i mean, he aint middle class now, but he sure as fuck was when he was growing up, lol

12/22/2011 10:35:23 PM

[Edited on December 22, 2011 at 10:38 PM. Reason : .]

12/22/2011 10:37:15 PM

http://www.reuters.com/article/2011/12/27/us-usa-treasury-debt-idUSTRE7BQ0KU20111227

any of the dumbass obama supporters care to defend this one?

12/27/2011 4:31:51 PM

He's really looking lifeless these days. Shilling for the establishment must be a real drain.

12/27/2011 4:45:41 PM

If any Obama supporters would care to defend the following actions without using the words "Republicans" or "George Bush" I'm all ears.

http://www.reuters.com/article/2011/12/27/us-usa-treasury-debt-idUSTRE7BQ0KU20111227

http://www.nbcnewyork.com/news/local/Iraq-War-Troops-Parade-NYC-DC-Soldiers-Come-Home-136272073.html

http://thehill.com/blogs/ballot-box/gop-presidential-primary/201335-rep-paul-says-defense-bill-assures-descent-into-totalitarianism

http://www.hawaiireporter.com/while-president-obama-arrives-in-hawaii-amidst-security-and-fanfare-former-house-speaker-nancy-pelosi-slips-quietly-into-big-island-resort/123

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2078964/Growing-wealth-gap-members-Congress-rule-survey-reveals.html#ixzz1hk8pAfrq

http://www.nypost.com/p/news/national/he_schu_in_XaoXJibNNI16jjroHK7aUM

12/27/2011 9:14:38 PM

LOL Sure: War on Irag does not equal WWII.

we were never gonna be invaded/harmed. The war should have never happened.

[Edited on December 28, 2011 at 10:45 AM. Reason : we]

12/28/2011 10:34:25 AM

http://www.csmonitor.com/Commentary/the-monitors-view/2011/1227/Obama-s-new-tax-on-the-poor-Internet-gambling-by-states

but i thought he was the champion of the poor!?

[Edited on December 29, 2011 at 1:57 PM. Reason : -]

12/29/2011 1:57:06 PM

y0willy0, All of his original supporters on this board already realize he lied/sold out the American people. Obama is The Establishment candidate.

In other words you are addressing no one.

12/29/2011 3:13:38 PM

Shut up hater no he aint. Sometimes people need to put what is good for america ahead of what is partisan. He has made progress.

12/29/2011 5:01:32 PM

Quote :

"Sometimes people need to put what is good for america ahead of what is partisan."

12/29/2011 5:09:26 PM

Assassinating American citizens is good for America.

12/29/2011 5:41:33 PM

Perpetual war is good for America.

12/29/2011 5:43:30 PM

http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/plum-line/post/breaking-obama-also-set-to-make-recess-appointments-to-the-nlrb/2012/01/04/gIQABCkvaP_blog.html

http://tpmdc.talkingpointsmemo.com/2012/01/gop-hints-at-legal-challenge-to-consumer-watchdog-recess-appointment.php

My Barry standing up to the GOP for once? Say it ain't so! I think he's finally realized that playing hardball with the obstructionists is the only way forward.

He's probably also realized that he will have no problem winning reelection, so no reason to play timid anymore.

1/4/2012 3:40:37 PM

a dictatorship is much preferred to checks and balances

1/4/2012 3:59:46 PM

Did you say the same thing when W. appointed John Bolton?

1/4/2012 4:03:24 PM

Quote :

"My Barry standing up to the GOP for once? Say it ain't so! I think he's finally realized that playing hardball with the obstructionists is the only way forward."

