’t choose to. They could be….but they aren’t. Those people, b/c they don’t want to look for a job, aren’t calculated into the unemployment rate. Also figured in to the 14.5 would be the folks that are indeed working a part time schedule. Now, as it states in the Note section…they may not WANT to be working that part time schedule…but that’s all they can get. But they actually are working…and not unemployed. That’s a piece of your 14.5 as well.

      So, for the actual rate….people that don’t have a job..and are looking. They’ve figured 8.2%.

      For reference on the 14.5% ..it’s calculated just as they’ve said it — Total unemployed, plus all persons marginally attached to the labor force, plus total employed part time for economic reasons, as a percent of the civilian labor force plus all persons marginally attached to the labor force

      And…once again….the White House doesn’t really have much to do with that number. They like ‘using’ it for their own purposes….but they’re given that number….from……guess who? DOL

      • Another View says:

        The Department of Labor is part of the executive branch, of which the President (aka the White House) is head. The President appoints the Secretary of Labor and all political appointees in that department. So cut Sarge some slack.

      • I’m fully aware of the contents of the table. That’s why I posted it. And you are correct, it comes from the government, which is the point. No one before Obama has calculated unemployment using “Jobs created OR SAVED”, whatever that is. But that is exactly what the White House does. And the other thing that is happening is that Obama is making sure to promote the number that does not include the tens of millions that have given up looking for work in the Obama economy. Esstentially, he is throwing out three pieces of pie and then only counting a percentage of the remaining one half of the pie.

        OTOH, I remeber George Bush gotting nailed on a regular basis for unemployment rates of 4.5%, essentially full employment.

        • Jeremy Carter says:

          AV – Point taken…and that’s not unusual in any regime. The President appoints heads at almost all branches of government departments…..And when a regime changes….hence the shuffling of department heads just the same. My point, which I sort of strayed from on that is….it still doesn’t ‘come’ from the WH persay. But…potatoe, potatoe. Or…however it’s said. I know what you’re meaning…I’ll cut him some slaaaaack!

          Sarge – I’m not 100% sure…but I’m pretty sure I’ve heard a report from some place called MarketWatch…that has always reported on Jobs created, and how employees get hired in each quarter. We must hit different news outlets tho…I hear it almost everyday. WTOP does at least……and they report regularly on that status frequently….It’s like a website or something……..www.marketwatch.com

          Sorry..I jest. But…you get what I mean I guess….

  6. livinginbville says:

    I really do NOT understand how anyone can defend Obama and his presidency. Our country is in sad shape and will continue down that path until he’s history.

    • Name another president in our history that was sworn in on a day when we were in two wars, the housing,auto and financial industries were collapsing, over 200,000 private sector jobs were being lost monthly and the economy was in the greatest recession since the Great Depression.

      I can not defend every aspect of his presidency but I do feel that he has the country on the way back. He has managed to lead us through these three years even with an all out attack from Fox news and an opposition determined to make him a one term president from day one and a congress that failed to act but always found ways to block progress.

      We are making slow progress by adding jobs and investing in the future but three years is not enough time considering these unprecedented circumstances. He deserves four more years and our united support before we should go back to the policies that got us here in the first place.

      Good Luck Mr. President

      • But what has Obama DONE? He used the TARP program that Bush started, so he can’t take credit for that. Gitmo is still open, violating his own Executive Order to close it. He not only extended the Patriot Act (A Bush intitiative) but EXPANDED it so the government can round up Americans. He talked about Shovel ready jobs, but later admitted there was no such thing and instead spent a good portion of that money on failed “Green Jobs”. Three years ago was supposed to be the “Summer of Recovery” and Biden was running around proclaiming that soon there were going to be 500,000 new jobs per month because of their policies. Nothing.

      • My 2 Cents says:

        Well said Casey! And let us not forget who he inherited all that mess from! The same people that are calling for Mitt Romney. How funny.

      • Another View says:

        President Reagan inherited a far worse situation. The difference is that he fixed it; without whining. Unlike Obama.

      • clarke conservative says:

        Name another President …

        Ronald Reagan had Soviets in Afganistan. Iranians holding US hostages. Communists taking over in South and Central America. Inflation at 18%. Jobless at 10%. Steel industries closing down. etc.

        In four years he had the Soviets on the run. Iran let hostages go. Freedom fighters were winning in Latin America. Inflation and unemployment down and economy roaring ahead at 6% annual growth.

        Obama is ruining this country and the voters need to send him into retirement on November 6.

      • Glen Poe says:

        Casey….please he has not gotten the country on the way back and he certainly doesn’t deserve 4 more years. Other than some short term credit adjustments to give the impression of improvement during the campaign season he has done nothing but lied to the people who supported him and even those who didn’t. We are still headed rapidly in the wrong direction with a blip up on occasion for looks. He can keep his brand of hope and change.

        Not to start the whole is he a citizen conversation again but as I understnd it his own attorney testified in court that the birth certificate posted on the White House web site was likely a fraud…….so where’s the real one? I had to renew my drivers license the other day and to do that I either had to bring my passport or my long form raised seal birth certificate. I would think the bar would be higher for the highest office in the land and people should be able to view the real deal if requested…..don’t you?

  7. Jeremy Carter says:

    Boy, I sure can’t wait until the Republicans can just go ahead and take over government, so we can see just how great they are. I’m sick of hearing about it. Let em have it….and we can sit back and watch them flounder just the same. And then when they sit stagnant for 4 years, we can have the same conversation we’re having now, and they can blame everything on Obama…just like Republicans claim Democrats do about ‘Dubya’….and then they’ll just say the same thing….’well you can’t fix what Obama broke in 4 years now can you?”……….But…didn’t you say that same thing about Obama?

    There’s too much ‘talk’, and not enough ACTION these days. People swear they have all the know how, and smarts to get stuff done. I learned a phrase a long time ago….’Don’t talk about it, BE ABOUT IT.’ Simple as that. Those that feel they know so much….run for that office. Go right ahead. So that your life can be trampled and turned upside down in the public eye, and your skeletons brought right on out of that closet. C’mon…what are you all waiting for????

    I would LOVE to take office. Unfortunately, I believe that I’ve started a bit too late in trying to ‘learn’ about politics. There’s entirely too many other people, especially on this board, that know WAY more than I do. (/sarcasm) And, I also don’t have all of the answers like some other folks, here especially. (Imagine that….someone saying that they actually don’t know something?!?!?! No way???)

    • Dave M says:

      Depends on a lot of things. Would the republicans in charge be able to wither to daily charges of being racist and feeding children and seniors to the bears… That’s what did us in with the housing fiasco. A GOP house would not oppose charges of racism by democrats claiming that the GOP did not want blacks to own a home.
      Now how dumb is that? But it worked.

  8. A Different View says:

    I don’t understand why Clarke Daily News is reporting on Obama anyway. Of course all the information is going to be swayed to a Republican’s viewpoint. Mitt Romney would be a no better President, and if any of you were going to argue for Gingrich or Santorum, than I worry for you. No one has anyone else’s best interests in mind. Obama is the best thing to happen to this country, but he’s so busy cleaning up Bush’s mess that he can’t even work on his own.

    Again, Clarke Daily News, next time to report a political event, please send a reporter who is not going to take any bias. The community should be given the facts and nothing else. Obama said some really great stuff in his speech. If you want to decide for yourself then go to http://www.barackobama.com/live.
    I challenge you Berryville. Try out a different viewpoint from the one that has been engrained into your head.

    • “Obama said some really great stuff in his speech”

      The problem is that you can’t listen to what he SAYS, you have to WATCH what he does. They are usually two different things

      • So you mean you have to watch someone’s political actions to base your opinion of them on? Isn’t that a little counter-intuitive? If America followed your model, we’d be worse off then we are now.

    • “but he’s so busy cleaning up Bush’s mess that he can’t even work on his own.”

