First, let me state an obvious point: Ron Paul won’t be the GOP nominee.
Next, let me say that I suspect Rick Santorum will have a similar fate as Mike Huckabee, and will be peter out soon enough. With Rick Perry limping along, I see this still being a race between Mitt and Newt. If Rick Perry manages to revitalize his campaign in South Carolina, it may be a three-man race, but with speculation last night being that Perry would drop out, right or wrong, his campaign took a blow last night. I don’t think the Iowa Caucuses should mean so much–and in many ways they don’t–but the impact on the race already is clear.
Rick Santorum, in my opinion, has never been a viable candidate for the nomination. I like him. I’ve met him. But, he’s not the one to go head to head with Obama. Not by a long shot. Ron Paul is just insane, only outdone by his hardcore followers who argue like Occupy Wall Street protesters.
With debates resuming, I think Newt Gingrich will reemerge strong as the anti-Romney candidate, and siphon support away from Perry as his campaign sputters. Santorum, if the pattern continues, may get some increased scrutiny, and that probably means that Newt will benefit the most.
What do you think?
Blogs For Victory 
Matt, I was a big Newt supporter but that support has waned over the last couple of weeks. I still really like Newt and think that most of his ideas and policies are exactly what is needed, but am now finding that he may be a little too quick with the mouth before engaging the brain, as evidenced by his Bain comment. That being said, I hope Newt has a prominent role in whatever administration comes next, and of which I hope is Romney and of whom I plan to vote for. I just think Romney is a little more disciplined and I have always liked his private sector experience. I think at this time in our countries history, we need a CEO, not a politician. We need someone who has made tough business decisions, has been accountable to share holders, and someone who knows how the private economy works – and that’s Romney. I do like Santorum, but he is a politician, and I am not convinced he has the business acumen Romney does.
Mitt Romney is John Kerry-lite. In the general election he’ll do well in the Northeast and the West Coast. Meaning, He’ll make losses in Democrat states look more respectful. He is weak in the South, putting into play Virginia, South Carolina and Florida for Obama. In key state Ohio, Obamacare was not well received, leaving the key issue moot with Romneycare.
Romney in politics, lost to Ted Kennedy, won the governship with less than 50% of the vote. He was voted the 48th most liked governor in America when he left office. He didn’t run in ’06 for governor because he would have lost and ’08 lost the Republican nomination. Now, he can’t poll more than 30% in his own party. Not a very good record.
Romney is disciplined, steady and exciting as oatmeal for breakfast. And Obama will eat him for lunch for his privledged upbringing – out of touch with “working families.” Portrayed as being part of the problem – a Wall Street insider.
I’m conservative and have voted a straight Republican ticket since Reagan. Romney is another Dole and McCain, doing whatever he can to secure the nomination outside the conservative base of the party.
With this country on life support and Washington broken, we don’t need someone who is timid. Gingrich has bold solutions, Reaganist economic reforms. He has ballanced budgets in Washington and because he has been in Washington, he knows how it works and knows what needs to be fixed and what needs to be eliminated. With Gingrich you won’t have on the job training.
Russ
Bingo…cept the fig newt wont get the nod.
His well was poisoned by the marxist press years ago.
Cluster, I really think Romney could have done without McCain’s endorsement, though, as you never know what the old feller will come out with next. It’s obvious that after the President defeated him & his sidekick, Palin, in the last election that Mr. Obama now lives rent free in both of their heads, haha.
http://goosecreek.patch.com/articles/video-mccain-misspeaks-obama-for-romney#video-8840842
Has a candidate ever turned down an endorsement from someone they know would hurt their campaign?
romney = RINO = mcLame = loser
25% in 2008, 4 years & tens of millions still 25%
yesterdays old rejected news.
barky is already starting to recycle the hope and change bull. The donkyrats are getting desperate. Would love to see thier internal polling data, my guess is they got the rrl vote locked up and nothing more.
Even Romney Mitt will beat barky in November. Time to say goodbye to king putt and her excellency queen mooch.
FORE!!! ARUGULA!!!
What do you have against hitting a ball with a stick while eating green leafy vegetables?
santorum = politician = Bush = more government
It’s been obvious for weeks that Romney would win the nomination. Santorum is a retread of Huckabee and doesn’t stand a shot in the moderate states like Florida and New Hampshire.
Gingrich is the only viable threat to Romney, and that’s why they are going after each other so hard in recent days.
i look forward to a battle between Obama and Romney.
Yeah me too. I’m looking forward to see if the deficitin 2013 is 2 trillion dollars or just 1.6 trillion.
HOPE!!! CHANGE!!!
jamestooge
we will see when the people of the GOP has finished our nomination process months away.
until then WHO gives a flying Flip what some lefty Moron “thinks”
BUMP……
Thomas/James and his predictions. Can’t remeber when he called one right. Can anyone else?