And, by "standing up to the GOP," you really mean making recess appointments while the (Democrat-controlled Senate) isn't in recess, right?

http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2012/jan/4/obama-unprecedented-recess-appointment/

Quote :

"Defying Congress, 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 senators said amounted to a constitutional power grab. The president acted just a day after the Senate held a session, breaking with at least three different precedents that said the Senate must be in recess for at least three days for a recess appointment. Mr. Obama himself was part of two of those precedents, both during his own time in the Senate and again in 2010 when one of his administration’s top constitutional lawyers made the three-day argument to the Supreme Court. Mr. Obama tapped Richard Cordray to head the CFPB and named three others to the labor board — all of which had been stymied by congressional Republicans who said Mr. Obama is accruing too much power to himself through those two agencies. In strikingly sharp language, Republicans said the Senate considers itself still in session for purposes of blocking recess appointments, and the move threatened to become a declaration of war against Congress. “Although the Senate is not in recess, President Obama, in an unprecedented move, has arrogantly circumvented the American people,” said Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell, Kentucky Republican. GOP House Speaker John A. Boehner called the move “an extraordinary and entirely unprecedented power grab by President Obama that defies centuries of practice and the legal advice of his own Justice Department.” “The precedent that would be set by this cavalier action would have a devastating effect on the checks and balances that are enshrined in our Constitution,” the Ohio Republican said in a statement. The White House, though, argues Republican senators stonewalled the nominee for so long that Mr. Obama had no choice but to circumvent them. The president introduced Mr. Cordray during a trip to Ohio Wednesday, telling a supportive crowd that the Senate Republicans’ ongoing blockade of his nomination “inexcusable.” “I refuse to take ‘No’ for an answer. I’ve said before that I will continue to look for every opportunity to work with Congress to move this country forward. 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. CPFB supporters has said the lack of a top executive has blocked the fledgling agency from taking on a number of tasks in its mandate to police the financial sector and protect consumers from fraud. Mr. Cordray was accompanying the president on the trip, and briefly spoke to reporters. He said he would begin work immediately, adding: “We’re going to begin working to expand our program to non-banks, which is an area we haven’t been able to touch until now.” The Constitution gives the president the power to make appointments when the Senate is not in session and able to confirm them. Traditionally, that has been understood to mean when the Senate has adjourned for a recess longer than 10 days, and a Clinton administration legal opinion said a recess must be at least three days. Mr. Obama’s own top constitutional lawyers affirmed that view in 2010 in another case involving recess appointments. Asked what the standard was for making recess appointments, then-Deputy Solicitor General Neal Katyal told the justices the administration agreed with the three-day rule. “The recess appointment power can work in a recess. I think our office has opined the recess has to be longer than 3 days,” Mr. Katyal said."

1/4/2012 4:22:55 PM

http://www.cnbc.com/id/45875134/Obama_to_help_unveil_realistic_military_plan

Quote :

"President Barack Obama will join top Pentagon commanders to unveil a new "more realistic" vision for the military, including cuts to ground force numbers as a result of budget strains, officials familiar with the plans said on Wednesday."

Good step in the right direction.

^^^It's also better than an oligarchy. And I much prefer dictator Obama over dictator Boehner.

^^No, I probably thought it was stupid, just like everything Bush did.

^I know, isn't it awesome? Not only did he appoint a bunch of people the GOP didn't like, he did it in the most confrontational way possible. It's called "waving the big stick" and it's something he needs to do more of in the face of unprecedented GOP intransigence.

1/4/2012 4:27:49 PM

Quote :

"y0willy0, All of his original supporters on this board already realize he lied/sold out the American people. Obama is The Establishment candidate."

Presidents make promises they can't keep. That's how they become President. Obama did technically attempt to do almost everything he said he would.

Quote :

"a dictatorship is much preferred to checks and balances"

I could get on board with a dictatorship; someone to just make executive decisions straight from the heart with no need to heed lobbyists or wait for plodding, fat bureaucracy. Really just get shit done without giving fuck about some worthless party.

I bet it would be pretty awesome for the first few years, until power corrupts.

[Edited on January 4, 2012 at 4:35 PM. Reason : .]

1/4/2012 4:34:19 PM

Quote :

"It's called "waving the big stick" and it's something he needs to do more of in the face of unprecedented GOP intransigence."

Actually it's called having no principles and changing your mind when it is convenient to do so.

Just like Mitt Romney, Newt Gingrich, and Rick Perry.

1/4/2012 4:39:32 PM

suspending due process is good for america

1/4/2012 4:42:08 PM

Quote :

"President Barack Obama will join top Pentagon commanders to unveil a new "more realistic" vision for the military, including cuts to ground force numbers as a result of budget strains, officials familiar with the plans said on Wednesday."