      Really? Let’s see what the preezy of the united steezy is up to today

      http://www.whitehouse.gov/schedule/president/2012-05-07

      1000 am? Nice hours

      10:00 am The President receives the Presidential Daily Briefing
      Oval Office
      Closed Press

      11:00 am The President meets with senior advisors
      Oval Office
      Closed Press

      2:30 pm The President holds a conference call with elected officials and student government leaders from across the country to discuss the need to prevent rates from doubling on July 1
      Oval Office
      Closed Press

      Rough day. How about the weekend?

      Sunday

      http://www.whitehouse.gov/schedule/president/2012-05-06

      Zip

      No public schedule

      Saturday?

      http://www.whitehouse.gov/schedule/president/2012-05-05

      No public schedule

      Friday? Now THAT was a rough day

      http://www.whitehouse.gov/schedule/president/2012-05-04

      10:30 am The President and the Vice President receive the Presidential Daily Briefing
      Oval Office
      Closed Press

      11:25 am The President holds a roundtable discussion with a group of seniors and their parents
      Washington-Lee High School
      Pool Spray
      (In-Town Travel Pool Gather Time 10:50AM – North Doors of the Palm Room)

      11:50 am The President delivers remarks about the importance of having a fair shot at an affordable higher education
      Washington-Lee High School
      Open to pre-credentialed media

      4:55 pm The President welcomes the University of Kentucky men’s basketball team to the White House
      Rose Garden
      Open Press

      Maybe Thursday was “Work on Bush’s mess day”? Started at the crack of dawn.

      http://www.whitehouse.gov/schedule/president/2012-05-03

      12:30 pm The President and the Vice President meet for lunch
      Private Dining Room
      Closed Press

      2:00 pm The President meets with senior advisors
      Oval Office
      Closed Press

      5:00 pm The President delivers remarks at a Cinco de Mayo Reception
      Rose Garden

      OK, OK. Maybe Wednesday he got something done

      http://www.whitehouse.gov/schedule/president/2012-05-02

      10:40 am The President arrives Joint Base Andrews
      Travel Pool Coverage

      10:55 am The President arrives the White House
      South Lawn
      Open Press
      (Final Gather 10:30AM – North Doors of the Palm Room)

      3:45 pm The President participates in an Ambassador Credentialing Ceremony
      Oval Office
      Closed Press

      4:30 pm The President attends a campaign event
      The W Hotel
      Closed Press
      (In-Town Travel Pool Gather Time 4:00PM – North Doors of the Palm Room)

      5:30 pm The President attends a campaign event
      The W Hotel
      Closed Press

      How about Tuesday?

      http://www.whitehouse.gov/schedule/president/2012-05-01

      10:30 am The President and the Vice President receive the Presidential Daily Briefing
      Oval Office
      Closed Press

      11:00 am The President meets with senior advisors
      Oval Office
      Closed Press

      4:30 pm The President and the Vice President meet with Secretary of Defense Panetta
      Oval Office
      Closed Press

      What a buttload of work!

      Please everyone, pay attention this time

      • Jeremy Carter says:

        ^ – You seriously can’t be this naive to go by this. I mean….You just can’t. I’m not even sure what your point is with this. You’re actually not pointing anything out.

        I guess I can state the obvious…but as far as any level of national security is concerned….you think it’s a wise idea to post every single thing on the POTUS’ schedule? (I can’t even believe I typed that out……)

        Or, maybe I can just assume that the spaces in between these times listed..you’d say that the Prez was playing tiddly wings…or….poker…or shootin dice in his office……or checkin on his boys in the hood?? I betchya that’s your angle here……dang. That’s pretty bad……even for you you man…c’mon.

        • “You seriously can’t be this naive to go by this. I mean….You just can’t. I’m not even sure what your point is with this. You’re actually not pointing anything out.”

          In fact, I am pointing something out. By using the White Houses own website and not “Faux News”, I’m showing that Obama isn’t “Cleaning up Bush’s mess” as A Different View pointed out. He’s campaigning and doing a bunch of nothing.

          And you’ll notice that there is no itinerary for upcoming days for obvious security reasons, but they do post his daily schedule

          • Jeremy Carter says:

            You do know that one of the things that was said about the former prez was that he was the ‘most vacationing’ prez ever? So….as long as the playin’ field is the same……..let’s all have a swing!

            Campaigning?……well yes..b/c he has to. If he could sit back and watch the debacle of the Republican party bickering and face planting any longer…..I’m sure he would..and do his job and save more money. But I guess since there’s only one clown left…..he has to get his pies ready to throw in their faces right?

            And I know what you mean on the schedule….but you were using it as a means to make some wild point that he didn’t have a hard day, ever. I was just saying that was rather ludicrous to try to use as the FULL schedule most certainly isn’t shown all the way……..

          • What is posted on the website is his day. Now, there have been reports that he schedules meetings off site so that the visits of the union bosses don’t make such a big spash

            http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0211/50081.html

            And of course when he makes trips that need to stay secret like his recent Afghanistan visit. Otherwise, his whole day is posted.

            Not a lot going on, huh? No meetings with congress to try to hammer something out. No initiative at leadership at all.

          • Jeremy Carter says:

            I hate to keep going back and forth with you…I really do…but I can’t seem to stop. lol…and I do fully know you’re an intelligent guy…We’re just conversing as far as I’m concerned…..sharing ideas/opinions if you may…..

            So, everything you read on a website it true now all of a sudden? And there can’t be any wavering from what they post? That settles it…I’m heading to the Onion right now to see what they’re saying about the schedules of political figures. They’d have to be spot on too I guess……

            So, Mr. Obama gets up at 9am probably…has his shower and coffee while he reads the Washington Post. Then he’s there for his 10am meeting. He was probably out partying too hard on S. Capitol street the night before to get up before 9am. I’d agree.

            It’s not conceivable that maybe there was a NSA meeting at 8am sharp to go over anything…or maybe a breakfast meeting with someone at the FBI? Or…maybe DHS? I dunno..I’m just playing devils advocate here with you. You seem to be straight set that that schedule is EXACTLY his schedule. Unless of course, you follow him around all day for some reason….or are his assistant.

            Point being, I think it’s a little negligent to even speculate on what a day in the life of any President would be..unless you sat in the Oval Office. Certainly a website isn’t going to hash out the full day. But hey, that’s why I’m sitting here behind my laptop screen, and not at the White House. What do my opinions mean?

          • “I hate to keep going back and forth with you…I really do…but I can’t seem to stop. lol…and I do fully know you’re an intelligent guy…We’re just conversing as far as I’m concerned…..sharing ideas/opinions if you may…..”

            Same here:). One of my other points is that the preezy normally gets the PDBM first, so he can be up to speed in other meetings during the day. You’ll notice it’s usually the first thing on the schedule. Obama seems to get his around 1000. Half my day is over by then.

      • Fly on the wall says:

        You think those pick-the-number-of-stars you answered to have a harder day? Or the CEO of a big company? All of them have a host of underlings and inferiors who are tasked with the myriad jobs that must be done…the “heavy lifting,” if you will. But…just as a CEO’s fortunes rise (and, rarely, fall) with the vagaries of the company, or a general’s lot moves forward (or not) based on performance of the units or squadrons under his/her command, the president is in the same position.

        [redacted]

      • Dave M says:

        Barry is “Focusing like a laser” on creating jobs. So far he has been successful in creating jobs for Chinese and Brazilian oil companies drilling for oil in the Gulf of Mexico. And they are using the same equipment Exxon would have used. They must be more knowledgeable in oil drilling safety,

  9. Another View says:

    Obama is the best thing to happen to this country? Persistently high unemployment? Inflation? An unsustainable spike in deficit spending and the national debt? Public monies funneled to political cronies in the name of “green energy”? Socialized medicine? Persistent calls for immorally higher taxation? Appeasement of our enemies?

    If Obama is the best thing to happen to this country, I would shudder to encounter the worst.

    • Jeremy Carter says:

      AV:

      Shame that Santorum couldn’t be voted in then.

      We all could have found out!

      • Another View says:

        Rick Santorum–as with any of the Republican candidates–would be a far superior President than Barack Hussein Obama.

        • Jeremy Carter says:

          Typical.

          There’s nothing else to say here then. You’ve won for the day!

          Congratulations!