GMB,
I predicted a long time ago that Romney would be the nominee. Maybe you’re the deficient one, but I am not.
Gluck rationalizing your vote for Romney! He even got McCain’s endorsement!
people of the GOP? what are you a priest?
What about that supposed high turnout sport? what happened to the enthusiasm in Iowa and among the GOP for their party?
McCain endorsed Romney today, have fun voting for a RINO as you would call him….while we vote for a true liberal!
jamestooge
“while we vote for a true liberal” = marxist, muslim, usurper, POS
a fake, a fraud, a doper back seat pole smoker, a light weight never was, surrounded by thugs, terrorists, racists, bigots, cheats, useful idiots, and dumbed down drones.
are you related? sport
GMB
“Thomas/James and his predictions. Can’t remeber when he called one right. Can anyone else?”
Like THIS? LOL LOL
James January 3, 2012 at 12:40 pm #
Santorum will get 17%
Darth Rinos endorsement? LOLzer Kiss of death instead. Romney is almost as big a Rino as McCain is.
Rationalize my vote for Romney? Wow bad at predicting and a bad memory too. There are two people in the GOP field that will make me skip the potus ballot and number one is Romney Mitt.
..while we vote for a true liberal! – James
Who has collected more wall street money than any other candidate, who cozies up with the CEO of GE who paid no taxes, whose Treas Sec was fined for not paying taxes, who assassinates Americans over seas, who keeps Gitmo open, who strengthens the Patriot Act, who bombed Libya and effected regime change to a country that was not at all a threat to America, who surged in Afghanistan and uses drones to kill enemy combatants, who extended the Bush tax rates and who is a multi millionaire and recently asked for $3 donations to his campaign.
That is a very weird definition of a true liberal.
Who has collected more wall street money than any other candidate
so what? are Democrats not allowed to take donor money? Are they not allowed to accept donations or contributions? I get it, only republicans can do that!
who cozies up with the CEO of GE who paid no taxes
according to your theory, that’s a good thing right? this way GE can create more jobs! Besides, didn’t you want business experience around the President? don’t you want the most admired company in the world send their CEO to give advice and provide ideas?
whose Treas Sec was fined for not paying taxes
so what? is he the first and only person to ever be in public office and be punished for breaking the law? stop being so emotional!
who assassinates Americans over seas
The man was a terrorist and an enemy combatant. are you against a robust foreign policy designed to keep our country safe? would you even be complaining about this if it was a GOP President? Nice try sport.
who keeps Gitmo open
Thank God he is!
who strengthens the Patriot Act
you’re damn right he did…and you know why? He wants to keep you and your family safe.
who bombed Libya and effected regime change to a country that was not at all a threat to America,
Was Iraq a threat to us? besides, where is your desire to help the oppressed like you wanted to do in Iraq?
who surged in Afghanistan and uses drones to kill enemy combatants,
Its called living in the real world and not being a boxed in ideologue.
who extended the Bush tax rates and who is a multi millionaire and recently asked for $3 donations to his campaign.
He compromised on the tax cuts for the good of the economy and to not hurt the middle class. Also, who cares if he is a multi millionaire? do you have jealousy issues? are all Democrats supposed to be poor?
Grow up and smell the roses. your party is toast, history, kaput.
So barky is bush junior?? Looks kike the only difference between bark and Bush is the letter after thier name.
So much for hope and change. We got Bush’s third term instead.
James,
Let’s say, for the sake of discussion, you’re right. The GOP lands on the ash heap of history (like the Whigs, LOL). What then? I know the 20% of the country that describe themselves as Liberal will go off and have a collective circle jerk. But what do the 60% of Americans who describe themselves as Conservative and the 20% that describe themselves as Moderate/Independent/Libertarian do? Do they just crawl in a cave somewhere and let the country be run by a small minority? You seem to love making predictions. What say you?
What is really funny here is that Thomas doesn’t see any irony at all. Keep up the good work there. 🙂
Every single point you listed barky used against Bush in the last campaign and will be used against him in the coming one.
If Bush would of hired a tax cheat as an advisor you rrl types would have went nutso. Again if Bush had used a drone on an american citizen, no matter if he was a filthy, stinking, terrorist, you rrl types would have been screaming “constitutional rights”!!
Strange world you live in there.
JR
60% of Americans don’t describe themselves as conservatives.
A majority of Americans are middle of the road moderates.
If you have any source to back up your claim, post it.
Sorry, James — my bad. I should have checked some sources instead of taking it off the top of my head.
According to the most recent Gallup Poll I could find, it’s 41% conservative, 36% moderate, 21% liberal and 2% no declaration.
BTW, as you can see, not even close to a majority of Americans describe themselves as middle of the road/moderate.
