Originally Posted by Padre

I'd like to agree with Mmarsh on the Defence Budget comment. Whether or not we agree with the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, the fact is the USA has paid the bill for those wars. The USA, arguably, has done the world a favour fighting terrorism and over-throwing Saddam and the Taliban governments. The world benefits with the defeat of despots and terrorists, but China, Russia, etc are not sharing the sacrifice, the pain, the cost - mainly the USA and 2 trillion dollars has been sapped out of the US Treasury to fund just these two wars. As well intentioned as US policy is on anti-terrorism, the financial cost to the US economy is crippling. That said, I realise there are other factors such as democratic legislators wanting to spend public funds in excess of revenue.

One last point - Mmarsh, isn't Chris Christie ultra-right wing? Even Anne Coulter loves him. I'm surprised you could support him, and I agree he seems good (but not interested in running in 2012).

He's right-wing, but he's an East Coast Catholic Conservative (both Italian and Irish ancestry). I don't agree with some of what he has done but hes clearly not an extremist. Some of his views like medical marijuana and the protection of Muslim-Americans would be considered a liberal viewpoint, so I put him closer to the center.

If you want to know where he is on the issues:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Governo...Chris_Christie

I'm from NY (right across the Hudson from NJ) I know Christie background well, lots of Irish migrated from Hell's Kitchen NY to NJ. Tough SOBS, but hard working down to earth people. Hes not a nutcase, so I got no problem that we don't see eye to eye on everything.

The only reason hes not in it is he doesn't have enough political experience.

Oh, Scott Brown from Boston Mass is another center-right republican I could vote for.

Originally Posted by mmarsh

George

I mean no offense by this so please don't take it the wrong way. I am trying to be constructive not insulting.

But Its precisely these types of hysterical rants bordering delusion is exactly why I can no longer support the GOP. Its stupid, its childish, and its wrong. You want me to vote Republican? you are going show me why I should, meaning: what MY interest is. Just demonizing Obama and the left will not do it, quite the opposite actually. You are going to LOSE votes they way you are going, if Obama is reelected next year, you'll know why and you wont be able to blame him for it.

Liberals don't want to destroy America, anymore than the Tea Party does, That's simply partisan crap and I'm sick of it. Its extremists on both sides (but especially the right-wing as of late) that is to blame. And if you really want to point fingers on that I might recommend you take a look at certain Texas President whose record was far worse than Obama. The reason we are in this mess is because of a REPUBLICAN ADMINISTRATION. Obama did a crap job trying to fix it, Ill agree with you there. But its the GOPs fault for the mess we are now in.

The fact the GOP still hasn't assumed the responsibility for the Bush Administration which tells me that they not really that sorry about it. Which is another reason why they lose my vote. As much as I am unhappy with Obama if the GOP thinks I'm going to vote for a Bush II they are very sorely mistaken.

I have a serious ax to grind with Obama, but its based on fact on what Obama has done so far as president. Its posts like yours that are going get Obama re-elected, because Americans don't like crazy, either left or right-wing.

Sorry if that's too personal, but this partisan crap will destroy us, its already beginning to. The lose of our AAA+ credit rating was a direct result of partisans determined to destroy one another. And look what happened to the Stock Market as a result. 15% lose in 2 weeks. We keep that rythum up and we will have to start selling US states back to their original owners.

There are ALWAYS going to be liberals and there are ALWAYS going to be conservatives, we are just going to have to live with each other.


Padre

Hillary goes back and forth, but I honestly think that Obama is more to the right of her.

I must confess I am not conservative, so far right candidates are not really my thing. You ask me who I like for GOP 2016?. Chris Christie (Governor of NJ) and I also like Jon Huntsman (who is running this year but has zero chance) and I am a huge fan of Chuck Hagel (former senator from Nebraska). These are center-right Republicans.

If you were to hold my feet to the fire and force me to pick conservatives. I'd say McCain (whose too old now, smart man, means well, but like Obama doesn't have the personality to be a good president) and Mike Huckabee who I like many of his policies (but as a secularist I have a very serious problem mixing religion and politics). European history is filled with bloody ancedotes about why that is a bad idea.

