BGFalcons82;786026 wrote:There is no doubt there is a price to pay for our undying lust for spending. The question is, do we pay the price right now...or kick the can down the road like we've been doing for the past 10 years at unprecedented levels? Electing someone to straighten our mess up now will have some negative consequences for sure. We can't gorge ourselves like we've been doing and not expect to have to pay for it. Or do we re-elect the quintessential king of spending and seal our doom to an even greater disaster? I've said this before and I'll say it again...by 2015, we will be spending $1,000,000,000,000 per year just to service the debt and that number is NOT coming down in 2016, 2017, 2018, etc. Hell, by 2020, it might even be $2,000,000,000,000 per year. Those numbers are unsustainable and regardless if the pansies in DC raise the debt ceiling or not, the world will yell, "I call", on us. The price to pay for belt-tightening is a cold compared to the stroke of an economic collapse.

Beyond having our economic system collapse, the most worrisome element to an Obama re-election is the high probability that he will turn the Supreme Court into a Progressive rubber-stamp. It was just a little over a year or so ago that the SCOTUS let the 2nd Amendment stand by a vote of 5-4. With another Progressive or two on the bench, the vote goes the other way, along with the Constitution, the Bill of Rights, and any semblance to the country that was formed over 230 years ago. If you want a "Living Constitution", re-elect Barry and you'll likely get your wish.

I've often felt that the single biggest legacy a President can leave is by his SC appointments. Hopefully Obama will get to put a couple more on the bench and reverse the conservative nature of the Court of the last 20 years.

stlouiedipalma;786618 wrote:[/I][/B]


I've often felt that the single biggest legacy a President can leave is by his SC appointments. Hopefully Obama will get to put a couple more on the bench and reverse the conservative nature of the Court of the last 20 years.

I truly hope Obama's opponent brings this issue up and frames it exactly for what it means. Only in a Progressive SCOTUS can the 2nd Amendment be tossed aside. The Amendment process will equally be destroyed via fiat as how could you have a new Amendment proposed that merely re-states the 2nd Amendment? Ludicrous. Ditto for the 4th, 5th and 10th Amendments, whose original purpose was to keep power away from government. Hell, they're already trying eliminate them with idiocies known as the Patriot Act in times of relative peace.

stlouiedipalma;786618 wrote:[/I][/B]


I've often felt that the single biggest legacy a President can leave is by his SC appointments. Hopefully Obama will get to put a couple more on the bench and reverse the conservative nature of the Court of the last 20 years.

Brilliant. Look what liberalism is doing for the economy....that HAS to be good for the law and Constitution, right? RIGHT?

I'd love to know what "conservative" decision has irked people so much, I doubt most people could name any decision they disagree with - probably most people would say Kelo which was hardly a conservative decision. At any rate if we're comparing appointees W has Obama beat by a mile, of course Obama was hamstrung by pretty much being forced to categorize his selections even if it meant appointing a "wise latina" who will likely have little historical relevance on the bench.

BGFalcons82;786673 wrote:I truly hope Obama's opponent brings this issue up and frames it exactly for what it means. Only in a Progressive SCOTUS can the 2nd Amendment be tossed aside. The Amendment process will equally be destroyed via fiat as how could you have a new Amendment proposed that merely re-states the 2nd Amendment? Ludicrous. Ditto for the 4th, 5th and 10th Amendments, whose original purpose was to keep power away from government. Hell, they're already trying eliminate them with idiocies known as the Patriot Act in times of relative peace.

Wait, were you blaming Obama for the Patriot Act there? Because while I wish he wouldn't support it the damn thing has practically unanimous support from the conservatives in congress.

If that's not what you meant then carry on.

Because while I wish he wouldn't support it the damn thing has practically unanimous support from the conservatives in congress.

I don't think so.
http://articles.latimes.com/2011/may/25/news/la-pn-patriot-act-20110525

I Wear Pants;786926 wrote:Wait, were you blaming Obama for the Patriot Act there? Because while I wish he wouldn't support it the damn thing has practically unanimous support from the conservatives in congress.

If that's not what you meant then carry on.