Since June 2002, the Battleground Poll has asked this same question in its demographics section, and in fifteen consecutive polls, the answer has always been the same. Americans overwhelmingly describe themselves as conservative. What does “overwhelming” mean in this context? The percentage of Americans who call themselves conservative in these polls has never been less than 58% (conservative strength was that at its lowest point through these years in December 2007, when “only” 58% of Americans described themselves as conservative.) There has been a remarkable consistency in the responses to this question. Over the course of these polls, 60.2% of Americans, on average, call themselves conservative.
The results of the April 2010 Battleground Poll show that nothing has changed. Fifty-nine percent of Americans in the latest Battleground Poll call themselves conservative; two percent of Americans call themselves moderate; thirty-four percent call themselves liberal; and five percent were either unsure or refused to answer. Remove the “Unsure/Refused,” and sixty-two percent of Americans are conservative. Stories from the establishment media, like USA Today and the L.A. Times, conveniently miss the underlying story about the April 2010 Battleground Poll.”
JR,
Gallup surveys “people” while Battleground surveys “voters.”
Your point is correct, them what don’t vote, don’t get a say.
Thanks, Count. I was pretty sure I had heard the 60% figure somewhere. Need to sharpen my Google skills.
James — thzzzzzp!
Next? Perry is going to South Carolina so he can personally attack Newt Gingrich and Rick Santorum in an attempt to get their voters support. Backstabbing the non-Mitt voters by helping to bring down their vote totals and splitting them up so that Romney could have a surprise finish there as well. After coming in with 11% of the vote in SC, Perry will then do the same in Florida.
Actually, Perry will think better and realize if he is responsible for handing the nomination to Mitt Romney then he won’t ever be considered for the Presidency again, so he’ll drop out.
Sarah Palin will come out and throw her support at the not-Mitt candidates in general, but clearly saying through twitter that the GOP can’t afford to nominate a big government moderate – of course this will be interpreted by the GOP establishment as meaning that she supports Romney, but oh well.
a repeat……….
ROTFL
you KNOW when your (political) enemies swarm in full FARCE to tell who us who will beat THEIR candidate and thus WE should vote for him………..
the NEXT day after Iowa this thread has responses many from Ochinpy’s flying monkey brigade of morons, Christophobes, useless idiots, union bots, and dumbed down drones telling us which way to vote.
Soooooooo predictable
soooooooo comical
marx / alinsky 101 and paid agent provocateurs.
Obama defies Congress with ‘recess’ picks
Nominations could provoke constitutional fight
By Stephen Dinan and Susan Crabtree
Wednesday, January 4, 2012
President Obama used his recess appointment powers Wednesday to name a head for the controversial Consumer Financial Protection Bureau and three new members to the National Labor Relations Board — moves Republican lawmakers said amounted to an unconstitutional power grab.
Boehner…..START IMPEACHMENT NOW!!!!
there are so many items, pick three and run with them.
LOL
It is unclear what prompted the wild fight filmed by Shawn Turnbull, who titled his above video “Chinese vs Blacks.”
Obamba’s Kanadian security force? occcupy chinese take out?
LOL
ObamneyCare. I like the sound of that.
blozo
and OPM you like the sound of that too?
Hope you’re right, Matt.
Iowa Should Not Matter
By C. Edmund Wright
During the entire M*A*S*H series, Radar the company clerk was given a hard time for the irrelevant little town he was from — Ottumwa, Iowa. Ottumwa, however, is one of Iowa’s major cities and media markets. This should provide some perspective on the eight-month spectacle that is Iowa every four years. It’s almost political porn.
Thus, the best way to analyze the Iowa Caucuses is to do so without regard to the results of the voting — as done here. As of this writing, the actual caucuses are four hours away. But that does not matter because Iowa’s caucus vote does not matter. To make Iowa matter is to literally disenfranchise the vast majority of American voters, in fact. We should not let that happen. Yet we do.
Read more:
http://www.americanthinker.com/2012/01/iowa_should_not_matter.html#ixzz1iX4qxKjF
Let’s suppose it’s January 2016, the president has decided that romneycare2.0 isn’t so bad after all. The “right” to health care has become entrenched in the American psyche much like medicare/ss/medicaid or like it has in the rest of the western world. Tax rates have stayed the same under the president and the deficit is still ballooning. Abortion on demand is now a precedent with more than 40 years of history and is fixed because openings on the SC have been filled with moderates. Unemployment is at 8% which is the new normal and is beneficial due to labor market “liquidity”. Illegal immigration is down mainly due to a lack of jobs available in the U.S. The U.S. has allowed Israel to bomb Iran and has large numbers of troops stationed all over the world to control tensions.
Who is president?
Do we have flying cars?
I like flying cars!
http://www.moller.com/
2016 Google has nearly perfected cars which drive themselves
which will finally get rid of those nasty teamsters along with more decent jobs for people who don’t want to become lawyers or forensic accountants and don’t have Mittens millions.