And TI

I agree that he should be a 1 termer, but I am certain the GOP will make sure that he isn't. As I said the problem is that in 2012 there is simply no viable alternative. You really want a President Bachmann or Santorum? These people are nuts. Bachmann in particular is scary, some of her ultra-views are dangerous. They type of politics that sets off the crackpots like the shooter in Norway. If that's my choice Ill vote Obama.

In fairness to Obama, the shortchanging of our military personnel goes back to Bush I and every President since him (Bush, Clinton, Bush II, etc). Its not just Obama, sticking it to our service people is one thing both parties do quite well on.

You probably wont like this next part; but our defense budget is simply killing the economy. Granted, Its not the only thing. But the military adventures we have embarked on and these pork-barrel military projects like the Marines AAAV (a never to be used sitting duck) and the second engine for the F-35 (which even the Navy has said it doesn't want) are simply catastrophic. It has do with Big Business rather military necessity.

And yet politicians on BOTH sides always go after things that are important to the individual soldier (the VA, salaries, retirement benefits, etc) which is peanuts but never the fat of the DOD budget.

Did I demonize Obama by mentioning things he said in his book? I think Hillary & Obama are 2 peas in a pod, just Obama was distracted from some of his actual agenda by the recession.As I've said here(& elsewhere) Bush & his Big Govt Republicans wern't who we we voting for when the Reps were running for Office. We wanted smaller Govt & smaller budgets. Instead we got Bush & Co who we thought @ the time were spending like Democrats, it wasn't untill Obama & the Democrats took total control did we realize they wern't actually spending like Dems where Bush doubled the debt in 8 years & Obama doubled it again in less than 2. Does the Rep Party leadership think Bush was a mistake? Probably not, they are professional politicians who seem ok with growing the Govt. @ a slower rate than the Dems., maybe nonpro people of the TEA Party is what's needed to turn the spending around, but it's hard to see turning the ship of State away from the rocks. At least I expect such irresponcibility with Dems.We have a spending problem, 40% of spending is borrowed, But Reid, Pelosi ect says the mythical minor spending reductions over 10 years(yeah, right) are "Draconian", you can't just keep spending like they are w/o something coming apart. Why have a "debt cieling" if you just constantly move it higher, instead of being an enforcable thing. It's a joke. We would be in great shape as far as National Debt is concerned if they had enforced it when passed in 1917. "Niether Libs or TEA Party want to destroy America", well what happens when the spending & interest on the debt finally gets beyond controll? Newt & the Young Turks who got elected in '94 forced Clinton to embrace the balanced budget, but spending continued to bloat. It can't just keep going up. "The GIs have been shafted since Bush 1" You forget about "The Peace Dividend" that the Dems insisted on? Defence budget as a % of economy is way down from the 50s, the drag on everything is welfare/entitlements starting with the never ending War on Poverty/Great Society. Think the AAAV has been cancelled. Govs of N.J. & N.H. look interesting, as does Herman Cain.

I came across this article today. I'm not familiar with the author but he regularly appears on CNN, FOX, SkyNews, and writes for the UK Telegraph. I assume he is on the conservative side of politics but nevertheless presents below a good & balanced assessment of the Obama Presidency and quotes sources and polling that is reputable and not all from the Right Wing stable (eg. Gallop, NYT).

I am old enough to remember most of the Carter Presidency and the 1980 election and I see history repeating itself. I have cousins in Missouri, Massachusettes, NY, and Florida - a mix of registered Democrats and Republicans and Independents. The cousins who voted for Obama in 2008 say they wont do so in 2012 (not that they'll turn out for the GOP either), so my family straw poll suggests to me Nile Gardiner's piece is spot on.