    • Glen Poe says:

      While I agree with your assessment of Obama you will encounter the worst if he stays or if he is replaced with Romney.

      As they are finding out in states like Iowa,Maine,Indiana,Nevada and now Arizon and Oklahoma. Its not the people who vote that counts but the people that count the votes. If thats the level of corruption you are willing to go to in order to get elected what are you willing to do after?

      As they are finding out in many States Romney and company did not win the primary they just got people to adjust the votes through multiple forms of fraud,deception and theft.

      Where it counts is the actual delegate votes (which is the wise reason for this “so called” arcane process) The process is much harder to manipulate …when done in the open.
      Ron Paul has now won 11 States delegations by a landslide including Romneys home State of Massachusetts. That should say something about the real support is. (you won’t find it written in the AP)

      The Republican party is being rebuilt from the inside out by dedicated Patriots who have the real interests of this country and its people (all people) in mind.

      Regardless of which party or which candidate you support people should be concerned of who is counting the vote and where( more on that later). These new voting machines make sense on the face of the issue but if you research how easy they can be manipulated and the fact that there is no paper record…. voting could easily become (and in many instances as Romney is proving) merely a pacifier and totally for show than more than an acurate reflection of the will of the people. Rather than party politics we need as a society to pull together rather than let politicians deliberately divide and conquer over issues that in the grand scheme of things should be the least of our worries as a country. Most better left to be resolved in the private sector by the people it effects and the ones willing to work for a better solution not driven by the government.

      Pick a topic. Whenever the government gets involved the solution is more expensive and the quality of the whatever goes down significantly. Usually to the benefit of someone over the other. The main ones that benefit appear to be the corporations (at taxpayer exspense) who end up writing the regulations, that then never seem to be read before the congress rubber stamps them into being.

  10. Clarke Life says:

    Don’t you love how the Repubs stress Obama’s middle name???

    • Another View says:

      You mean like Obama did when he took the oath of office?

    • Funny, four years ago you couldn’t say his middle name without being called a “raaaaaaaaaacist”.

  11. A Request says:

    I would like to see Romney’s birth certificate wasn’t he born in Mexico? While we’re playing show and tell how about his tax returns including his off shore no tax accounts that would be helpfull?

    • “I would like to see Romney’s birth certificate wasn’t he born in Mexico? While we’re playing show and tell how about his tax returns including his off shore no tax accounts that would be helpfull?”

      Obama first. To include school records that he had sealed.

    • Glen Poe says:

      You ‘all make my point for me. Neither are worth voting for.

      Ron Paul 2012

  12. Got-A-Dollar says:

    The capital gains tax was lowered in May 2003 under the George W. Bush administration not by a Republican congress under Bill Clinton. Since implementation of the Bush Era tax cuts the economy has steadily declined and debt increased .
    With the melt down and subsequent Bush bailout has not changed how this greedy bunch operates and they have the benefit go the 15 percent capital gains. The stock market is over 13000 while the rest of us continue to struggle. Having a president who looks out for his rich friends certainly won’t help the rest of America.
    There is no need to invest in a business and pay income tax of 30-35 percent when you can just play the stock market.
    Where would the economy be had Obama not bailed-out the auto industry. Expecting everyone to pay the same tax rate on income is not an attempt to take anyone’s wealth or to redistribute wealth.
    This president wanted affordable healthcare for all Americans, what a terrible thing. Individuals would be required to pay premiums. How is that different from traditional health insurance? But when the healthcare industry is involved in writing the rules who will benefit most? Mitt Romney has proven it works.
    President Obama will be re-elected and the Replicans may not do as well in congressional races as they think. Then the party of the rich and the party of no will have to regroup.

    • Another View says:

      The Republican Congress cut the capital gains tax in 1996, and it took effect in 1997.

      After the Bush tax cuts the economy grew robustly.

      The auto bailout was an immoral, illegal failure. And who would invest $80 billion dollars in an industry valued at $15 billion dollars?

      The Supreme Court will strike down Obamacare–thank goodness!

      Obama will be living in Chicago come Jan. 20, 2013. Again, thank goodness!

    • “This president wanted affordable healthcare for all Americans, what a terrible thing. Individuals would be required to pay premiums. How is that different from traditional health insurance? But when the healthcare industry is involved in writing the rules who will benefit most?”

      The health care industry and Big Pharma, of course. But who was in charge of congress when this law was written? Nancy Pelosi, Harry Reid and by extention, Obama. And now the CBO has turned around and after saying it would help the deficit, now says it will add to it.

      http://www.drudge.com/news/155518/study-obamacare-add-least-340b

      As for teh requirement that all individuals pay premiums, the Obama adminstration has already stated that it will take care of around 40 million people that can’t pay the premium. Of course, THEY won’t take care of it. People that pays taxes will

      http://cnsnews.com/news/article/administration-admits-court-under-obamacare-select-group-can-get-health-care-not-pay-it

      For an elite group—including people eligible for Medicaid who don’t sign up for it and people whose health care expenses exceed 8 percent of their income—the Obamacare mandate is no mandate and the penalty is neither a penalty nor a tax because they are not required to pay it, period.

      Under Obamacare, Verrilli conceded, these people can continue to receive free health care care, not sign up for health insurance, not sign up for Medicaid, and not pay a penalty.

  13. Got-A-Dollar says:

    Excuse me, left out Wall Street as the greedy bunch.

  14. Got-A-Dollar says:

    Hey Another View, I Love You!
    Just trying to get some of that hatred out of you heart.

  15. Clarke Life says:

    Wow Sarge, you are slumming it when you get your sources from HuffingtonPost…….

  16. Got-A-Dollar says:

    I agree with the Huffington report but is was Bush based on a three page document from his Treasury secretary that initially bailed out Wall Street.

  17. A Different View says:

    Sarge: Glad you have enough type in your day to search the President’s schedule. Maybe you should run this country, and we’ll see where it goes from there. All of women’s rights be taken away and men out in the fields fetching the meat? Yeah, cause things went so well back then.

  18. Funny. Over 60 comments, and no one has been able to articulate one reason why Obama should be re-elected

    • Reason #1 – 4 Million private sector jobs created ( more than W’s 2nd term)
      Reason #2 – Bin Laden is dead!
      Reason #3 – GM and Chrysler are alive and well !
      Reason #4 – American corporations are making record profits.
      Reason #5 – He supports women’s rights
      Reason #6 – He is not Mitt Romney

      I could continue but it would be pointless because our world views are so different. At my age I can only choose to see the world as half full and will vote for a leader who agrees. The modern Republican Party tears down the President’s policies and stresses his failures but gives him no credit for his successes and offers no new vision for our future.

      • Another View says:

        Reason #1 – 4 Million private sector jobs created ( more than W’s 2nd term)–First, Presidents do not create jobs, the private sector does. Second, there are more people unemployed today than when Obama assumed office on January 20, 2009. Indeed, there are record numbers of folks receiving all sorts of welfare such as food stamps, unemployment benefits, etc. Obama has made a bad situation worse.

        Reason #2 – Bin Laden is dead!–True. But the credit properly goes to SEAL Team 6 and the CIA, not Obama.

        Reason #3 – GM and Chrysler are alive and well !–False. More than $80 billion was invested in businesses worth no more than $15 billion. Bondholders and secured creditors were cheated, and despite massive subsidies, the monies have not been paid back, and the companies are not making money. The VOLT is a joke. This is a huge failure.

        Reason #4 – American corporations are making record profits.–No thanks to Obama. There would be far more economic activity if Obama policies were repealed, and free market reforms implemented.

        Reason #5 – He supports women’s rights–Such as? Public monies for abortions and contraception? Those are not rights, they are bribes, bought at the expense of the taxpayer.

        Reason #6 – He is not Mitt Romney–True enough. But Mitt Romney is far preferable to Barack Hussein Obama.

        • Relax AV!!

          I only responded to Sarge’s request to give a reason to re-elect the president. These are only a few of my reasons and your response only proves my point and confirms my desire to help get the president re-elected. He has made several mistakes but deserves another term before his policies can be truely and fairly judged. Romney has no core or vision for the future and offers no clear alternative message to deserve my vote so if this is my only choice, I will stick with the President.