Tenure will continue to decline so the need for post-tenure review will become moot. The remaining brain washing ‘tenured’ professors will close ranks, drink their lattes and tut tut about the fall of union positions all while telling themselves that the corruption among the unions brought about their own downfall.
and flying sock puppets…
Let’s try this mental masturbation; It’s 2016 ObamaCare has been dismantled and a new consumer friendly version allowing for access across state lines and tort reform are being voted on in the House. Social Security has a new “opt-Out” option (similar to the one some state employees already enjoy in 2/3 of the states in 2012) and the largest number of new participants are now the under 30 demographic. The Supreme Court rules that “marriage” is a State issue and ½ of the states have or will have “1 Man – 1 Woman” restrictions while ¾ of the states have Civil Unions codified. Unemployment is 4.5% (full employment) and the Borders are protected thus eliminating the need to deal with new illegals. US unrelenting support of Israel makes challenging her right to exist a stupid move on many levels, the EU is disbanded and Russia, tired of Muslim interference in their internal affairs is a strong supporter of NATO.
Who cares who the president is?
I knew it was only a matter of time before a flying monkey swooped in and mischaracterized Obama’s ‘unprecedented’ power grab.
But, you follow your Masters well, ““Ridicule is man’s most potent weapon. It is almost impossible to counteract ridicule. Also it infuriates the opposition, which then reacts to your advantage.”” keep up the good work, little Alinsky B. Trotskyite.
barstool openly states what Obama and liberals are afraid to – that 8% unemployment is the new norm, which it is, and will be under a liberal Democrat administration. IF employment was a concern of Obama’s and/or liberals, the Keystone pipeline would have been expedited, and energy exploration and extraction would be brisk on many fronts, much like N. Dakota. Energy will be the new vehicle that drives the American economy for the next few decades, and lessen our reliance on other more dangerous countries in the process, which will in turn lessen our need for those messy wars liberals hate. Unfortunately, democrats are on the wrong side of this issue because they pander to the fringes.
Cluster,
I know you were just a kid in those days, but you might remember Carter trying to convince us that misery is the new normal, out of control inflation is something we all have to get used to and our best days are behind us. See how well that worked out for him?
Saturday Night Live did a skit with Dan Aykroyd as Carter trying to sell the US on the idea that inflation is our friend; haven’t you always wanted to own a $1,000 suit? Well, now you can, and it’s the same suit you paid $300 for just a year ago.
I think Obama is Carter on steroids only with a new, more effective, marketing campaign. Fair Share is the new Misery
Bmitchthesquid
You can’t stand the guy because he’s black
but he is only 1/2 black so which half do I “hate”?
—————————————————————————————
neo flipped out over ya de ya and……..
By Stephen Dinan and Susan Crabtree…..DOH!!
————————————————————————————–
made 171recess appointments
This was NOT a recess appt, but an end run appt = ILLEGAL
bmitch the KID tilting at windmills…….
Exactly the process that got Bolton into the U.N. So now you are a constitutional attorney? Who knew! (Pssst. Better tell McConnell. He could use the advise. Oh yeah! I forgot! He’s on vacation.)
And you hate both of his halves because you are a shallow bigot who believes absolute unfounded nonsense. Gay Muslim Marxist crackhead baby eater my ass.
bmitch
who believes absolute unfounded nonsense. Gay Muslim Marxist crackhead baby KILLER
eater my ass.read
hisayres books.No, Alinsky B Trotksyite, “Between the beginning of the Reagan presidency and the end of the George W. Bush presidency,
it appears that the shortest intersession recess during which a President made a recess appointment was 11 days,13 and the shortest intrasession recess during which a President made a
recess appointment was 10 days.14”
The Senate is not out of session this week as the last pro forma meeting was yesterday and the next is Friday.
First rule of holes ~ little man.
surprise surprise
NAACP blasts Santorum for targeting blacks in entitlement reform
BAM
42 Disgusting Revelations from Barack Obama
January 4, 2012
http://offgridblogger.wordpress.com/
Houston, we have a problem:
But when Congress refuses to act in a way that hurts our economy and puts people at risk, I have an obligation as president to do what I can without them,” Mr. Obama said
Anyone that subscribes to this thinking, does not deserve to be, nor should be an American President.
http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2012/jan/4/obama-unprecedented-recess-appointment/
Gingrich has too many lies he’s trying to cover up and will be easily shot to pieces. Perry, Romney are MOSTLY good, but have problems on some of the most valued conservative issues via their voting history. Ron Paul is insane, I agree with you there. Santorum will probably be the surprise contender and may take the candidacy, and I believe can blow obummer out of the water just on backbone alone.
uh, mitchiethekid… Congress was not in recess….
Reagan tripled the deficit? Ah… the favored liberal talking point. Liberals love to complain about Reagan tripling the deficit (when deficits were less than 400 billion) BUT obAMATEUR has outspent Clinton and all the presidents before him and you don’t hear liberals complaining about it.
“You can’t stand the guy because he’s black.”
