2kool4skool;1157906 wrote:He doesn't really have to do much of anything in order to beat a fish like Romney.

You hope, anyway. How much cabbage are you in for?

isadore;1158007 wrote:the Clinton's term ended 11 years ago and I think obama has done a good job.

It is sad that people actually believe this.

gut;1158448 wrote:One of them was "trained" for the job. The other was a community organizer.

trained for throwing people out of work, he did pass healthcare but so did Obama.

isadore;1158395 wrote:He got the Healthcare Bill passed, if it is declared unconstitutional it sure not the first mistake by the SCOTUS from Dred Scott to Citizens United their mistakes are legion. He played a major role in saving the auto industry, he has the economy headed in the right direction, he saw that closing Gitmo was a mistake and he had the guts to do what was best for American safety over appeasing a bunch of people who will hate America any how, and his escalation in Afghanistan has moved us closer to the possibility of success after the mismanagement of the Bush era.

lol, has Obama done anything wrong in your eyes? Give me a freaking break, just starting singing "All Hail King Obama", it's what you want anyway.

jmog;1158490 wrote:lol, has Obama done anything wrong in your eyes? Give me a freaking break, just starting singing "All Hail King Obama", it's what you want anyway.

would you sign my petition to repeal the 22nd Amendment. please.

isadore;1158512 wrote:would you sign my petition to repeal the 22nd Amendment. please.

I personally believe that the 22nd Amendment is Unconstitutional. It states that every person in the USA (save they match the other criteria of being natural born and 35+) is eligible to run for President EXCEPT the few people who have served 2 terms.

I do believe that a President should "step down" and not run after 8 years as the norm was for the first 150+ years.

Yes there were a few who tried for a 3rd term and 1 who got a 3rd term, but most, like Washington and Jefferson, stepped down.

I also see Jefferson's side of the argument though, he was a proponent of a term limit being put into the Constitution. He even said that a 4 year term could end up being a life term and turn into tyranny, which was still on their mind at that point in history.

I see both sides and can play Devil's Advocate for both sides, personally I have no problem with a President serving more than 2 terms if the general public is dumb enough to elect a bad President 3 times then then deserve it.

I don't think anything in the Constitution can be unConstitutional, unless it deprives a state or equal representation in the Senate or violates the proposal or ratification procedures. But what it does do more importantly is to try to stymie the will of the people who ultimately are the ultimately sovereign in our representative democracy.

isadore;1158568 wrote:I don't think anything in the Constitution can be unConstitutional, unless it deprives a state or equal representation in the Senate or violates the proposal or ratification procedures. But what it does do more importantly is to try to stymie the will of the people who ultimately are the ultimately sovereign in our representative democracy.

I maybe unconstitutional was the wrong word, but it goes against the original intent of the Constitution. How is that?

I would think that is a good explanation. Original intent is hard to prove and understand. Personally I agree it goes against the intent of people's choice. On the other hand George Washington was the Presiding Officer at the Constitutional Convention. It was obviously his intent that two terms were enough for a leader.

isadore;1158594 wrote:I would think that is a good explanation. Original intent is hard to prove and understand. Personally I agree it goes against the intent of people's choice. On the other hand George Washington was the Presiding Officer at the Constitutional Convention. It was obviously his intent that two terms were enough for a leader.

or it was his intent that two terms were enough for him.

isadore;1158489 wrote:trained for throwing people out of work, he did pass healthcare but so did Obama.

Ahhhh, yes, yet another person who doesn't understand what private equity does. The alternative in many cases is everyone loses their job because, unlike the US gubmit, no one actually wants to run a business at a loss.

gut;1158609 wrote:Ahhhh, yes, yet another person who doesn't understand what private equity does. The alternative in many cases is everyone loses their job because, unlike the US gubmit, no one actually wants to run a business at a loss.

Private Equity is fine and useful in the economy in large part but what they don't deserve is a tax expenditure for their compensation for services rendered which they are able to get through lobbying because they are rich and powerful. Conservative economists who do not like deviations from pure income tax norms and distortions in economic activity should raise hell about the break for carried interest.