          • Another View says:

            What? You want more inflation? You want more transfers of taxpayer monies to unions? You want less energy and higher energy prices? You want socialized medicine? You want more socialism?

            If so, then you want Hollande, the President of France. In the USA, we are liberty minded free market individuals, who distrust government instinctively.

          • Yes! Yes!

            I lost a third of my net worth six years ago, pay $900 mo. for health insurance( up 40%during the Bush years ), and I am drawing a union pension.

            So I say yes to recovering some of my lost home equity, yes to a public option for health insurance, yes to stronger unions to help restore our middle class, yes to investing in alternative fuels, and yes to another term for the president because it takes more tha three years to recover from a depression.

            Fear mongering no longer intimidates me. It’s time for new and creative ideas to move America forward. I think most Americans are ready for a conversation and cooperation and are tired of the anti-government and bitter opposition.

            Finally, I say no to the president of France running this country. Your comparison between him and President Obama only illustrates my point that the fear tactics are still being used but solutions to our problems and cooperation are not even offered.

          • Another View says:

            No! No!

            Government does not create wealth. Government does not create jobs. Government does not create prosperity.

            What caused the housing crisis? Government policies. What caused the debt crisis? Government policies? What is the biggest bite out of businesses’ bottom lines? Government taxation and regulation. What is the biggest impediment to an individual achieving wealth and independence? GOVERNMENT!

            There is a great comparison to be made between the President of France and President Obama; their policies are quite similar, except Obama’s are more radical. So you should be afraid!

            I am afraid. I am afraid that we are on the path to losing our country. I am afraid that the dollar will become like the Argentine dollar or the Weimer deutsche mark. I am afraid of socialized medicine. I am afraid of the loss of liberty and freedom which will doom my child’s future. I am afraid of the loss of morality and tradition such that the President of the United States endorses homosexual conduct and the destruction of marriage. I am afraid because I see that too many people either take liberty and freedom for granted, or would trade them for a regular diet of government gruel.

            We must stop this trend. Decline is a choice, not destiny.

          • My 2 Cents says:

            Well said again Casey! Fear-Mongering at best to get the Party of NO back in office!

          • “I lost a third of my net worth six years ago”

            We all did

            “pay $900 mo. for health insurance( up 40%during the Bush years )”

            So perhaps Obama, instead of instituting a system that has broken the bank in Eurpore, should have concentrated on price controls instead of cradle to grave health care for everyone, including illegals

            “yes to a public option for health insurance”

            ANd who gets to pay for this? Obviousy it won’t be you since you’re drawing a pension. Answer this……………….why should I pay for your health care?

            “yes to stronger unions to help restore our middle class”

            Unions are a big reason why formerly American jobs are now in China and Mexico

            “yes to investing in alternative fuels”

            I can get into this, as long as it’s not done the Obama way, giving millions to fly by night solar companies.

            “because it takes more tha three years to recover from a depression”

            Reagan fixed Carter’s mess in his first term

            “Finally, I say no to the president of France running this country. ”

            We already have the president of Franc runing this country. It hasn’t worked. Please give an example of one economi policy Obama has inititated that is aimed at getting this country back to where it was.

            Granted, I haven’t seen Romney’s plan yet either, and am disappointed it has not come out. But he has at least advanced some ideas to spur economic growth. Obama’s ideas are more governmetn spending of money we don’t have

          • Reagan worked closely with Speaker Tip O’Neil and a bipartisan congress. I only wish President Obama had a similar congressional climate.

          • Another View says:

            Reagan came into office with a mandate. Tip O’Neil and the House Democrats had to work with Reagan to some extent.

            That being said, Tip O’Neil and the House Democrats were far more partisan and vocal than any Republican today. Reagan was accused–falsely–of starving children, hating poor people, being a warmonger, etc. The “good ole days” never were.

  19. Jeremy Carter says:

    Oh Sarggeeeee….Where’d I put my bat ….and do you see the horse?

    I wish I had all day to go back and forth with you….although I’ve done a pretty good job thus far. We can exchange talking points all day and night though…and we’d still have a differing opinion.

    I can say – “Obamacare isn’t even that bad, and it’s being used against everything, when in reality, it doesn’t change that much as far as most folks are concerned…..let me re-iterate MOST, as they still have a choice in healthcare………BUT also that I know folks that have benefitted immensely from the program, and it has allowed them to save their own child’s life b/c of the help it provided.” But then you’ll come back and tell me I’m crazy…….etc. I can then come back and say I have blue cross/blue shield and I pay over $300/month to insure my family..and Obamacare still doesn’t make a difference for most folks b/c they can choose, and I’ve yet to see how it’s been ‘crammed down our throats’, as I still choose.

    I’ll tell you my feeling. Democrat or Republican – show me the best candidate and the lesser of two evils…and I’ll vote for them if I agree on what they’re about. Right now……the Republican party has done nothing to show that they can even put a candidate in that will come close to doing anything right. They’ve shown how they can screw up campaigns and make the political office about religion and bible thumping. Does that resonate to a lot of America?…..actually yes. But ….not me. Take on the real issues and stop getting in people’s business about abortion and gay marriage and fix something. Go to whatever church you want to go to on Sunday…and shut up about it.

    • Obamacare is going to bust the budget. Strangely enough, the CBO couldn’t foresee this back in 09 when this was being crammed down our throats. Now, three years later they are saying what a lot of people were saying back then, the it will bust the budget. It’s common sense actually. Add more people to a program, it’s going to cost more. On top of everything, the government has already set up health care co-ops to undermine the insurance companies. Oh, didn’t know that, did you? They did this knowing that private insurance can’t compete with government subsidized insurance. It will drive private insurance companies out of business and leave everyone at the mercy of the government. Now, there are a couple of things that are nice about the bill, such as being able to leave your kids on there if you want and making it easier to get insurance with pre-exisisting conditions. However, those two nice, but minor things, do not counter balance the overall harm Obamacare will do to the country. If this is the best he can run on, he’s hosed

      And oh, look! Another busy day at the White House!

      http://www.whitehouse.gov/schedule

      Tuesday, May 8 2012All Times ET Next .

      No public schedule.
      .

      • Jeremy Carter says:

        Did I say I hated going back and forth with you?? 🙂

        Once again, I said it above what you posted…we’ll go back and forth about this all day…and you said exactly what I thought you would…and go where I thought you would. So..I guess we’re done with that.

        I will say however, that you’d have to be insane to think you’d push out a United Healthcare, or a Blue Cross, or a Cigna out of the game. Obamacare won’t shove them out the door and make you go on it. Sorry. In case you didn’t know….I guess….Private insurance still makes money…..and a LOT of it……and I wouldn’t see that changing..well….ever. But, once again, (hold the phone!), I don’t know it all.

        “No public schedule” – Surely that means that he’s gone to the beach to body board or some foolishness of the like. I know what you mean………And I’m sure he’s using Marine 1 to get there, and using my tax dollars to front the gas for the chopper.

      • Fly on the wall says:

        Wow…jealous much, Sarge?

        “No public schedule” just means that the goings-on of his day are private…not that he is just loafing around 1600 Pennsylvania Ave.

  20. life is good says:

    The republican party is not what I grew up with. My parents left in disgust when Phyllis Schafly and her ilk decided to “run” the republican party, and all the bible thumpers who joined in with her. Less government, give me a break, You don’t want to be told what to do? Well, guess what.

    Republicans today tell us what is moral and immoral. I am a moral person, but believe women have the right to choose what to do with their bodies. I also believe men have the right to take Viagra if it helps them out, and reading these posts, some of you could sure use some.

    The tea party has ruined any sort of discourse. The goal was to make Obama a one term president, and they have imploded because they cannot deal with issues that are important. They have such a narrow view that they have paralyzed themselves.

    Religion? None of my business. Nor anyone’s business.

    Gas prices are going down. That is not Obama’s doing, just as the 4 dollar mess in 2008, going down right before the election was Bush, right?????? The president does not have control over pump prices.