Ahhh and the other mindless talking point from the dumbed down drones….. Pathetic.
No mitchie we don’t like the pResident’s policies… you know the one that is giving us the following:
* The unemployment rate for African-Americans, 96% of who voted for Obama, stands at 15.5% as of last month, while Hispanics, who pulled the lever for Obama at a clip of 67%, have an unemployment rate of 11.4%. When Obama took office, those rates stood at 12.7% and 9.9%, respectively.
* The typical American household will have spent $4,155 filling up their gas tanks this year, a record. That is 8.4 percent of what the median family takes in, the highest share since 1981.
* Since President Obama took office the nation has lost 1.9 million jobs and the unemployment rate has increased from 7.8 percent to 8.6 percent.
* Since Obama took office, the national debt has increased by over $4.5 trillion, an increase of over 42%.
* The cost of health insurance skyrocketed in 2011 after several years of relatively small increases.
With all those disasters on record, bitchie thinks we don’t like him because “he is black”.
Wow, mitchie do you think you can think for yourself rather than regurgitate the moronic trash that is being spoon-fed to you by your liberal masters?
Try again, hack.
tired
yup
Over the past 50 years, 10 U.S. presidents have made annual budget requests to Congress, projecting deficits both big and small. But no other president compares to Barack Obama when it comes to the size and scale of the current budget deficit facing the United States.
http://blog.heritage.org/2012/01/01/chart-of-the-week-u-s-presidents-ranked-by-budget-deficits/
Count: “The Senate is not out of session this week as the last pro forma meeting was yesterday and the next is Friday.”
Well, that’s only if you accept the pro forma concept as being “in session”. In fact it’s a legal fiction, much as if an employee stuck his head in the door of his cubicle a couple times a week and then claimed he was technically working all week.
Fact: there is no work being done, a visitor to the House or Senate office buildings would find empty chambers and no debate or business going forward. Senate is effectively in recess, whether someone comes in and picks up the gavel at odd hours or not. Most reasonable people would see pure BS in the claim that Senate was “in session” just as you would if an employee of yours was pulling the same trick – whether he turned on the computer or not. Particularly troubling is that in this case the pro forma gimmick is being used solely for the purpose of preventing the people’s business from being done.
This is the very essence of why so many Americans are fed up with Congress. Legal conceits are employed to play partisan games and deepen partisan divides, that rob the employer (in this case American taxpayers) of the work they are paying their employees to accomplish. So in this matter the president is entirely within ethical (and I’d bet most people would believe constitutional) bounds in making recess appointments.
I really doubt any President in the 17 and 1800s used a recess appointment when the Senate was out for the weekend. That is basically what you are saying…..and by the way if Obama wanted to do this correctly, he could nominate candidates acceptable to both parties. Today’s Senate is different from back then, it’s a full time Senate rather one that is off for months at a time. There is no need whatsoever for a recess appointment anymore.
The reason there is a recess appointment option in the constitution is because of how infrequent the Senate was in session. In today’s world the only reason it is used is specifically to bypass the Senate’s Consent clause in the Constitution – any recess appointment in the last couple decades could easily be considered as an attempt by the President to go around the intent of the framers of the constitution.
…and by the way if Obama wanted to do this correctly, he could nominate candidates acceptable to both parties.
Well of course this is how rational adults would govern, but Obama is far from being rational or an adult. His fragile feminine ego wont allow for dissent, and remember, he is the one that recently said that of Congress wont go along with him, he will bypass them.
It’s past time for him to go. He is not worthy.
It’s past time for him to go. He is not worthy.
Psalm 109:8
Senate stays in session to block Bush recess appointments
JOHN BOLTON
November 19, 2007
The Senate will hold “pro forma sessions” while lawmakers are gone for the Thanksgiving holiday.
Senators have left town for the Thanksgiving holiday, but the Senate will technically stay in session — a move that keeps President Bush from making appointments while lawmakers are in recess.
Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, D-Nevada, said he would schedule “pro forma” sessions during the two-week break, even though lawmakers will be absent and no business will be conducted.
” any recess appointment in the last couple decades could easily be considered as an attempt by the President to go around the intent of the framers of the constitution.”
That would only be true had not the appointments been subsequently confirmed by the Senate. You should look into that.
neo, that is correct, But John Bolton was recess appointed during the August 2005 Recess while the Senate was not in session; pro forma or otherwise for a month, and then renominated him in 2006 and he withdrew his nomination in December 2006. the 2007 thanksgiving pro forma was for other Bush nominees iirc.
dennistooge
the blind telling the sighted why they should follow them….LOL
PATHETIC stooge pathetic
A good read……….T~E~A
http://www.redstate.com/mikeymike143/2012/01/04/rick-santorum-surges-in-iowa-due-to-the-support-of-the-tea-party/
The LONG KNIVES are already cutting RS to shreds.
‘I Didn’t Say Black’: Santorum Says He ‘Mumbled’ During Controversial Speech About Welfare
didnt take long did it?