This is an extract. Go to the link to see the whole article.


http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/news/ni...s-to-meltdown/

1. Obama isn’t trusted on the economy

A series of recent polls have demonstrated significant public discontent with President Obama on the economy, the number one issue for US voters. A Washington Post/ABC News survey in late July reported that 57 percent of Americans disapprove of Obama’s handling of the economy, 60 percent disapprove of his handling of the federal budget deficit, and 52 percent are unhappy with the president on job creation. A July 21 poll for Gallup showed US economic confidence plunging to its lowest level since March 2009, with just 26 percent of Americans saying the economy is “getting better.” According to Gallup, more than two thirds of Americans now say the economy is “getting worse.” The latest Rasmussen survey shows consumer confidence “just one point above the lowest levels of the last two years” with investor confidence “down nine points from a week ago, down 12 points from a month ago, and down 29 points from three months ago. Investor confidence has not been lower since March 13, 2009.”

2. Obama isn’t serious about the budget deficit

That’s certainly the opinion of credit agency Standard and Poor’s, which downgraded America’s AAA credit rating for the first time in 70 years, in early August. As the Congressional Budget Office revealed in a January report, the deficits generated by the Obama administration are the largest since the end of World War Two, after two years of unchecked and out of control federal spending. And as I noted in a piece on the S&P decision last week:

Since President Obama took office in January 2009, the United States has embarked on the most ambitious failed experiment in Washington meddling in US history. Huge increases in government spending, massive federal bailouts, growing regulations on businesses, thinly veiled protectionism, and the launch of a vastly expensive and deeply unpopular health care reform plan, have all combined to instill fear and uncertainty in the markets.

3. Obama’s foreign policy remains a weak-kneed and confusing mess

US foreign policy under President Obama remains a staggering mess. With a policy of “leading from behind”, Washington’s approach towards the war in Libya has been a sea of dithering and contradiction, with no discernible end goal in sight. The Obama administration has acted like a deer in the headlights in the face of momentous changes in the Middle East, and was caught napping by developments in both Egypt and Syria. In the face of the Iranian nuclear threat, the United States has been largely passive, content to pursue a foolhardy policy of engagement while Tehran edges closer to building a nuclear weapon. Over in Europe, the Russian reset has emboldened Moscow, while undermining key allies in eastern and central Europe. Obama has paid scant attention to the transatlantic alliance, weakening the Special Relationship with Britain, and sleepwalking while NATO declines. It is difficult to think of a US foreign policy that could be more ineffective that the one pursued by this administration, with the hardly surprising result that confidence in US leadership has dramatically fallen across the world since Obama took office.

4. Independents are deserting the president

In contrast to Bill Clinton, who moved to the centre after the emphatic Republican takeover of the House of Representatives in 1994, Barack Obama has shown little inclination to do so. This is a rigidly ideological presidency with a distinctly left-wing vision and agenda. Unsurprisingly, independents have been deserting Obama in droves, a huge cause for concern for the White House as it looks to November 2012.
A Gallup survey at the end of July found just 37 percent of independents backing Obama, his lowest level of support from this group since he took office, a fall of ten points since the end of May, and down from 62 percent at the start of his presidency. A Pew Research Center survey, conducted in late July, also showed a dramatic drop in support for the president among registered independent voters, with significant implications for the presidential elections. As Pew noted in its report:

The sizeable lead Barack Obama held over a generic Republican opponent in polls conducted earlier this year has vanished as his support among independent voters has fallen off. Currently, 41% of registered voters say they would like to see Barack Obama reelected, while 40% say they would prefer to see a Republican candidate win in 2012. In May, Obama held an 11-point lead.
This shift is driven by a steep drop-off in support for Obama among independents… just 31% of independent voters want to see Obama reelected, down from 42% in May and 40% in March. Where Obama held a slim 7-point edge among independent registered voters two months ago, a generic Republican holds an 8-point edge today.