    Looking at the president’s schedule? Give me another break. What a life some of you lead. How about Bush 2 chopping wood ad nauseum at the ranch? How he flew over Katrina aftermath and said “wow, it must be really bad there” How about lying about weapons of mass destruction in Iraq? Oh, and let’s not forget “mission accomplished” how pathetic was that?

    I’ll swear some of you still believe the birther issue, and oh my, on the sealed grades. No matter that Bush had what GPA and was shall we say not a stellar student? And how bout that alcohol?

    Reagan didn’t know what the heck was going on….Alzeimer onset. But let’s pop those jelly beans and smile.

    But I preach to a county who I think was one of the few who didn’t go for the President of the United States in 2008, and you can’t get over it.

    Your beloved republican, ultra conservative party, has ensured he will win, and if you don’t like that, you have only yourselves and coca cola glasses and tin foil hats to blame.

    • Another View says:

      President Bush did NOT lie about WMD in Iraq.

      • J Gibson says:

        Yes, he did. As did Cheney, and…sadly…Secretary of State Colin Powell to the UN. In fact, in speaking to the UN as he did, Mr. Powell was speaking on behalf of the US and the Bush administration.

        • Another View says:

          Was President Clinton lying? How about John Kerry? Even Ted Kennedy thought Iraq had WMDs!

          And the evidence is clear that Iraq maintained the basis for cranking up their WMD program at any time. Uncontroverted!

          Did it ever occur to the Left that perhaps on this question, the whole world–not just President Bush–erred? Did it ever occur to the Left that perhaps it was better to err on the side of US security, rather than err in trusting Saddam Hussein? What if Saddam had possessed WMD, and President Bush had not acted? What would the Left’s accusation be then?

          It is time to move on from the silly canard that President Bush lied, or that President Bush did this, that or the other thing. The instant crisis is being mismanaged by the incumbent and we need to correct it. TODAY recovery means Barack Hussein Obama’s retirement.

          • My 2 Cents says:

            Considering we should have left Iraq alone and went after and focused on Afghanistan the whole time, I am not buying AV. Remember, W was just trying to appease his Daddy because he couldn’t kill Saddam. Everyone knows that……….

          • Another View says:

            History shall show that deposing Saddam Hussein and establishing a functioning free state in Iraq shall serve to stabilize the Middle East region.

          • The verdict is still out on that. Frankly, after a tour there, I’m not convinced they can pull it off. Of course Obama, if you look closely, has helped not those that want freedom, but those elements that are pro-Iranian in the region

          • Ahhh, the ol “Sarge tells the truth markdown”. I know most people don’t keep up on this stuff. I guess I do because of my military background. But again, maybe this time people will pay attention.

            Behold

            First up, Bahrain. Didn’t hear about that one, did you? It’s only homeport to the largest US naval base in the region. The “protestors” there were pro iranian shias, while the government is made up of sunni muslims, as are most of the countries on the arbian pennisula. The Sauds asked us for help since we’re based there. Nada. The Sauds ended up sending their own troops in to quell the unrest. Again, the “protestors were pro-Iranian

            http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/middleeast/bahrain/8330005/Bahrain-protests-live.html

            14:52 – Critics of the protests have claimed that the crowds are being influenced by pro-Iranian factions – or even directly by the Iranian government – as well as by the Lebanese militant group Hezbollah.

            Then we have Libya, who the Sec Def, Robert Gates, said on one of the Sunday shows posed no threat or interest to the US. Obama helped overthrow Kahdaffi, who was indeed a brute, but was a non radical islamist. Now there is nothing there but tribal fighting.

            http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/tehranbureau/2011/02/iran-condemns-clampdown-on-pro-democracy-protesters-in-libya.html

            Iran ‘Condemns Clampdown on Pro-Democracy Protesters’ … in Libya

            Egypt speaks for itself. A choice between the Muslim Brotherhood and military rule, thanks to Obama overthrowing a stable dictator

            Then, right up the road is Syria, a pro-iranian satellite state. The protesters there are sunnis, protesting the shia government of Assad.

            http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/middleeast/syria/8451596/Syria-Iran-secretly-aiding-repression-of-protests.html

            http://www.nowlebanon.com/NewsArchiveDetails.aspx?ID=371449

            Yet Obama does nothing here, which benefits Iran and fight against Israel. Every factionhe has backed in the region is pro-iranian.

            Sorry. Truth hurts

          • Glen Poe says:

            Wake up….most of them on in on it. Follow this link….but before you make some off handed comment do some research.

            http://davidswanson.org/node/3665

        • Really? All these democrats lie as well?

          “Without question, we need to disarm Saddam Hussein. He is a brutal, murderous dictator, leading an oppressive regime … He presents a particularly grievous threat because he is so consistently prone to miscalculation … And now he is miscalculating America’s response to his continued deceit and his consistent grasp for weapons of mass destruction … So the threat of Saddam Hussein with weapons of mass destruction is real…”
          – Sen. John F. Kerry (D, MA), Jan. 23. 2003 | Source

          “One way or the other, we are determined to deny Iraq the capacity to develop weapons of mass destruction and the missiles to deliver them. That is our bottom line.”
          – President Clinton, Feb. 4, 1998 | Source

          “If Saddam rejects peace and we have to use force, our purpose is clear. We want to seriously diminish the threat posed by Iraq’s weapons of mass destruction program.”
          – President Bill Clinton, Feb. 17, 1998 | Source

          “We must stop Saddam from ever again jeopardizing the stability and security of his neighbors with weapons of mass destruction.”
          – Madeline Albright, Feb 1, 1998 | Source

          “He will use those weapons of mass destruction again, as he has ten times since 1983.”
          – Sandy Berger, Clinton National Security Adviser, Feb, 18, 1998 | Source

          “[W]e urge you, after consulting with Congress, and consistent with the U.S. Constitution and laws, to take necessary actions (including, if appropriate, air and missile strikes on suspect Iraqi sites) to respond effectively to the threat posed by Iraq’s refusal to end its weapons of mass destruction programs.”
          Letter to President Clinton.
          – (D) Senators Carl Levin, Tom Daschle, John Kerry, others, Oct. 9, 1998 | Source

          “Saddam Hussein has been engaged in the development of weapons of mass destruction technology which is a threat to countries in the region and he has made a mockery of the weapons inspection process.”
          – Rep. Nancy Pelosi (D, CA), Dec. 16, 1998 | Source

          “Hussein has … chosen to spend his money on building weapons of mass destruction and palaces for his cronies.”
          – Madeline Albright, Clinton Secretary of State, Nov. 10, 1999 | Source

          “We begin with the common belief that Saddam Hussein is a tyrant and a threat to the peace and stability of the region. He has ignored the mandate of the United Nations and is building weapons of mass destruction and th! e means of delivering them.”
          – Sen. Carl Levin (D, MI), Sept. 19, 2002 | Source

          “We know that he has stored secret supplies of biological and chemical weapons throughout his country.”
          – Al Gore, Sept. 23, 2002 | Source

          “Iraq’s search for weapons of mass destruction has proven impossible to deter and we should assume that it will continue for as long as Saddam is in power.”
          – Al Gore, Sept. 23, 2002 | Source

          “We have known for many years that Saddam Hussein is seeking and developing weapons of mass destruction.”
          – Sen. Ted Kennedy (D, MA), Sept. 27, 2002 | Source

          “The last UN weapons inspectors left Iraq in October of 1998. We are confident that Saddam Hussein retains some stockpiles of chemical and biological weapons, and that he has since embarked on a crash course to build up his chemical and biological warfare capabilities. Intelligence reports indicate that he is seeking nuclear weapons…”
          – Sen. Robert Byrd (D, WV), Oct. 3, 2002 | Source

          “I will be voting to give the President of the United States the authority to use force — if necessary — to disarm Saddam Hussein because I believe that a deadly arsenal of weapons of mass destruction in his hands is a real and grave threat to our security.”
          – Sen. John F. Kerry (D, MA), Oct. 9, 2002 | Source

          “There is unmistakable evidence that Saddam Hussein is working aggressively to develop nuclear weapons and will likely have nuclear weapons within the next five years … We also should remember we have always underestimated the progress Saddam has made in development of weapons of mass destruction.”
          – Sen. Jay Rockefeller (D, WV), Oct 10, 2002 | Source

          “In the four years since the inspectors left, intelligence reports show that Saddam Hussein has worked to rebuild his chemical and biological weapons stock, his missile delivery capability, and his nuclear program. He has also given aid, comfort, and sanctuary to terrorists, including al Qaeda members … It is clear, however, that if left unchecked, Saddam Hussein will continue to increase his capacity to wage biological and chemical warfare, and will keep trying to develop nuclear weapons.”
          – Sen. Hillary Clinton (D, NY), Oct 10, 2002 | Source

          “We are in possession of what I think to be compelling evidence that Saddam Hussein has, and has had for a number of years, a developing capacity for the production and storage of weapons of mass destruction.”
          – Sen. Bob Graham (D, FL), Dec. 8, 2002 | Source

    • In-the-Know says:

      Life is good…

      Oh, man! You rock!!!!!!!