Al Bundy;1158602 wrote:or it was his intent that two terms were enough for him.

and that is one of the many problems with determining original intent, the basis for many Supreme Court decisions.

gut;1158609 wrote:Ahhhh, yes, yet another person who doesn't understand what private equity does. The alternative in many cases is everyone loses their job because, unlike the US gubmit, no one actually wants to run a business at a loss.

it will serve as a basis for the Romney Presidency, making a small group richer on the suffering of working people.

believer;1158454 wrote:Trillions of dollars in new debt, $787 billion in Porkulus Crony Spending, ObamaKare, etc. BHO's accomplished a lot.

Hopefully he uses these during his campaign. That's all he has to run on.

isadore;1158622 wrote:it will serve as a basis for the Romney Presidency, making a small group richer on the suffering of working people.

You do realize that under Obama's presidency, the rich have still been getting richer and the divide between the wealthy and the middle class wider, right? He is no different than what you think Romney would be.

isadore;1158622 wrote:it will serve as a basis for the Romney Presidency, making a small group richer on the suffering of working people.

Actually, when PE outsources jobs they improve the lives of the TRULY suffering. But it's more an "honor badge" for the bleeding heart liberals than genuine passion to end REAL suffering.

isadore;1158620 wrote:and that is one of the many problems with determining original intent, the basis for many Supreme Court decisions.

The SC is supposed to follow what is written there, not what they think should be written there. The writers of the Constitution knew things would change over time and built in a process to amend the Constitution when it is needed.

Navy SEALS slam obama .........
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2137636/SEALs-slam-Obama-using-ammunition-bid-credit-bin-Laden-killing-election-campaign.html


only about 8 more months of this imposter.

BoatShoes;1158619 wrote:Private Equity is fine and useful in the economy in large part but what they don't deserve is a tax expenditure for their compensation for services rendered which they are able to get through lobbying because they are rich and powerful. Conservative economists who do not like deviations from pure income tax norms and distortions in economic activity should raise hell about the break for carried interest.

Agreed on the carried interest, although in many respects it does represent an actual investment realized over years - no different than stock option grants to execs. Your point is more pertinent to hedge funds which would be ordinary income if not structured the way the funds are.

It's worth looking at since deferred comp can certainly be argued as different and deserving different treatment than true investment of capital, but objectively it's somewhere between capital gains and ordinary income.

QuakerOats;1158773 wrote:Navy SEALS slam obama .........
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2137636/SEALs-slam-Obama-using-ammunition-bid-credit-bin-Laden-killing-election-campaign.html


only about 8 more months of this imposter.

That may be about the only thing I do give the President credit for doing well. He made a tough call and America's finest weapon served valiantly.

I don't like the President baiting his opponent with such an event, however.

I sure am doing better than I was four years ago. Back then my IRA was taking on water because of the financial crisis. After four years of BHO, it has come all the way back (and then some), I am debt-free and my outlook is positive. Why would I give the Presidency back to the fools who drove the car into the ditch?

stlouiedipalma;1158853 wrote:I sure am doing better than I was four years ago. Back then my IRA was taking on water because of the financial crisis. After four years of BHO, it has come all the way back (and then some), I am debt-free and my outlook is positive. Why would I give the Presidency back to the fools who drove the car into the ditch?

FYI, we are still in the "ditch"...4 years later and we haven't got out of it yet or even trying to climb out.

jmog;1158900 wrote:FYI, we are still in the "ditch"...4 years later and we haven't got out of it yet or even trying to climb out.

I might argue that we are back on the road driving across a bridge to nowhere...

fish82;1158471 wrote:You hope, anyway. How much cabbage are you in for?

On Obama? I'm only betting the profits from my Romney bet, so at worst this political season will be break even. Looking like I'm going to end up a decent amount though

dwccrew;1158636 wrote:Hopefully he uses these during his campaign. That's all he has to run on.



You do realize that under Obama's presidency, the rich have still been getting richer and the divide between the wealthy and the middle class wider, right? He is no different than what you think Romney would be.

he made a mistake in not ending the tax cuts for the rich during his first two years, instead of first going for his healthcare plan. But Romney would have pushed more tax cuts for the rich further pushing our maldistribution of wealth.