Obama refuses to accept 2012 election results

[Jim in Anchorage]

might try a window

[Buftex]

might try a window

 

 

You would think, by 2012, Repulicans will realize that hitching their fortunes to the Tea Party was a mistake...and they will be left with a field of candidates that will make Barry look pretty good. That is of course, after they figure out what their stance is...

[Booster4324]

might try a window

 

Umm, only he got in.

[IDBillzFan]

You would think, by 2012, Repulicans will realize that hitching their fortunes to the Tea Party was a mistake...and they will be left with a field of candidates that will make Barry look pretty good. That is of course, after they figure out what their stance is...

 

You make it sound like Barry knows what HIS stance is.

 

Close Gitmo! Open Gitmo! Ghadafi must go! No, we're putting a Canadian General in charge! The rich will pay taxes! No, the rich will NOT pay taxes! Health care reform will reduce the deficit! No, it will add to the deficit! I'm focused like a laser on jobs! I'll see you when I get back from Rio!!

 

Say what you want about the right and the tea party, but I will say this until one of you dolts finally sees the truth: fix the unemployment rate, or Barry loses to a wet mop.

 

It's just that simple.

 

Well, it is for some of us. For others, demonizing is all the rage.

[Buftex]

You make it sound like Barry knows what HIS stance is.

 

Close Gitmo! Open Gitmo! Ghadafi must go! No, we're putting a Canadian General in charge! The rich will pay taxes! No, the rich will NOT pay taxes! Health care reform will reduce the deficit! No, it will add to the deficit! I'm focused like a laser on jobs! I'll see you when I get back from Rio!!

 

Say what you want about the right and the tea party, but I will say this until one of you dolts finally sees the truth: fix the unemployment rate, or Barry loses to a wet mop.

 

It's just that simple.

 

Well, it is for some of us. For others, demonizing is all the rage. It seems like everyone on your side of things was demonizing the president for not "doing anything" about Libya, until he did something, and then want to condemn him for taking action.

 

Yeah, you were so serious, and non-partisan, until Barry became prez. I miss the old days when you were just a boob obsessed yob. You will only be happy with someone in the White House as simple as you. We have an adult in the White House...what difference does it make if the president is in Rio, or Crawford, TX?

 

There seems to be a trend of tea partiers getting the job, and realizing it isn't as simple to just cut everything as they thought it would be. It seems there is a trend of those who were so gung-ho for the tea party in 2010 elections are starting to have buyers remorse.

 

Seriously, LA, as you are the person proudest to identify themselves as a tea partier, what candidate, or potential candidate best exemplifies your beliefs? I don't see how any currently identified tea party candidate could be taken seriously.

Edited March 28, 2011 by Buftex

[3rdnlng]

You make it sound like Barry knows what HIS stance is.

 

Close Gitmo! Open Gitmo! Ghadafi must go! No, we're putting a Canadian General in charge! The rich will pay taxes! No, the rich will NOT pay taxes! Health care reform will reduce the deficit! No, it will add to the deficit! I'm focused like a laser on jobs! I'll see you when I get back from Rio!!

 

Say what you want about the right and the tea party, but I will say this until one of you dolts finally sees the truth: fix the unemployment rate, or Barry loses to a wet mop.

 

It's just that simple.

 

Well, it is for some of us. For others, demonizing is all the rage.

 

Earmarks. transparency and lobbyists. I never thought that Carter could be beaten out as the worst President ever but this guy has done it.

[ExiledInIllinois]

Yeah, you were so serious, and non-partisan, until a Barry became prez. I miss the old days when you were just a boob obsessed yob. You will only be happy with someone in the White House as simple as you. We have an adult in the White House...what difference does it make if the president is in Rio, or Crawford, TX?

 

There seems to be a trend of tea partiers getting the job, and realizing it isn't as simple to just cut everything as they thought it would be. It seems there is a trend of those who were so gung-ho for the tea party in 2010 elections are starting to have buyers remorse.

 

Seriously, LA, as you are the person proudest to identify themselves as a tea partier, what candidate, or potential candidate best exemplifies your beliefs? I don't see how any currently identified tea party candidate could be taken seriously.

 

I miss the old days too! When LA actually could afford paying out to a winner of "dinner's on me smartass contest." Well, if anybody could win with those odds by picking each game of the season at the end of April.