  21. That’s right sheeple, keep fighting amongst yourselves, pay no intention to the man behind the curtain. Isn’t it blatantly obvious the democrat republican paradigm is engineered by design to keep us fighting amongst ourselves. (Divide and conquer) One thing is for certain, very little difference exist between either party at this point. Need an example: Obama campaigned and promised to end the war, has that happened? You see, it doesn’t matter who wins Obama or Romney, the war will continue. Regarding Obamacare, do you really think Romney will end Obamacare considering he is the one that imposed it at the state level? Wouldn’t he be in direct contradiction opposing it? Whether you vote for Obama or Romney makes no difference because the agenda is exactly the same, or at least the end result will be. The only clear choice in this election cycle is Ron Paul.

    For educational purposes, I challenge each and everyone of you to look up “Hegelian Dialectic” and ask yourself, is this something being used on the American people today? Be sure to take note of were it originated and it’s purpose. –

    http://www.crossroad.to/articles2/05/dialectic.htm

    • “The only clear choice in this election cycle is Ron Paul. ”

      I like a lot of the libertarian positions, except for foreign policy and a free for all drug culture. Their foreign policy is completely whacked.

      And I disagree with your notion that there are no differences between the parties. Yes, a lot of times they might as well be Republicats or Demicans, but Obama showed just today by coming out for full fledged gay marriage that there are differences, some of them stark.

    • Glen Poe says:

      All that would require to much real thought ….after all its only choosing the Person most willing and capable of running the country thats serves the people(all) the best. I mean its not like winning the super bowl or something really important like that. Give us a break.

    • livinginbville says:

      That word “SHEEPLE” is incredibly demeaning. Not that you care, I’m sure you consider yourself above the average citizen.

      • An apt name for Obama voters.

        Obama was mentored by a communist

        SHEEPLE: Oh well

        Obama has a Conn Social Security number, even though he never lived there

        SHEEPLE: Chris Matthews said sometimes people get social security numbers from state where they never lived

        Obama sealed his records

        SHEEPLE: He showed his birth cretificate and we really don’t care or want to hear that his student records are sealed because it probably shows he applied for foreign student aid. CNN said it was all good

        Obama sat in a church that is anti American for 20 years

        Hey, at least he goes to church!

        Obama said he was going to ban lobbyists from Capitol Hill

        SHEEPLE: What’s the big deal, he sings great! Did you see him on the Late Night Show?

        Obama has run up 6 TRILLION in debt for the US

        SHEEPLE: But he’s Coooooooool!

  22. “Their foreign policy is completely whacke” – Please be more specific so we can address on a case by case basis. I agree we should protect our nation, and assist our allies by promoting peace, not war, destruction, land theft, ethnic cleansing, and implementation of puppet governments.

    “And I disagree with your notion that there are no differences between the parties. Yes, a lot of times they might as well be Republicats or Demicans,” – This kind of reinforced my original point regarding heglian dialectic. Glad we agree.

    • If I remember correctly, Ron Paul wants to completely withdraw from all overseas commitments. This is whacked. While we could certainly scale back on some postings, others are there for a reason, primary of which is to protect the supply of oil that runs this country. Completely withdrawing and being days away from a contingency in those areas leaves us at the mercy of a lot of people that don’t like us.

      • Wagonman says:

        If Ron Paul stays in the game he will surely hand the election to Obama. Can anyone say Ross Perot???

        • Glen Poe says:

          Maybe so….Maybe not. Maybe the Republicans should post a candidate worth voting for instead of McCain or Romney. Oh yeah some are working on it. His name is Ron Paul. Don’t blame Dr Paul because some will vote for anyone (Romney) just to beat the other guy.

          At least Paul has a voting record that he can defend.

      • Glen Poe says:

        If I remember correctly…..well Sarge you don’t. But I digress.

        Her is a clip From Wesley Clark that tells a lot of the story and why you don’t get the truth from the politicians and war mongers who are making money of taxpayers while followig their own agenda that has nothing to do with a reliable foreign policy and everything to do with empire building. By the way in case you haven’t figured it out …..you and your children are not part of the empire.

        This is worth watching wether you are a Republican or a Democrat.

        If you are not familiar with PNAC then you should google it.

        I hope you all wake up soon. If you have children you should. If you think Obama is not a part of this you are wrong.

        • Glen Poe says:

          ooops ….the link I was refering to

          http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9UshrpY3Cug

          Wesley Clark on whats really going on.

          • Wesley Clark almost started a war with the Russians in Bosnia back in the 90’s. I put little credence in anything he has to say

          • Another View says:

            Indeed, Wesley Clark was fired for incompetence and insubordination. Hardly an authoritative source of information.

          • Glen Poe says:

            Maybe…..maybe not. The point was about PNAC, the group behind it and what it states as well as the timing. Which can be verified from multiple sources as well as most of what Clark describes. It wasn’t an endorsement. Look it up.

            PNAC

            Project for a New American Century.

          • Another View says:

            Wesley Clark’s dismissal, and the reasons therefore, are not in dispute. These are facts. And the reasons for his dismissal flow from Sarge’s point about his tenure in the Balkans. Again, facts.

          • There are all kinds of New World Order plans out there. Look up Agenda 21. Look up the North American Union. If you really want ot go down a rabbitt hole ask why the government, specifically the DHS, recently bought millions of rounds of ammo and is conducting joint military operations. Google Executive Orders and FEMA camps

            This is why we have the Second Amendment

          • Glen Poe says:

            Right ….and I agree. Problem is Obama and Romney are in it all the way to the top of their pointed heads. So how is voting for either going to do anything. Why are you fighting the ones trying to change it. Don’t tell me Romney ( whos backed by all the same) Will do anything to change it…in fact he has as much as siad he wouldn’t.

            This will tell you why the ruling class want primarys and why the rest of us want conventions and why they differ. Although Romney and co has bbeen doing his best to circumvent that process too. Like stuffing ballot boxes, flipping votes and trying to have his minions close conventions without the necessary votes and count the votes in private. Its still not working. Not even here in Virginia. I don’t want to fight with you guys and would rather have you on our team but I will not step aside for another useless ….anybody who can beat the other guy election again this time.

            http://communities.washingtontimes.com/neighborhood/reawakening-liberty/2012/may/10/why-cant-romney-win-delegates-ron-paul/

          • Another View says:

            Again; Ron Paul is going to support Romney. Are you?

        • Oh, here’s the Wiki entry for Clarks little “war monger” escapde in Bosnia. If you like, I can get a more reliable source

          http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Incident_at_Pristina

          A contingent of 200[1] Russian troops deployed in Bosnia and Herzegovina then crossed into Kosovo and occupied Pristina International Airport in Pristina, the capital city of Kosovo.

          Upon hearing of the deployment, American NATO commander Wesley Clark called NATO Secretary-General Javier Solana, and was told “you have to transfer authority” in the area. Clark then ordered a contingent of 500 British and French paratroopers to seize the airport by force, an order that is still debated. British officer (later singer-songwriter) James Blunt[2], who commanded the contingent, questioned and did not carry out this order. His delay was sanctioned by British General Mike Jackson. Jackson refused to enforce Clark’s orders, reportedly telling him “I’m not going to start the Third World War for you”.[3][1] Jackson instructed the paratroopers to encircle the airport instead.