5. A majority of Americans still reject Obamacare

President Obama has stubbornly refused to back down over his hugely costly health care reform plans, commonly dubbed “Obamacare”, despite significant public opposition to them. In many ways, Obamacare is a political albatross around Obama’s neck as he heads towards 2012. The RealClear Politics average for May to July has 50.8 percent of Americans opposed to Obamacare, with just 38.6 percent in favour. Rasmussen, which tracks the issue closely, has the level of opposition to Obama’s health reforms running currently at 55 percent. CNN’s most recent polling in June placed public opposition at 56 percent. Strikingly, out of 50 polls conducted on Obamacare since the start of 2011 and listed by RealClear Politics, only two (Rasmussen in January and Gallup in March), show more support than opposition for the president’s plan.

6. The Obama presidency looks increasingly out of touch with the American people

This is an extract. Go to the link to see the rest of the article (# 6 to 10).

Padre

Ill take a pseudo-defense of Obama just to stir the pot...

1. Yes the economy sucks, wasn't his fault although yes he could do a lot more. The principal problem is that Obama is simply too trusting. He nominated 3 very pro-Wall Street (Summer, Greitner, and I forgetisname) as his economic team because thet assured him that Wall Street could fix the economic problems, that regulation and supervision were not necessary. And they were right, Wall Street did fix the problem as far as THEY were concerned (hence the record profits), they just didn't bother to fix Main Street.

Remember this was the same group of people that when given by Bush Federal money to ball out the Banks, simply took it as their End of Year Bonus and split. Why Obama thought he could trust them again...I'll let him explain that.

The thing is, back in 2008, Obama's GOP opponent was a person who didnt even know there was a economic problem, and by his own admission knew nothing on economics? With that type of person had done any better? I don't think so.

2. No, and neither are the Republicans. Both sides only want to cut spending on the other parties toys, never their own. The last VP was quoted saying "Deficits dont matter", does anyone really think the Republicans saw the light and changed their spending ways within 8 years? Remember historically the top spenders are Republicans (and before someone mentions Obama, Obama only spend 7 of the 14 Trillion. The other $7 came from Bush.

3. Yes, no argument here. Hes been very weak on FP. Whereas Bush treated US FP like a reckless storming of San Jacinto, Obama has adopted the opposite approach a snail crossing the highway approach. Too slow, too cautious, and too conciliatory. Both were epic failures.

4. This one means nothing, the election is way too far off. I don't how many of you saw the Iowa GOP straw poll thursday night, the real winner of the event was Barack Obama. The overwhelming sentiment amougst independents was that it was a Horrible, Horrible, choice. Simple Dreadful. And when push comes the electorate will usual vote for the incombant (Home field advantage). A President has only failed to be reelected twice in 50 years, its always when the presidents polls dip past 35% and there is a primary challenger. Neither has happened to Obama so far...yet. Chances are he will be reelected.

"McCain didn't know there was a problem" The problem was the meltdown in housing, caused by Carter signing Law that required banks to lower standards, a Law enforced by Clinton @ ACORN's urging, plus over deregulation by Republicans resulting in seperate type banks getting into each others areas. The banks found these high risk loans lucrative, knowing the Govt would bail em out if they got in trouble. McCain waived a red flag on this in '05, but was shouted down by Dems, esp Shumer who said McCain was a racist because the head of Fanny was a black guy. Had even a few Dems said, hey he might have a point, this might have been headed off. National Debt ownership: Obama 50%, Bush 25%, all other Presidents 25%.

Timeline

the warnings were there. as far back as 2001

no. I didn't vote for Obama. never will

Just a question, how many of y'all actually voted for Obama in 2008 (As asked in the subject). I'm guessing none of you.

And again; look what the GOP choice is for 2012. Its a pretty sorry lineup.

If Obama wins reelection (which I think he will) it will because the GOP let him win.

Todays Daily Beast "GOP STILL HAS NO CHANCE".

http://www.thedailybeast.com/article...rust-belt.html

The author is saying the only chance the GOP is a Catholic conservative from outside the rustbelt (sort of like what I saying about Christie). The only two that come close is Santorum and McCotter both of which are at the absolute bottom of the rankings.