Wasn't it just re-upped by Obama's "electronic pen" last week? In war time, I could be persuaded about national security issues. In today's world? Nope. The Patriot Act is a clearly stated violation of search and seizure without warrants.

BGFalcons82;787087 wrote:Wasn't it just re-upped by Obama's "electronic pen" last week? In war time, I could be persuaded about national security issues. In today's world? Nope. The Patriot Act is a clearly stated violation of search and seizure without warrants.

I agree, but I thought you were placing blame on the left for it which would be disingenuous. Blaming Obama is fair and it's one of the bigger disappoints I have with him (re-upping the damn thing).

Hits: http://www.opencongress.org/vote/2011/h/376

196 Rs for 54 Ds for. All dbags.

No votes, 122 Ds, 31 Rs. Still probably dbags but right on this issue.

16 Ds and 12 Rs are pussies that didn't vote.

Cain will be a force in the debates and, like recently in South Carolina, will change minds of those Rs on the fence. I've heard that Cain could be BHO's worse nightmare.

As many have said, it is too early to predict and I do think there will be others who enter the nomination. Given the optimism among R ranks, it would not surprise me that some who are running are doing it primarily to get a job in the next administration.

Romney appears to be the blue-blood country-club pseudo-conservative candidate that always seems to rise to the top. On one hand he has a lot of money and support. On the other hand he fucking refuses to say that RomneyCare in Mass was a mistake and BHO should not have used it as the prime model for ObamaKare. For this reason alone I refuse to vote for Romney in the primary. I will hold my nose while voting if he is the candidate vs. BHO.

It would not surprise me if Christie eventually runs in 2012. Word is he recently distanced himself from the Cap and Trade legislation NJ has been debating and this can only help garner conservative votes nationwide. He is a strait shooter and could be incredible in debates vs. BHO.

With the way BHO has mishandled the economy since taking office in 2009... and as others have mentioned, the ECONOMY will be a primary if not the only, issue in the 2012 election

Maybe we'll see a 2012 Romney/Christie ticket where Christie finally gets the experience he says that he is missing and we end up with 16 years of conservative leadership that saves the USA from the socialist path it now is sliding down.

I really like Herman Cain.

bigdaddy2003;787298 wrote:I really like Herman Cain.

Me too. just not sure he can get beyond the inevitable obvious liberal media slant that he is only a black guy that the Rs are putting up to go against BHO.

Not being racist.. just realistic.

In debates, he could take BHO to the woodshed. Might be fun to watch!

"With the way BHO has mishandled the economy since taking office in 2009... and as others have mentioned, the ECONOMY will be a primary if not the only, issue in the 2012 election "

Agreed, hell it is an issue now, the housing "recovery" never happened and we're looking at a substantial double dip in home prices, at a time when there is inflation in gas and every day goods. If W was in office right now he'd be impeached given the lackluster (and that's the understatement of the millennium) growth.

I think we should just vote for the "White Individual"....

When you think that 96 percent of black voters supported Obama and constituted 13 percent of the electorate that not voting issue, policy or politics that racist voting.
Because of that mentality look at what has happen and look at the the damage that has been done to the black population. Sorry black voters you are a Chump.... the Democrat pimped you again.. The National Black Chamber of Commerces get it and will not be voting color again... what about the other black population?

IMO ... Obama will lose 45% of the support from the Black community ... 2012

Belly35;787337 wrote:I think we should just vote for the "White Individual"....

When you think that 96 percent of black voters supported Obama and constituted 13 percent of the electorate that not voting issue, policy or politics that racist voting.
Because of that mentality look at what has happen and look at the the damage that has been done to the black population. Sorry black voters you are a Chump.... the Democrat pimped you again.. The National Black Chamber of Commerces get it and will not be voting color again... what about the other black population?