          Russia placed several airbases on standby, and prepared battalions of paratroopers to depart for Pristina on Il-76 military transport planes. Fearing that Russian aircraft were heading for the airport, General Clark planned to order British tanks and armored cars to block the runway, and requested American Admiral James O. Ellis for helicopter support. His orders were not carried out

  23. A Request says:

    To add any substance to this discussion will require a review of what Bishop Willard (aka Mitt Romney) will actually do to improve the economy, foreign affairs, taxes and human rights. Until now it has been a cascade of buzzwords without a single plan. I am getting tired of hearing jobs and the economy being tossed around when the DOW has doubled, private market jobs have soared while public sector jobs have been reduced. Until Bishop Willard can address his plan that includes the world economy as well as our own a discussion is useless. How quick we forget the first panic $780B bailout of Wall Street in Nov 2007 by GW’s crew to float thier $10T debt they passed on. My guess is the GOP didn’t want to win in 2008 no doubt why McCain picked Palin to assure a loss and inheritance of the GW mess. If there is a plan we should know? Meanwhile leave out the buzzwords.

    • Another View says:

      How about:

      1. Repeal Obamacare

      2. Repeal Dodd-Frank

      3. Permit oil drilling on public lands and off-shore

      4. Repeal Obama regulations on coal burning plants

      5. Simplify the federal tax code, imposing a flat tax at a low rate with few, if any deductions

      6. Repeal the inheritance tax

      7. Eliminate subsidies to favorite industries such as wind and solar power, as well as GM

      8. Repeal the NLRB’s rogue regulations favoring unionization

      9. Cut spending domestically, across the board

      10. Rebuild the Navy’s fleets

      11. Make Social Security private and voluntary

      12. Eliminate Medicaid

      13. Phase out Medicare

      14. Eliminate the Departments of Energy, Labor, Education, Agriculture, Commerce, Transportation, HUD, and Veterans’ Affairs

      15. Return Congress to part time status

      There you go. No buzzwords, specificity, and a short list of much which needs to be accomplished.

      • A Request says:

        Exactly what I said and the plan to accomplish these include lighting a candle and wishing?

        • Another View says:

          No, I think Congressional action, Presidential leadership and the involvement of the American people shall suffice to restore this country to greatness and prosperity. We certainly cannot do nothing, Obama’s socialism doesn’t work, and history shows that the program I outlined above would be very successful in achieving our restoration.

      • Glen Poe says:

        He asked what Romney was actually going to do not what you thought should be done.

        • Another View says:

          Well I do not work for Romney, so I cannot speak for him.

          And the President does not pass laws, make appropriations, lower taxes, spend monies, raise armies or eliminate Cabinet Departments. So the better question is what would a Republican Congress do w/ a Republican President, versus a Democrat Congress w/ President Obama.

          We saw what unified Democrat control would do, and fired Nancy Pelosi. Maybe we should try unified Republican control, and hold them accountable.

          • Glen Poe says:

            If that person was Romney and not Ron Paul it would be a disaster.

          • J Gibson says:

            But here in Ol’ Virginny…it was only Ron Paul and Willard Romney on the ballot, and Ron Paul couldn’t get a majority. Your carrying water for him (who today has said he’s spending no more money because he has none on his campaign) is all well and good, but if he couldn’t beat Romney in a 2-horse race, how could he beat Obama in a 2-horse race? He’s far too libertarian, far too politically bi-polar, to have any sort of general election coalition.

            From the speeches and debates I’ve seen, he’s personable enough, with an irrascible streak that is at times commendable and at other times maddening. But, seriously, you – and only you, of late – pushing his candidacy now is a waste of time.

          • Another View says:

            Pushing Ron Paul’s candidacy is indeed a waste of time.

            Pushing Ron Paul’s agenda (most, with certain foreign policy exceptions) is not. It should be a GOP goal.

          • Glen Poe says:

            You don’t know what you are talking about. If you want more of the same regardless of which administration just keep your head in the sand. Your kids will reflect on your stupidity later.

            He is the only one who defined the issues we are facing and the only one with the voting record and willingness to take on the problem. Putting anyone else in is a waste of time. He has been consistently right about the financial crisis and what was driving it. Going back years.

            Pushing anyone else is a waste of time.

          • Glen Poe says:

            [redacted] He’s winning in 11 states and still going strong. I’m not in those states so I must have some help. I’m carying water for my family and anybody else who sees whats really happening and is willing to do something about it instead of just blabbering something they know little about or something they heard on FOX news. At least I’m spending my time on a candidate worth electing instead of just looking for a puppet to beat the other puppet with.

          • Another View says:

            I admire much about Representative Paul. But the fact is, his ideas have not carried Congress when he was in the majority. Therefore, there is no reason to believe that his ideas would prevail if he were President.

            I am no fan of Mitt Romney. But the thought of Barack Hussein Obama in the White House on January 21, 2013 scares the dickens out of me. Mitt Romney would undo the damage inflicted by the Dems since 2007. Time enough after that mess is cleaned up to find and elect an effective conservative President, IF a Republican Congress is forced to act.

          • Glen Poe says:

            AV if Ron Paul were president then it would mean his ideas did prevail and if we as citizens did our job we would give him a congress that worked instead of sending the same jokers from either party back over and over again.

            Romney will give us more of the same.

            By the way Paul is winning. He has one 11 states already in the conventions were it counts. If Romney’s people had counted the votes in the open instead of someones basement he would have one the primarys too. He’s trying to do it in the conventions too but its much harder because the people voting are paying attention. He lost his own state of Massachusetts to Paul by a landslide as well as Maine,Louisiana,Nevada,Iowa, etc

          • Another View says:

            Ron Paul has quit campaigning. He is going to support Mitt Romney, as is his son, Rand, The Republican primary campaign is OVER, and Mitt Romney won.

            Just thought you’d like to know.

          • Glen Poe says:

            Oh yea….that speaks to your credibility. How about a source for that? Not the one that says we are no longer waisting money on the primaries and will continue to focus on the conventions.

          • Paul is done and will have no influence on the convention. It’s time to decide if you want Romney or if you want four more years of out of control spending and racial strife, among other things

          • Glen Poe says:

            No the decision is really yours because without all the disenfranchised from all parties your man is a loser……well he’s a loser anyway but that’s beside the point. Don’t blame it on everyone else because they are tired of the same lame game and not going to take it anymore. The anyone but Obama line ain’t gonna cut it. Paul has been winning were it counts and where they can’t hide in a closet to count the votes ….though they are still trying. There was a reason they tried to get the states to go all primary….because the vote is easier to manipulate. Voter fraud and dirty tricks have been a Hallmark of his campaign and that’s within his own party so yea sorry won’t support that anymore under any circumstances. What will he do when he gets in?….don’t know because he says little and one he does its the same as Obama and more and like Obama he has trouble with the truth. Not doing the lesser of 2 evils thing either. Obama is not my choice by any stretch but Romney….No! Either will suck …it will just suck slightly differently with no overall net gain for the general population. Lets talk again after Tampa….good luck to you.

          • Another View says:

            There is an old saying about not cutting off your nose to spite your face. It may fit here.

            You do not have to love Mitt Romney to know that Barack Hussein Obama is an absolute disaster as President, and must be removed. You also do not have to be a rocket scientist to know that there shall only be two (2) realistic choices on November’s ballot; Mitt Romney and Barack Hussein Obama.

            So, Glen Poe, who are you going to choose? Ron Paul is going to choose Mitt Romney; are you?

          • I love you Paulians. Every election it’s the same thing, the Ron Paul REVOLUTION!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! You talk about overwhelming support from the military and money bombs and gobs of cash from the grass roots. Then………..poof! It’s over, same as this time. Only the Paulians keep on talking about taking over the convention and pulling off some miracle that will propel Paul to the presidency. Ain’t gonna happen.