RACIST full court press to destroy RS
Al Sharpton Blasts Santorum and the GOP‘s ’Mad Rush to its Extreme White Wing’
Did he mean to say “right wing?”
The ENEMY…….to Liberty, America, Freedom and Religion.
Occupiers Plan Gay Pride Parade & ‘Funeral for the American Dream’ to Disrupt NH Primary
“This is the beginning of the Occupy
ARM UP,
This is the beginning of the Occupy
Yeah, I think 2011 was just the first act for OWS.
neo, that is correct, and Bolton was recess appointed during the August Recess while the Senate was not ins session; pro forma or otherwise for a month.
Legal fiction? Please explain how an abstract in reconstruction of common law theory applies to a codified construct such as legislative scheduling and why the common law has precedent without your usual liberal-babble. I’m looking forward to this.
To quote from a favorite movie of mine, “Dennis! There’s some lovely filth down here!“
Right is wrong. Up is down. Wrong is right. The takers cry foul when thier own tactics are used against them. Thats ok though, some politician will come along and save the day and there will be harmony on earth. I hope that comes with rainbows and skittle pooping unicorns too.
This has been your daily dose of doom and gloom. I now return you to your regularly scheduled tedium.
I denounce myself for whatever. 🙂
matt
beginning to believe the republicans don’t want to win???
i mean cmon…. the next 4 years post obama ain’t going to be easy to turnaround?
don’t you think?
give obama 4 more years of the bad deck he was dealt and has also played very poorly?
and republicans can win the house, senate, presidency
i’m not a conspiracy theorist
but by your own admission the field is filled with non winners
and romney appears to be the only one that could possibly win
and even that is way up in the air……..
Count said:
That is not true. To quote from a Congressional Research Service report:
Click to access RL33310.pdf
What part is “not true”?
If the recess appointment is subsequently confirmed then the President isn’t “go[ing] around the intent of the Framers” he is filling an important position and then awaiting confirmation exactly the way the Framers intended.
Obama, otoh, is circumventing the Senate while the Senate is not in recess to appoint a controversial candidate without Senate approval.
You either can’t read your own post or you’re so brain damaged you don’t understand what you just posted.
Either way, stop digging.
Count, I didn’t want to get into semantics, just intent of the framers. Semantic wise, yes, any recess appointment is consitutional.
However, was the intent of the founder such that the Executive would have the power to appoint someone DESPITE the Senate not giving their consent?
Currentlly, the only use of recess appointments is for the President to appoint someone that the Senate will not give their consent to. That, in my belief, was not the original intent of the founders.
Their intent was such that the appointment would be made by the President in order to be able to keep the government functioning while the Senate was not in session.
Hence, what I said I believe to be accurate, that the last few decades of recess appointments were attempts by the Presidents to go around the constitution as the founders intended.
It appears that congressional vacations are now called “recesses” so that the GOP can continue to be obstructionists even when they are not in Washington. I suspect you would have a different take on this if a Republican president was making appointments during the Christmas break after months of blocks by a Democratic minority. And although many Republicans have stated that this man is very qualified for the position, they like him, but they just do not want this agency to have leadership or to be staffed or funded. After all, the average consumer does not need an agency to protect their interests, but large corporations/businesses should have lobbyists protecting its interests. After all, consumers take advantage of corporations and businesses everyday through fraud, over charging and hidden fees.
You said that Bush attempting to go around the constitution would “only be true had not the appointments been subsequently confirmed by the Senate.” The record shows that of Bush’s 171 recess appointments, 64 failed to be confirmed. That is the point.
Rick Santorum believes states should have the right to outlaw contraceptives. Do you agree?
http://thinkprogress.org/health/2012/01/03/396516/santorum-states-should-have-the-right-to-outlaw-birth-control/
If they have the right to force you to purchase insurance that is mandated to provide contraceptives, then I would believe that they would have the right to outlaw contraceptives as well…….
TRANSLATION: If a state has the right to implement Romneycare, then a state has the right to outlaw contraceptives. It’s pretty much cut and dried on that account.
single, are you?
Sunny, I’m married with kids including a daughter.
If a state has the constitutional right to ban contraceptives, then they do. If they don’t have that right, then they don’t.
Evidently, Romneycare is still alive in MA, so I’m guessing that the state has a constitutional right to control your healthcare decisions, and if that is the case then I would think they have the right to ban contraceptives.
If the federal gov’t has the right to control my healthcare, as Sunny and most liberals believe with Obamacare, then why shouldn’t they have the right to control my birth control, my food intake, my smoking and my risky behavior? After all, they are having to pay for my decisions, right?
Sunny,
I think, as usual, in your eagerness to score a gotcha, you misread what you posted. In the article that Think Progress linked to, Santorum says this in an interview:
It seems to me that Santorum was looking at this from a 10th Amendment viewpoint, not a contraceptive viewpoint. He even says what the state did was a “dumb thing”, but it’s still under the purview of the states, not the federal government.