Cutting ground force numbers = Hiring more Blackwater contractors.

1/4/2012 4:43:20 PM

Quote :

"^^No, I probably thought it was stupid, just like everything Bush did."

Sorry, that wasn't directed towards you. For a supposed eye doctor, he sure doesn't seems to be rather myopic...

1/4/2012 4:54:03 PM

Quote :

"Actually it's called having no principles and changing your mind when it is convenient to do so. Just like Ron Paul, Mitt Romney, Newt Gingrich, and Rick Perry."

False equivalence. Those fellas are flip flopping to score political points so they can win the GOP nomination. Obama is actually doing his job. But whatever makes you feel better about voting for one of them in November!

[Edited on January 4, 2012 at 5:03 PM. Reason : i]

1/4/2012 5:03:14 PM

So, to be clear, you're putting Ron Paul in the same ranks as those guys when it comes to being inconsistent and a "flip flopper"? Feel free to hate RP, but I don't think there exists a more consistent politician out there.

This shit where Obama is just ignoring the law and making recess appointments...I don't even know what to say. If you're supporting this shit, you should be ashamed of yourself.

Quote :

"“I refuse to take ‘No’ for an answer. I’ve said before that I will continue to look for every opportunity to work with Congress to move this country forward. 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."

Totally outrageous. That harsh realization that, no, there in fact doesn't have to be a happy ending...we might just be completely and totally fucked with no recourse.

[Edited on January 4, 2012 at 5:33 PM. Reason : ]

1/4/2012 5:24:26 PM

Quote :

"Did you say the same thing when W. appointed John Bolton? "

"Obama’s move, to be announced during a visit to Ohio, is likely to be challenged in court as he will be the first president in more than two decades to make such a so-called recess appointment during a Senate break of less than three days."

http://www.latimes.com/business/money/la-fi-obama-cordray-20120104,0,2612330.story?track=rss

Im clearly not as smart as you are, but one of these is not like the other.

Of course you could go the hypocritic angle too:

"In 2010, Deputy Solicitor General Neal Katyal explained to the Supreme Court the Obama administration’s view that recess appointments are only permissible when Congress is in recess for more than three days"

However, I dont think that matters too much to you.
And I cant tell if your attempted insult is just bad grammar or ignorance, either way let me help you. Someone who is myopic is NEARSIGHTED. I believe that is the insult you were trying to make. btw, the use of the plural during your insult is inspiring.

Bush was shitty and Obama is even more so. VERY likeable guy, but when someone calls out that your guy takes a shit in a pool, it is not a good defense to say that it isnt bad bc someone else already pissed in it. (and im not just talking about this appointment, although blocking a business from opening up IN the US is brilliant)

oh btw, I didnt call the dems "obstructionists" when they did the same shit. Doubtful you did as well. Little history lesson?

"In early 2007, shortly after Democrats took control of the Senate, President George W. Bush made several recess appointments. But in November 2007, Senate Democrats did not formally recess before going home for Thanksgiving. Instead, they stayed in “pro forma” session, sending a member into the chamber every three days to bang the gavel.

Senate Democrats repeated the move during breaks for the rest of Mr. Bush’s presidency, and Mr. Bush did not try to make any further recess appointments. Under President Obama, Republicans – despite being a minority in the Senate — turned the tables by also keeping the chamber in pro forma session."

http://thecaucus.blogs.nytimes.com/2012/01/04/obama-tempts-fight-over-recess-appointments/

1/4/2012 5:29:05 PM

You're right. It was a typo due to not enough backspacing on the original language. But your snide remark about a dictatorship is utterly laughable. Even if this doesn't last I like seeing the president stand up to this [NO] Congress.

1/4/2012 5:49:19 PM

It's important to note what these appointments were for - the National Labor Relations Board. Since it's Obama, that shouldn't surprise anyone.

The appointments were submitted in December of 2011, so they haven't even been considered by the Senate. This is a power grab. Don't give me this shit about an obstructionist Congress. That's some bullshit and you know it.