 

Now, the winner will have to settle for The Golden Corral while breaking bread with 20 of his best TeaBagger buddies chipping in on the tab. At least the winner gets to be picked up for dinner in a 1992 Dodge Caravan.

 

Los tiempos son difíciles, ¡ay de mí es mi amiga!

[IDBillzFan]

Yeah, you were so serious, and non-partisan, until a Barry became prez. I miss the old days when you were just a boob obsessed yob. You will only be happy with someone in the White House as simple as you. We have an adult in the White House...what difference does it make if the president is in Rio, or Crawford, TX?

 

There seems to be a trend of tea partiers getting the job, and realizing it isn't as simple to just cut everything as they thought it would be. It seems there is a trend of those who were so gung-ho for the tea party in 2010 elections are starting to have buyers remorse.

 

Seriously, LA, as you are the person proudest to identify themselves as a tea partier, what candidate, or potential candidate best exemplifies your beliefs? I don't see how any currently identified tea party candidate could be taken seriously.

I'm just pointing out the flaw in your logic because you're making an almost youthful mistake of being critical of something you can't even properly define. I know you THINK you can define the tea party folks, but you simply can't, as is evidenced by your logic.

 

Here's a tip; it's not a single group of people. The reason the tea party movement has been successful (and didn't die a quick death like the ill-conceived Coffee Party) is because people like yourself are so bad at effectively criticizing it. The reason you suck at this is because you have no idea what you're criticizing, so you criticize the one missing element people like you MUST have in their life: definition.

 

I hear this from liberal talking heads all the time. What is the tea party position on this? Why doesn't the tea party present it's own budget cuts? It's funny. Folks like you are lost because there is no single Tea Party. It doesn't exist. So when you criticize something that doesn't exist as a single entity, your criticisms only succeed amongst your own.

 

So in conclusion, a lack of a single stance by various groups of people is perplexing, but lack of stance by the single leader of the free world on virtually EVERY SINGLE THING is okay. Got it.

 

As far as the canditate I prefer, I will happilyy have that conversation once candidates are in place. The reality is, it's a poison well question because because every current prospect is open to easy criticism. I say Mitt Romney, the left yells about RomneyCare. I say Haley Barbour, the left yells KKK! I say Sarah Palin (the last person I want to see run), the left yells "dumb twat!"

 

And one last time: who runs on the right means little right now. If the economy somehow rebounds, people have confidence to hire and unemployment falls, Obama can't lose. Economy and unemployment suck? Obama can't win. He's weak as a leader as it is. Throw in a bad economy, and he could even lose to "a dumb twat."

[3rdnlng]

 

Talking crap.

[ExiledInIllinois]

youtube.com/watch?v=RRRy-QlQyUw&NR=1&feature=fvwp

 

Talking crap.

 

I watched that and no carp! I don't get it! What the heck you doing Obama!

[/dev/null]

youtube.com/watch?v=RRRy-QlQyUw&NR=1&feature=fvwp

 

Talking crap.

 

Awesome

[Buftex]

I'm just pointing out the flaw in your logic because you're making an almost youthful mistake of being critical of something you can't even properly define. I know you THINK you can define the tea party folks, but you simply can't, as is evidenced by your logic.

 

Here's a tip; it's not a single group of people. The reason the tea party movement has been successful (and didn't die a quick death like the ill-conceived Coffee Party) is because people like yourself are so bad at effectively criticizing it. The reason you suck at this is because you have no idea what you're criticizing, so you criticize the one missing element people like you MUST have in their life: definition.

 

I hear this from liberal talking heads all the time. What is the tea party position on this? Why doesn't the tea party present it's own budget cuts? It's funny. Folks like you are lost because there is no single Tea Party. It doesn't exist. So when you criticize something that doesn't exist as a single entity, your criticisms only succeed amongst your own.

 

So in conclusion, a lack of a single stance by various groups of people is perplexing, but lack of stance by the single leader of the free world on virtually EVERY SINGLE THING is okay. Got it.

 

As far as the canditate I prefer, I will happilyy have that conversation once candidates are in place. The reality is, it's a poison well question because because every current prospect is open to easy criticism. I say Mitt Romney, the left yells about RomneyCare. I say Haley Barbour, the left yells KKK! I say Sarah Palin (the last person I want to see run), the left yells "dumb twat!"

 

And one last time: who runs on the right means little right now. If the economy somehow rebounds, people have confidence to hire and unemployment falls, Obama can't lose. Economy and unemployment suck? Obama can't win. He's weak as a leader as it is. Throw in a bad economy, and he could even lose to "a dumb twat."