Given how rightwing a democrat Obama is, I think the GOP is deliberately throwing in the towel for 2012. The GOP has got alot of what they wanted under Obama and because the economic situation is so bad its actually better for them to be the party NOT in power.

The real fight will be in the House, because there is a real chance now the GOP will lose it. And giving the Democrats an absolute majority is the LAST thing they want. I think this will be the GOP objective, not the White House.

Mmarsh,

What do you think of Rick Perry?

I saw him in an interview yesterday (bus tour in Iowa). Putting his politics/ideology aside, he came across well informed and fluent.
I'm fairly conservative these days (but was pro- Australian Labor Party in my younger days), but found George Bush's English and grasp of issues quite embarrassing.
Perry, Texan drawl aside, was polished and intelligent with an impressive state economic record to boast about (no doubt there are mistakes and shortcomings in his Governorship as well). I think he'll give Romney, then President Obama, a run for their money.

In fact I'm going to go early and predict a Perry - Romney ticket for GOP in 2012 that will bear comparison to the Reagan - Bush Snr ticket of 1980, with Obama - Biden being the Carter - Mondale doppleganger in this scenario.

Originally Posted by Padre

Mmarsh,

What do you think of Rick Perry?

I saw him in an interview yesterday (bus tour in Iowa). Putting his politics/ideology aside, he came across well informed and fluent.
I'm fairly conservative these days (but was pro- Australian Labor Party in my younger days), but found George Bush's English and grasp of issues quite embarrassing.
Perry, Texan drawl aside, was polished and intelligent with an impressive state economic record to boast about (no doubt there are mistakes and shortcomings in his Governorship as well). I think he'll give Romney, then President Obama, a run for their money.

In fact I'm going to go early and predict a Perry - Romney ticket for GOP in 2012 that will bear comparison to the Reagan - Bush Snr ticket of 1980, with Obama - Biden being the Carter - Mondale doppleganger in this scenario.

There are three candidates (so far) who would garenatee my vote for Obama. These are Perry, Bachmann and Santorum.

Let me explain the ways Perry Bugs me.

1. His own Church Pastor said that his politics was "George Bush on Steroids". I am not sure that was meant as a compliment, but I think you might recall my own views on Bush. Take Bush, notch it up 10x. God Help us.

2. He's a Dominionist evangelical Christian...thats the screwier end of fundimentalist Christianity. Dominionists believe that Christians are God-chosen to rule the world (reminds me of al Qaeda). I have no tolerance for religious extremist of any faith and people who claim God speaks directly to them makes me nervous.

3. It has been reported by a great many sources that the man is one of the dumbest people in politics. The college Transcript was Cs and D's, He received a C in Animal Breeding and as one politician said "I have Goats that have A's on the subject". Now I wasn't a star student either, and school doesn't necessary suggest intelligence or stupidity, but it all reminds me all of the last Texas Governor who barely passed school, and Bush had better grades from a better school then Perry did. Perry lack of Intelligence has been by reported by republicans and democrats alike.

4. He has some very disturbing political views. Including the repeal of social security and Medicare as "unconstitutional ponzi scheme" (his words). Anybody whose over 65 or is poor..watch out. These types of views most Republicans would consider radical.

As governor he executed a man who was probably innocent. A man was convicted of starting an arson fire that killed his 3 daughters, but the entire prosecution was based on testimony by people who knew zilch about fires. The defendant was given a terrible legal defense. All the investigations done by experts conclude that the fire was accidental and the father was innocent. The case was wildly televised and there was a large amount of evidence that would have probably exorated him. Perry's "tough on crime" promise meant he was merciless, and he executed him anyway. Now I am for the DP in certain cases, but this case was such a miscarriage of justice that it really put into question my views on the DP. A person this cruel, reckless, ignorant or stupid shouldn't be president. And Texas has a long reputation for "execute first, determine guilt later".