You do not want to side with Obama on this. He is intentionally breaking the law. Why he's doing it for these particular appointees, I'm not sure.

1/4/2012 6:02:16 PM

The recess appointment seems to be from an antiquated time period and should just be eliminated from use.

1/4/2012 6:04:09 PM

Quote :

"So, to be clear, you're putting Ron Paul in the same ranks as those guys when it comes to being inconsistent and a "flip flopper"? Feel free to hate RP, but I don't think there exists a more consistent politician out there. This shit where Obama is just ignoring the law and making recess appointments...I don't even know what to say. If you're supporting this shit, you should be ashamed of yourself."

Agreed.

Shrike, you obviously have no idea about anything Ron Paul stands for. The fact that you support a President who has gone over under and around the Constitution more times than rounds of golf he has played and yet make a statement aimed at lumping Ron Paul with any other politician (R, D, P, C, L, etc.) says only that you are not qualified to talk about American politics.

1/4/2012 6:07:39 PM

If the president's re-election strategy is him vs. Congress then this makes complete sense. The right will claim that he's just trying to use the attention on Iowa as a smokescreen for this, but the election is closer than we think so this may just be setting the table.

1/4/2012 6:12:35 PM

Dude, THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES has no Constitutional role in appointments to the President's cabinet.

Only someone who didn't understand the Constitution would post or agree with ^.

1/4/2012 6:13:53 PM

Quote :

"The recess appointment seems to be from an antiquated time period and should just be eliminated from use."

Ditto for most of constitution.

Quote :

"The appointments were submitted in December of 2011, so they haven't even been considered by the Senate. This is a power grab. Don't give me this shit about an obstructionist Congress. That's some bullshit and you know it."

The appointments were submitted then because the board would have been shut down due to the current member's terms expiring. Republicans had vowed to block any attempt to make new appointments because that's exactly what they wanted. What do you call that if not obstructionist? Actually, you probably didn't even know that because you're a clueless fuck who only reads headlines.

Quote :

"Shrike, you obviously have no idea about anything Ron Paul stands for. The fact that you support a President who has gone over under and around the Constitution more times than rounds of golf he has played and yet make a statement aimed at lumping Ron Paul with any other politician (R, D, P, C, L, etc.) says only that you are not qualified to talk about American politics. "

I know exactly what Ron Paul stands for, do you?

Quote :

"Ron Paul wants to define life as starting at conception, build a fence along the US-Mexico border, prevent the Supreme Court from hearing cases on the Establishment Clause or the right to privacy, permitting the return of sodomy laws and the like (a bill which he has repeatedly re-introduced), pull out of the UN, disband NATO, end birthright citizenship, deny federal funding to any organisation which "which presents male or female homosexuality as an acceptable alternative life style or which suggest that it can be an acceptable life style" along with destroying public education and social security,, and abolish the Federal Reserve in order to put America back on the gold standard. He was also the sole vote against divesting US federal government investments in corporations doing business with the genocidal government of the Sudan. Oh, and he believes that the Left is waging a war on religion and Christmas, he's against gay marriage, is against the popular vote, opposes the Civil Rights Act of 1964, wants the estate tax repealed, is STILL making racist remarks, believes that the Panama Canal should be the property of the United States, and believes in New World Order conspiracy theories, not to mention his belief that the International Baccalaureate program is UN mind control.."

1/4/2012 6:16:12 PM

^^ Except that no where did I mention the House of Representatives. Like many of your cohorts you continue to gleefully omit the obstructionists in the Senate that require 60 votes to get anything accomplished but rather echo "but the Dems are in control of the Senate!!!1" when more aptly, the Democratic majority is being held hostage in the Senate.

1/4/2012 6:25:19 PM

Quote :

"I don't even know what to say. If you're supporting this shit, you should be ashamed of yourself."

So what Obama's doing is reprehensible, but its ok for Republicans to block appointments indefinitely for the sake of crippling certain federal agencies and damaging the President politically?

[Edited on January 4, 2012 at 6:37 PM. Reason : .]

1/4/2012 6:33:50 PM

Yes, it's acceptable. You don't just get to ignore the law.