 

 

No, it's not perplexing LA...it is as vauge as it could possibly be, which is what I expected. You are not saying anything, only criticizing what has been done...and for every "RomneyCare" that hurts your ears from the left, ever hear anyone use the term "ObamaCare" ad nausium? Ever hear the argument "he's in Rio"?

For someone who has no stance, I am not sure what Obama has done to offend your sensibilities so much...seems to me he is constantly being criticized for his positions, by people who have no signle position (as you assert), so, as politicians do, he compromises and lets the idiots have what they want...only to be criticized for that...just two weeks ago, the right was coming out of the woodworks criticizing Obama for not making a move on Libya, when he does (a very good one IMO), they start tripping over themselves to criticize him for that...it would be comical, if it wasn't so pathetic. You can criticize liberals and the left for all of their partisan ways, but you are really mistaken if you think it is any different on the right...

[Dan]

I'm just pointing out the flaw in your logic because you're making an almost youthful mistake of being critical of something you can't even properly define. I know you THINK you can define the tea party folks, but you simply can't, as is evidenced by your logic.

 

Here's a tip; it's not a single group of people. The reason the tea party movement has been successful (and didn't die a quick death like the ill-conceived Coffee Party) is because people like yourself are so bad at effectively criticizing it. The reason you suck at this is because you have no idea what you're criticizing, so you criticize the one missing element people like you MUST have in their life: definition.

 

I hear this from liberal talking heads all the time. What is the tea party position on this? Why doesn't the tea party present it's own budget cuts? It's funny. Folks like you are lost because there is no single Tea Party. It doesn't exist. So when you criticize something that doesn't exist as a single entity, your criticisms only succeed amongst your own.

 

So in conclusion, a lack of a single stance by various groups of people is perplexing, but lack of stance by the single leader of the free world on virtually EVERY SINGLE THING is okay. Got it.

 

As far as the canditate I prefer, I will happilyy have that conversation once candidates are in place. The reality is, it's a poison well question because because every current prospect is open to easy criticism. I say Mitt Romney, the left yells about RomneyCare. I say Haley Barbour, the left yells KKK! I say Sarah Palin (the last person I want to see run), the left yells "dumb twat!"

 

And one last time: who runs on the right means little right now. If the economy somehow rebounds, people have confidence to hire and unemployment falls, Obama can't lose. Economy and unemployment suck? Obama can't win. He's weak as a leader as it is. Throw in a bad economy, and he could even lose to "a dumb twat."

This is the problem... there is NO perfect candidate, ever. Everyone wants someone that's perfect, makes all the right decisions, always agrees with everything they want, and never changes his mind because changing your mind is admitting that your were previously wrong and, of course, the perfect candidate is never wrong.

 

That's how pundits, on both sides, make their living. By pointing out any of these flaws. But, the reality is they're not flaws. They're just people. They make decisions that are complex, need to be defended and often change. Romney, for example, did pass a law similar to the Obama's. That's fact. He should be able to defend that; not criticize the new one and dismiss his support of the old one.

 

I love the economy sucks crowd and how it's all on Obama. He did exactly what the Republican President and Congress were doing before he got into office. He gave billions to large banks and corporations with the idea that they'd become financially sound again, stabilize the markets, and then they'd re-hire folks and the economy would correct itself. Well, once again, we've proven beyond a doubt that trickle down economics doesn't work. And now what's the solution? Everyone says jobs, jobs.. we need a president that can get us jobs. Yet, at the same time we say cut.. cut.. cut... we need politicians that cut. How does government create jobs without spending? They've already given corporate America more money that God; that didn't work. So now what? We repeal the health care law? Because employers were hiring like crazy right up until that law was passed? If we're electing politicians because they're going to find jobs, we'll continue getting no where.

 

I'm sorry, but the people falling into the "unemployment" bandwagon are falling right into the political machine's trap. You'll elect new guys because they'll promise exactly what you want, and in the end, continue to fail to deliver. Then the next election will have more new guys promising more or the same... and so on.

[pBills]

You make it sound like Barry knows what HIS stance is.

 

Close Gitmo! Open Gitmo! Ghadafi must go! No, we're putting a Canadian General in charge! The rich will pay taxes! No, the rich will NOT pay taxes! Health care reform will reduce the deficit! No, it will add to the deficit! I'm focused like a laser on jobs! I'll see you when I get back from Rio!!