5. Hes a member of the AVA (which is a hate group by the SPC) and also "Sons and Daughters of the confederacy" which is a neo-confederate revisionist group. Not to mention his TREASONOUS suggestion to secede Texas just 2 years ago. Its a miracle Perry was arrested for sedition just for making those remarks. I'm a blue-blooded Yankee, my ancestor was Union soldier, we used to lynch people with views such as this. If he thinks he's going to win votes in the North (where he needs to win) with the whole "Johnny Reb" routine he's in for a rude awakening.

6. He's a nasty SOB. His reputation for ruthlessness and holding grudges is legendary. Bush had the same temperate and the country suffererd enormously for it. At least Bush tried playing the "compassionate conservative", no such luck with Perry. If Bachmann is the Queen of mean, meet the King. Seriously more political partisanship is the last thing we need.

Jeez, I could go on. He's be a dreadful choice. But fortunately like Bachmann hes too extreme to get elected.

Originally Posted by mmarsh

There are three candidates (so far) who would garenatee my vote for Obama. These are Perry, Bachmann and Santorum.

Let me explain the ways Perry Bugs me.

1. His own Church Pastor said that his politics was "George Bush on Steroids". I am not sure that was meant as a compliment, but I think you might recall my own views on Bush. Take Bush, notch it up 10x. God Help us.

2. He's a Dominionist evangelical Christian...thats the screwier end of fundimentalist Christianity. Dominionists believe that Christians are God-chosen to rule the world (reminds me of al Qaeda). I have no tolerance for religious extremist of any faith and people who claim God speaks directly to them makes me nervous.

3. It has been reported by a great many sources that the man is one of the dumbest people in politics. The college Transcript was Cs and D's, He received a C in Animal Breeding and as one politician said "I have Goats that have A's on the subject". Now I wasn't a star student either, and school doesn't necessary suggest intelligence or stupidity, but it all reminds me all of the last Texas Governor who barely passed school, and Bush had better grades from a better school then Perry did. Perry lack of Intelligence has been by reported by republicans and democrats alike.

4. He has some very disturbing political views. Including the repeal of social security and Medicare as "unconstitutional ponzi scheme" (his words). Anybody whose over 65 or is poor..watch out. These types of views most Republicans would consider radical.

As governor he executed a man who was probably innocent. A man was convicted of starting an arson fire that killed his 3 daughters, but the entire prosecution was based on testimony by people who knew zilch about fires. The defendant was given a terrible legal defense. All the investigations done by experts conclude that the fire was accidental and the father was innocent. The case was wildly televised and there was a large amount of evidence that would have probably exorated him. Perry's "tough on crime" promise meant he was merciless, and he executed him anyway. Now I am for the DP in certain cases, but this case was such a miscarriage of justice that it really put into question my views on the DP. A person this cruel, reckless, ignorant or stupid shouldn't be president. And Texas has a long reputation for "execute first, determine guilt later".

5. Hes a member of the AVA (which is a hate group by the SPC) and also "Sons and Daughters of the confederacy" which is a neo-confederate revisionist group. Not to mention his TREASONOUS suggestion to secede Texas just 2 years ago. Its a miracle Perry was arrested for sedition just for making those remarks. I'm a blue-blooded Yankee, my ancestor was Union soldier, we used to lynch people with views such as this. If he thinks he's going to win votes in the North (where he needs to win) with the whole "Johnny Reb" routine he's in for a rude awakening.

6. He's a nasty SOB. His reputation for ruthlessness and holding grudges is legendary. Bush had the same temperate and the country suffererd enormously for it. At least Bush tried playing the "compassionate conservative", no such luck with Perry. If Bachmann is the Queen of mean, meet the King. Seriously more political partisanship is the last thing we need.

Jeez, I could go on. He's be a dreadful choice. But fortunately like Bachmann hes too extreme to get elected.

His own Church Pastor said that his politics was "George Bush on Steroids".

look who's callin' the kettle "black"

god damned america

Osama has no responsibility here at all. none. its Bush's fault has turned into the sound of crickets. now the moron claims the tea party is at fault. who's next??? charles manson