The Democrats who were crying about the power of Executive branch under Bush are more than happy to abandon those concerns when their guy is in office. Being unprincipled must be so easy.

1/4/2012 6:47:22 PM

^I honestly think that O brought out a ton of first time voters who are now just paying attention to how politics work in this country and are somehow outraged by things the minority party is doing....yet have no understanding that the other party did the exact same thing when it was the minority party.

Probably explains a bunch. Plus they love the victim card. "No president has EVER been treated so bad"... blah blah..

1/4/2012 7:18:31 PM

Tell us who "they" are, eyedrb.

1/4/2012 7:22:39 PM

Yes, please do....

1/4/2012 7:24:35 PM

So it's ok for Congress to abuse power and bypass the President, but not vice versa?

Just wanted to make sure. "Checks and balances" is such an outdated idea anyways.

1/4/2012 7:45:32 PM

sadly a ton of americans like to play the victim role...but libs mostly. I think it is bc they tend to push away from individual to the collective or group rights.

Or if you were trying to insinuate racism, feel free to add that to what libs also love to do as well.

^how so?

[Edited on January 4, 2012 at 7:50 PM. Reason : .]

1/4/2012 7:49:33 PM

Quote :

"sadly a ton of americans like to play the victim role...but libs mostly"

So long as this passes for political discourse we are never going to make progress. Don't think for a second that liberals have a monopoly on the victim card. This type of language, as a conservative, just makes me cringe. It does nothing to educate people about issues and only serves to distract the discussion into finger pointing, platitude spewing, and just altogether pointless debates about pointless shit.

1/4/2012 7:52:49 PM

^thanks for the lecture...I see you left out WHY I feel that way. You might disagree but it is at least a rational explaination.

1/4/2012 8:04:17 PM

your rationalization is weak sauce.

1/4/2012 8:25:48 PM

^ Wrong. Sweeping generalities are the foundation of any strong argument.

1/4/2012 8:36:54 PM

Always

1/4/2012 8:40:55 PM

You feel that way because you are a stereotypical conservative who drinks the main stream media kool aid.

1/4/2012 8:57:05 PM

^ah yes and keystone light apparently.

1/4/2012 9:56:37 PM

http://bloomberg.econoday.com/byshoweventfull.asp?fid=450885&cust=bloomberg-us&year=2012&lid=0#top

Quote :

"Jobless claims trended steadily and significantly lower throughout December with initial claims down 15,000 in the December 31 week to 372,000 (prior week revised 6,000 higher to 387,000). The four-week average shows improvement for the fifth week in a row, down 3,250 to a recovery best of 373,250 which is more than 20,000 lower from month-end November."

http://bloomberg.econoday.com/byshoweventfull.asp?fid=451287&cust=bloomberg-us&year=2012&lid=0#top

Quote :

"ADP is calling for a surge in private payroll growth, to 325,000 for December to double expectations for 160,000 and vs a revised 204,000 in November."

Now if only we could get the GOP to stop firing government employees, we might see some actual progress. Can't have that in an election year for a democratic incumbent though!

1/5/2012 12:11:29 PM

Quote :

"Ditto for most of constitution. "

that's fine. then don't come complaining when someone isn't following the Constitution in another area that is important to you.

Quote :

"The White House, though, argues Republican senators stonewalled the nominee for so long that Mr. Obama had no choice but to circumvent them."

This is simple stunning. "Hey, you guys are following the Constitution, so fuck it, I'm not going to follow it any more, even though I swore an oath to uphold it." If that is his attitude towards the Constitution, then he should be impeached immediately. I understand that the 'pubs are being dicks, and that the senate is, effectively, in recess, even if it's not official. But that's the damned rules. You can't simply ignore major Constitutional checks and balances when they are simply inconvenient. And this is coming from someone who is a bit tired of the obstructionist tactics being employed by the republicans in the Senate.

Quote :

"I know exactly what Ron Paul stands for, do you?"

oh look, you can still copy-pasta bullshit chain emails with literally zero truth to them. good work!

1/5/2012 12:26:13 PM

bump for setting 'em up

1/5/2012 11:37:34 PM