 

Say what you want about the right and the tea party, but I will say this until one of you dolts finally sees the truth: fix the unemployment rate, or Barry loses to a wet mop.

 

It's just that simple.

 

Well, it is for some of us. For others, demonizing is all the rage.

 

 

Just the handful of Republican Candidates... just be as far as right as you can be and Christian. If you have a shady past... you're born again. HAHAHA!!

[IDBillzFan]

just two weeks ago, the right was coming out of the woodworks criticizing Obama for not making a move on Libya, when he does (a very good one IMO), they start tripping over themselves to criticize him for that...it would be comical, if it wasn't so pathetic. You can criticize liberals and the left for all of their partisan ways, but you are really mistaken if you think it is any different on the right...

Both sides do it. Someone stop the presses.

 

Let me be clear; the guy you wanted is in charge now, for lack of a better phrase because even you know he's nothing more than a high-profile delegator, so he gets the slings and arrows. And if he gets re-elected, you can prepare yourself for once again listening to the constant barrage of "it'll take us forever to get out of the ditch from the last eight years."

 

Big freaking surprise.

 

Your guy is in. He's sucking hind tit in a manner that has even liberals missing Jimmy Carter. I sugget you grow a pair because it's not going to change any time soon.

[Buftex]

Both sides do it. Someone stop the presses.

 

Let me be clear; the guy you wanted is in charge now, for lack of a better phrase because even you know he's nothing more than a high-profile delegator, so he gets the slings and arrows. And if he gets re-elected, you can prepare yourself for once again listening to the constant barrage of "it'll take us forever to get out of the ditch from the last eight years."

 

Big freaking surprise.

 

Your guy is in. He's sucking hind tit in a manner that has even liberals missing Jimmy Carter. I sugget you grow a pair because it's not going to change any time soon.

 

 

Oh brother...this from the guy whose near every post is about some hypocrisy in how Obama and Bush are treated by liberals, and the media...

 

The problem as I see it (and both sides are guilty of this) everybody wants change, unless it affects them. So, this is what we have...it isn't productive at all.

 

I suspect DC Tom will come in and give enough nuance to your argument (if that is what it is), and then you will feel empowered...but right now, you are just flailing away, and not making any point...other than, you don't like Obama...point taken...back to your porn!

[Magox]

He did exactly what the Republican President and Congress were doing before he got into office. He gave billions to large banks and corporations with the idea that they'd become financially sound again, stabilize the markets, and then they'd re-hire folks and the economy would correct itself. Well, once again, we've proven beyond a doubt that trickle down economics doesn't work.

Sorry Dan, but the government providing bailouts to anyone including banks is not considered "trickle down economics".

 

Just sayin'

[Dan]

Sorry Dan, but the government providing bailouts to anyone including banks is not considered "trickle down economics".

 

Just sayin'

In the broad sense, is it not an economic theory which states that investing money in companies (typically by giving them tax breaks) is the best way to stimulate the economy? So, giving billions upon trillions to the automakers and wall street bankers is not investing government money into corporations? With the idea that it would stabilize their businesses and allow them to prosper so we could all prosper in return?

[Jim in Anchorage]

In the broad sense, is it not an economic theory which states that investing money in companies (typically by giving them tax breaks) is the best way to stimulate the economy? So, giving billions upon trillions to the automakers and wall street bankers is not investing government money into corporations? With the idea that it would stabilize their businesses and allow them to prosper so we could all prosper in return?

Amazing you see no difference between not taking and giving.

[IDBillzFan]

Oh brother...this from the guy whose near every post is about some hypocrisy in how Obama and Bush are treated by liberals, and the media...

 

The problem as I see it (and both sides are guilty of this) everybody wants change, unless it affects them. So, this is what we have...it isn't productive at all.

 

I suspect DC Tom will come in and give enough nuance to your argument (if that is what it is), and then you will feel empowered...but right now, you are just flailing away, and not making any point...other than, you don't like Obama...point taken...back to your porn!

My point was very simple. The fact that you were unable to grasp it speaks more loudly than anything else.

 

One last time. Slower, for the progressives on the board.

 

Being critical of the tea party for their lack of a collective stance on issues is stupid because you're being critical of something you can not even accurately define.

 

Also please note; comments from Tom don't empower me any more than comments from Exiled empower you. Unless they do, in which case, it sucks to be you.

Edited March 28, 2011 by LABillzFan