IMO ... Obama will lose 45% of the support from the Black community ... 2012

If you really believe this....I really feel sorry for you

In regards to Herman Cain...yea let a guy who was the CEO of a company who has been almost bankrupt twice be President...that would be good

If Christie does decide to run(IMO he won't and will wait till 2016) he will be torn apart by the other Republican candidates for being a flip-flopper on running. I would doubt he would make it past the 3rd or 4th primary state

Ty Webb;787679 wrote:In regards to Herman Cain...yea let a guy who was the CEO of a company who has been almost bankrupt twice be President...that would be good

If Christie does decide to run(IMO he won't and will wait till 2016) he will be torn apart by the other Republican candidates for being a flip-flopper on running. I would doubt he would make it past the 3rd or 4th primary state

Almost bankrupt? So he has successfuly run a company?

They were almost bankrupt twice while he was CEO...that isn't a good thing

Ty Webb;787698 wrote:They were almost bankrupt twice while he was CEO...that isn't a good thing

However, in 1986, several franchises of Godfathers Pizza plummeted. And the pizza chain struggled to beat its competitors. So, Pillsbury selected Herman Cain to be the new president of Godfather’s. Cain had previously rescued some Burger King chains from bankruptcy; thereby earning him a remarkable reputation. And with his leading abilities, he managed to settle some lawsuits, eliminated non-profitable units, introduced more products, and arranged for delivery services. As a result, the pizza chain gradually went back to its feet.
http://pizzadominoes.com/godfathers-pizza/

Ty Webb;787698 wrote:They were almost bankrupt twice while he was CEO...that isn't a good thing

I don't understand almost bankrupt. You either are or you arent. I bet he had to make cuts. So maybe he's the right guy for the job. The current nog keeps spending even though were bankrupt

majorspark;787708 wrote:However, in 1986, several franchises of Godfathers Pizza plummeted. And the pizza chain struggled to beat its competitors. So, Pillsbury selected Herman Cain to be the new president of Godfather’s. Cain had previously rescued some Burger King chains from bankruptcy; thereby earning him a remarkable reputation. And with his leading abilities, he managed to settle some lawsuits, eliminated non-profitable units, introduced more products, and arranged for delivery services. As a result, the pizza chain gradually went back to its feet.
http://pizzadominoes.com/godfathers-pizza/

Thanks. So ty lied. Cain saved them from bankruptcies

It undoubtedly appears true that Herman Cain was a good businessman.

Manhattan Buckeye;787333 wrote:"With the way BHO has mishandled the economy since taking office in 2009... and as others have mentioned, the ECONOMY will be a primary if not the only, issue in the 2012 election "

Agreed, hell it is an issue now, the housing "recovery" never happened and we're looking at a substantial double dip in home prices, at a time when there is inflation in gas and every day goods. If W was in office right now he'd be impeached given the lackluster (and that's the understatement of the millennium) growth.

Of course it never happened because Obama failed and Congress failed to enact any reasonable domestic policies sufficient to engage the problem that would have been consistent with the orthodox history of economics. But it wouldn't have mattered anyways because people like you would have been on this board screaming "inflation, gah!" It has been three years since Ron Paul stood on the floor of the House declaring the end of the dollar as we know it and yet core inflation is nowhere to be found and the commodity inflation responding to increased worldwide demand (and not printing of money) has tapered off and yet the housing problem still exists and unemployment is terribly high. I just don't get it...you're hating on them for not doing anything but if he would have done anything, even right out of an economics text book, you would deplore his incompetency. He cut taxes in his two worthless stimuluses which even Martin Feldstein disagreed with and let Bernanke rely on the Friedman playbook and yet you complain. Conservatism 101 and it did nothing.

Tell me what you think he and the Congress should do...because the ideas I've heard would disgrace the alter of our God the free market.

Ty Webb;787679 wrote:In regards to Herman Cain...yea let a guy who was the CEO of a company who has been almost bankrupt twice be President...that would be good

Better than letting a guy who's almost bankrupted the country be President twice.

gut;787779 wrote:Better than letting a guy who's almost bankrupted the country be President twice.

If that guy gets re-elected, you can remove the word, "almost", from your post.

I stated this before, but what is Obama's platform?
What will he say is the compelling reason to elect him again?
Other than ordering some lead for Osama's head, what macro problem has he taken on and solved?

BGFalcons82;787796 wrote: Other than ordering some lead for Osama's head, what macro problem has he taken on and solved?

He could spin not having a budget into solving the budget problem!