            Now, if you want to talk about the need for an independent other than repubs and dems, then you have my ear. Frankly, I was hoping the Tea Party would put someone up, but they are probably logisitcally an election cycle away from doing it. But I definately agree the country needs folks that are interested in the country and not in making themselves rich.

            But like I said, it’s over for Paul. Even he admits it. So, here are your choices;

            Mitt Romney, who while liberal, at least isn’t a Marxist and actually has a clue about running business’ and states

            Obama, a Marxist who has run the country into the ground or

            Stay home, and help Obama

            Romney is far from a perfect candidate for me, but I’l be there election day to pull the lever for him. The country just can’t withstand another four years of Obama

    • Not being a Barack Obama “why spend 10 Billion when you can spend a Trillion” is reason 1 through 156, why to vote for Mitt Romney. I just dont understand why you democrats just fluff that over. The interest is going to be 600 Billion this year alone, and Obama is not doing anything to stop the bleeding. If it were YOUR money, you would have fired Obama years ago……

  24. Got-A-Dollar says:

    Gas prices are tumbling, stock market is steady, unemployment declining and the country is headed in right direction.
    Four more years!

    • So you like $3.50 gas, 145 unemployment and having 88 million Americans out of work? Along with having more people on Food Stamps than ever before and more people living in poverty than since the Great Dpression.

      Not a very good example of “headed in the right direction”

      • 2/3 of all private sector jobs created in the last 50 years have been under Democraric presidents. 20 million under Clinton, 4million under Obama in three years with only 1 million during Bush’s 8 years. Please stop implying that jobs are not being created under Obama. We were losing jobs at a rate of 400,000 each month when Obama took office and continued that way for a couple of months. Since then we have added 4million jobs and if it were not for the public sector jobs lost we would be recovering even faster.

        Of course the food stamp numbers are going to increase during this crisis because along with unemployment insurance it acts a a safety net when people lose their jobs and houses.We have endured three years of a depression and the main reason it is not another Great Depression is that we are on the right track.

        These times call for patience and support instead of misleading buzz words and fear- mongering.

        Got-A-Dollar thinks we’re on the right track and I agree. The last thing we need is to return to the policies which got us here in the first place. Supply-side economics and deregulating Wall Street and banks have rewarded the few while destroying the middle class. It’s time to rebuild and move forward.

        I have been voting since 1968 and have struggled with some of my choices but this year will be the easiest decision for me to make. Four more years!

      • jennifer says:

        still better off than four years ago. and gas is an antiquated technology. it is time to move forward. people who favor offshore drilling so we can end up with more tragedies like BP’s mess are stuck in the past supporting what they know with very little concern for our children’s future. personally, i want my children to be able to enjoy the obx as they are today, without offshore drilling and oil spills and dead birds.

        • “people who favor offshore drilling so we can end up with more tragedies like BP’s mess”

          This would include Obama, right? After all, until the BP spill, he was still drilling. In fact, his adminstration gave BP some kind of safety award right before the spill. Of course, after that he ran all the prospectve oil drilling out of the gulf. That’s part of the reason gas is still $3.50+

        • Another View says:

          We are not better off than we were four (4) years ago. This country is on the decline, and the descent is purposeful, orchestrated by the Obama administration.

          True Americans do not want to live like “Julia”, cared for throughout life by the government. Real Americans want to stake their claim, and for government to leave them alone.

          And if gas is such an antiquated technology, what would you propose to replace it? Windmills on cars? How about solar panels? Electric cars like the Volt which no one wants, because it is impractical and does not work?

    • Stock Market is steady? Check the date on your newspaper.? gas prices are ‘tumbling’ Look, lets just cut to the chase? You like Obama for whatever reason. fine. We don’t like him for exactly one reason. He is incompetent..Now you are going to disagree, and the circular firing squad will continue.. until November, when we decide whether or not the Republic will fall or stand.
      ,

  25. Clinton’s 20 million jobs as you so put it had more to do with the tech boom and first Republican congress.
    Reagan and Kennedy both cut taxes, LBJ had the Vietnam War and space race.
    Nixon and carter had relatively little job growth.
    Oh and then what happened when San Fan Nan took over in 2006. presidents are not the “Supermen” you claim them to be. its the entire package.
    You need to analyze numbers not just look at the final tally.
    And BTW, in 2008, I sem to recall the job hemmoraging beginning after the corporate world realized we elected a socialistt as President

  26. Got-A-Dollar says:

    For you Reagan lovers.
    In 1979 Reagan endorsed the Kemp-Roth tax bill which would have cut income tax 30 percent across the board. After winning the White House in 1980 he sent the Kemp-Roth bill to congress! It was enacted in August 1981.
    Almost immediately upon enactment of the 1981 tax cut, Reagan came under enormous pressure to Do something about the increasing deficit. While his preference was to reduce spending it was not politically possible to do so. His aides began pressuring him to support a tax increase. Conservative activists were appalled that Reagan would consider such a thing, but he eventually endorse the Tax Equity and Fiscal Responsibility Act of 1982. According to a Treasury Department analysis, it raised taxes by close to 1 percent of GDP, equivalent to 150 billion today, and was probably the largest peacetime tax increase in American history.
    This was the first of many tax increases he endorsed and signed into law. There were 11 major tax increases during his administration.
    Information on Reagan’s tax activity is available on many web sites. Reagan understood cutting spending was not enough he had to increase revenue.

    • Both Reagan and Bush agreed to tax increases as they “negotiated” with Democrats in Congress. You know, much like the democrats in Congress negotiated with republicans over Obamacare by changing the locks on conference room doors.

    • Another View says:

      For you Reagan haters:

      Ronald Reagan only agreed to 1982 tax increase because Democrats agreed to cut spending $3.00 for every $1.00 in tax increases. The tax increases came, but the spending cuts did not; the Democrats lied. Ronald Reagan often lamented his agreement to this deal with the Democrats.

      Moreover, the Kemp Roth tax cuts called for 30% tax cuts across the board. The Democrats would only agree to 25%, phased in over 3 years. This phase in hurt the economy and prolonged the recovery from Jimmy Carter’s stagflation.

      Ronald Reagan believed that the economy did best, and freedom soared, when Americans kept more of their money in their pockets. Ronald Reagan recognized that the federal government had a SPENDING problem, not a too little taxation problem.

      Finally, Ronald Reagan wanted to lower spending and eliminate the deficit, but recognized that the defeat of the Soviet Union was of paramount importance. In return for the defense buildup, the Democrats demanded increased social spending. Ronald Reagan postponed deficit reduction in return for victory in the Cold War. It was a good deal.

      As much as Obama and the Left would try, Ronald Reagan is no poster child for higher taxes. Ronald Reagan believed in the power of the individual, not the government. Ronald Reagan believed in the Founders’ dream. He was the greatest president since George Washington.

  27. Got-A-Dollar says:

    Reagan tax cuts and increases effected everyone more equally. Bush tax cuts benefited the wealthy and increases hit the middle class. Democrats “compromised” with Reagan, the republicans will not compromise with Obama. The president has proposed trillions in deficit reductions along with revenue increases, the republicans say “no”.

  28. Shaun Broy says:

    Guess what?

    You all should start to come to terms with the fact that there is a very, very good chance that President Obama will remain our Commander and Chief through 2016. I hate to burst any bubbles.

    Maybe… Congress will have a “come to Jesus” moment of their own soon! I won’t be holding my breathe…

    (Que the music)

    Hail To The Chief!!!

    -SB 🙂

    • Another View says:

      Barack Hussein Obama will return home to Chicago come January 20, 2013. He is going to lose in a landslide. Because, he is the WORST president ever; worse than Jimmy Carter!

      • My 2 Cents says:

        There goes the daily Sarge/Another View Fear Mongering drop of Obama’s middle name!!! Shaun is right, if you Rightwingers are really that naive you need help.

    • He is at about 43% in all the swing states. That is not good for an incumbent. The voters know him. If they want him, they would be all in right now. Its like asking, will you be married to the same person next year?
      If you can;t say yes immediately, you are probably gong to say no. So you enjoy Hawaii and dream of Obama’s father!