Right Spook, and I just turned 25.
And this was not a “gotcha” score. I asked – do you agree with Santorum? Should the state have the right to determine whether or not a woman can use birth control? That seriously is what Santorum believes. You have daughters Spook – ask them how they would feel about such a law.
Should the state have the right to determine whether or not a woman can use birth control?…..That seriously is what Santorum believes. – Sunny
Once you get your panties untwisted, you might want to take a step back and actually listen to what he said last night on O’Reilly:
SANTORUM: Well, the states have a right to do a lot of things. That doesn’t mean they should do it. Someone asked me if the states have the right to do it? Yes. They have the right to do it, they shouldn’t do it. I wouldn’t vote for it if they did. It doesn’t mean they don’t have the right to do it. As you know, Bill, you’re a Catholic, Catholic Church teaches contraceptive is something you shouldn’t do. So when I was asked the question on contraception I said I didn’t support it.
Of course, you do like drama don’t you Sunny?
Sunny,
Are you prepared to apologize for making false statements about Santorum?
Sunny,
This is how it works for conservatives:
If a state makes a law that is constitutional, then that is the law whether we agree with the law or not.
If a state has the right to make a law under the constitution then that state has the right to make the law, whether we agree with it or not.
Hence, if a state has the right under the constitution to ban contraceptives, then we would agree that they have that right to.
You need to go to DailyKos where the thinking is thus:
If the state has the right under the constitution to ban contraceptives and they do it and you disagree with it, then you believe the state didn’t have that right to begin with.
Also, if the state has no right under the constitution to ban guns and they do it, then you believe the state had the right to do it.
OK, Sunny, I’ll try again.
He is clearly looking at this issue from a Constitutional viewpoint, not a contraceptive viewpoint.
You have daughters Spook – ask them how they would feel about such a law.
My guess is that they would have the same reaction that I or probably 99% of the American public would have: they would ignore such a law and work to vote legislators who passed such a law out of office
How would you react to a law that mandated that you use contraception, including the morning-after pill, and that, if both failed, you get an abortion — and that your insurance must pay for it?
Right Spook, and I just turned 25.
That explains why you’re so @#!$%^&* ignorant.
scummy
That seriously is what Santorum believes.
that seriously is a LIE
Right Spook, and I just turned 25
She just forgot to mention it was the first time her IQ went higher than 24.
scummy
you believe men have the “right” to have anal “sex” together and the state call it “marriage”
so why not?
Now I know it will be near impossible now for Newt Gingrich to get the nomination. The key for Gingrich has been the debates. It gave him traction and now he may regain some of that traction with the upcoming debates.
I E-mailed his campaign addressing two things, I know that they will fall on deaf ears but at least I’m trying.
The two things I addressed was first having Newt debate Romney one on one, Lincoln – Douglas style. Newt offered and Romney declined stating it would be disrespectful to the other candidates. In Iowa, Newt got slammed by ads that were in some cases misleading and out and out lies. Ads by Romney’s PAC and the other candidates. Was that being respectful? When Newt complained, asked for civility, he was basically told this was politics and quit whining. Well, if Romney had taken Newt’s offer, that’s politics, thus Romney’s excuse is disingenuous. Newt should make the offer again, for if Romney is afraid to debate Newt, what confidence do Republicans have in Romney’s ability in debating Obama?
The second thing is Romney saying he’s conservative. Newt left Iowa calling Romney a Massachusetts moderate. I think in the next debate and the issue comes up, Newt should say: I know a few things about conservatism. In the ’90s I worked in Congress and got tax cuts and balanced budgets. Mitt, I had to work with Bill Clinton, I know Bill Clinton, Governor you are a Bill Clinton moderate.
What do you think?
I think Newt Gingrich is a great debater who should never be President.
Why
Newt lacks the leadership skills and the discipline necessary to be the leader of the free world.
JR
I agree
besides that he is a lightning rod, and the commie press has poisoned his well years ago.
he would make a great SoS
Not as good a SoS as John Bolton. I’d put Newt in charge of reducing the size and scope of government, something that he actually did in the late 90’s.
…and the commie press has poisoned his well years ago.
I don’t disagree BUT we have to stop worrying about what the press has done or will do, and run our own race.
http://jamesofengland.livejournal.com/9631.html
A comparison of Newt and Mitt as far as cost cutting.
santorum = toast
rove and romney have already passed the order to destroy him……
WHAT NEXT??
OBAMA MUST GO!!!!
JUST GET ‘ER DONE!!!
Newt, over fifteen years ago, came up with the “Contract of America” the blue print for Republicans to take over the House for the first time in over forty years. Before that, he warned and fought against George H. W. Bush breaking his “Read my Lips” promise on raising taxes. Gingrich was right, Bush lost. Gingrich worked with a Democrat in the White House and lowered taxes, balanced budgets and ended welfare as we know it. He also supported the impeachment of a president, the chief law enforcement officer of the land, who committed perjury and obstructed justice in a civil law suit and before the grand jury. It was the right thing to do. Special Prosecutor Ray had Clinton sign a sworn affidavit admitting guilt to avoid further prosecution. Now if these are not examples of leadership skills, what is?
As far as discipline, Gingrich is 68, older and wiser. If you listen or read all of what he’s saying, rather than the thirty second sound bites that are aired, he’s very much in control of where his campaign is going and what he’s doing. Here is an example: Much was said when Gingrich said he’d get rid of judges who fail to follow the Constitution, that he would have them brought before Congress to explain their rulings. Congress sets salaries and approves or disapproves nominees for the judiciary selected by the Executive Branch. If you go back to the Federalist Papers you will find there was no intent of separate but equal with the Judiciary. Between Jefferson and Madison, they removed nearly half of the Federal judges. If all three branches are separate but equal and to hall in a federal judge before Congress is a violation of separation of powers, then why is the Attorney General of the Executive Branch before Congress now for “Fast and Furious”? Gingrich has historical precedence.
What the press did to Gingrich years ago, was exactly that, years ago. It is old news but more than that we are in a new age in gathering information and communication. Gingrich admits that the ads in Iowa hurt him, he knows it’s part of politics. He says that on Fannie Mae & Freddie Mac, he should have brought in J. C. Watts who had oversight in Congress to clarify what he did and didn’t do. He says it was a mistake on his part but this is a long process and it has just started. He has faith in the American people that his message of Reaganist economic solutions versus Romney’s timid approach will resonate. In the long run, the economy, jobs, and debt are the issues Americans are focused on. What Gingrich has in his past are side issues which can be explained.
That’s all well and good but he will never be the nominee. His seething hatred for Romney coupled with his inability to control himself will be on full display tomorrow night. You omitted that he has found guilty of 84 ethics violations, was fined $300,000.00, was committing adultery while leading the charge to persecute Clinton for the same behavior, has been married 3 times, had a $500,000.00 bill at Tiffanys which he tried to claim was their issue, said that his patriotism made him cheat on his wife and this is not to mention all of the other outlandish statements that come from his mouth.
Romney will be the nominee and in the words of the infamous Ann Coulter, “we’ll loose”.
The conventional wisdom concerning presidential politics in the TV era is that e.g. Nixon lost the 1st debate with Kennedy because he was unshaven (though he won among radio listeners).
If the electorate was that superficial even in 1960 the odds are not good for Newt who:
1. Lacks self-control in his eating habits.
2. Lacks self-control in his spending habits.
3. Lacks self-control in his romantic habits.
4. Was found guilty of ethics violations.
5. Has never run a business.
6. Avoided the draft through deferments just like Clinton.
7. Has known temper tantrums.
8. Was a consultant to the tune of 1,600,000 for Freddie Mac.
9. Thinks manual labor for poor kids should start pre-teen even though there is zero evidence Newt has ever done manual labor.
10. Was last associated to the Republican losses in the 1998 elections —the worst midterm performance in 64 years for a party that didn’t hold the presidency
dolf, please list the “ethics violations” for which Newt was “found guilty”.
dolf, is there any factual basis for your claim that Newt thinks manual labor for poor kids should start pre-teen ?
How far “pre-teen”? 12 or 6?
What kind and degree of “manual labor” does he favor?
Why do you feel this would be wrong?
mitch, I ask you the same question I asked dolf: Which ethics violations was Newt found guilty of committing?
As this allegation is so repeatedly made, I have to assume that you guys know what you are talking about so it would be helpful if you could be more specific.
Whose “issue” IS what a man spends, of his own money, on wife?
In a similar vein, whose issue is it on how much of OUR money is spent to entertain and pamper another man’s wife?
A lot of women will never vote for Gingrich because of his past. It may “years ago” but his past actions define his true character. I don’t think a lot of women will warm up to his wife either. There does not seem to be anything down to earth about her. I do not see him as the GOP presidential candidate.
On the other hand, Ann Romney appears to be a very warm and likable woman who has been married to her husband for over forty years and raised five sons with him. You may not think that any of this is relevant to practical reasons why Gingrich should be the candidate, but with women it really does matter.
Sunny,
One of the few times I’ve agreed with you.
I agree as well. It’s a character issue and although I understand being married more than once, I have a dower view of cheating.
scummy and bmitch
but they-YOU voted for KKKlintoon twice and would for his lying wife
what crap and total BS
Unemployment Falls to 8.5%; 200,000 New Jobs Created
http://www.kcci.com/r/30144582/detail.html#ixzz1idUftgoh
President plans to cut half a million troops and says US can’t afford to wage two wars at once.
The only GOP candidate with a chance of beating Obama in November is unfortunately Romney.