Doubling down: Obama follows Cordray recess appointment with three more to NLRB

posted at 5:12 pm on January 4, 2012 by Allahpundit

Ed saw it coming this morning and now here it is.

Between this and The One waging war in Libya without congressional approval — a move which his own lawyers found dubious, I remind you — I’m thinking the GOP really needs to run a guy next year with a less expansive view of executive authority. How about Dick Cheney?

The president used his power to name Sharon Block, Terence Flynn and Richard Griffin to the board, which arbitrates workplace disputes and federal labor issues. The controversial board — which drew fire from Republicans after its acting general counsel sided with an aircraft workers’ union in a dispute with aerospace giant Boeing — was in danger of becoming inactive when the term of Craig Becker, another Obama recess appointee, expired last month, depriving it of a quorum.

Block and Flynn are Democrats, while Griffin is a Republican.

“The American people deserve to have qualified public servants fighting for them every day – whether it is to enforce new consumer protections or uphold the rights of working Americans,” Obama said in a statement. “We can’t wait to act to strengthen the economy and restore security for our middle class and those trying to get in it, and that’s why I am proud to appoint these fine individuals to get to work for the American people.”

Labor unions, whose relationship with Obama had been strained recently, cheered the move.

Why would O risk a constitutional confrontation with Congress over something as minor as the NLRB or his new consumer board? Why, for the same reason he does everything: Because it might help him get re-elected. He’s going to run against a “do-nothing Congress” next year so he needs some dramatic examples of him heroically defying GOP obstructionism to serve the public good. And if that means taking a dump on the Constitution to help labor and impress middle-class voters, well, that’s just what strong, blue-collar presidents have to do sometimes. The legal argument against what he’s doing couldn’t be simpler, as David Freddoso explains. Essentially, Obama’s claiming that he gets to decide whether pro forma sessions of the Senate amount to real sessions for purposes of recess appointments; that sure sounds like a violation of separation of powers insofar as each branch typically sets its own rules, but the beauty of this maneuver from Obama’s perspective is that he probably can’t be sued over it. Federal courts will refuse to rule on certain turf-war disputes between the executive and the legislature on grounds that they represent a “political question” that should be decided by voters, not by judges. I’m not sure if that’ll apply here — what happens when someone ends up suing Cordray on the theory that he was never constitutionally appointed? — but that’s what The One’s counting on.

So shameless is this power grab, in fact, that even John Yoo, whose name is a curse word on the left when it comes to executive overreach, thinks Obama went too far. Lefty Timothy Noah, who supports Cordray’s appointment, candidly admitted today at TNR that he can’t figure out how this could possibly be constitutional. (If Obama has the power to define when the Senate is and isn’t in recess, writes Noah, then he could theoretically treat every weekend of the year as a recess.) In fact, according to Mark Calabria at Cato, not only does the Cordray appointment flout the Constitution, it actually violates the terms of the Dodd-Frank statute pushed through by O’s own party:

More importantly the “recess” appointment of Cordray doesn’t solve the President’s problem. The Dodd-Frank Act is very clear, even a law professor can probably under this section, that authorities under the Act remain with the Treasury Secretary until the Director is “confirmed by the Senate”. A recess appointment is not a Senate confirmation. Now don’t ask me why Dodd and Frank included such unusual language, they could have just given the Bureau the new authorities, but they didn’t. So even with this appointment, the CFPB won’t be able to go after all those non-banks, like the pay-day lenders and check-cashiers that caused the financial crisis (oh wait, those industries didn’t have anything to do with the crisis).

Meanwhile, Iain Murray at National Review reminds us that the names of the three NLRB appointees were only sent to the Senate three weeks ago. They haven’t been filibustered, so there’s no obstruction — yet. So eager is President Working Class Hero to start off an election year by defying Congress that he picked this fight before he had to.

Via CNS, here’s Carney warning the press corps yesterday that Obama was prepared to engage in unilateral executive action “small, medium, and large” to push his agenda. Let’s put this power grab in the “medium” category; “large” is reserved for wars like Libya that he’s undertaken without so much as a resolution of good luck from Congress. The more I think about this, the more it smells like O’s version of FDR’s court-packing plan, except (a) this is more constitutionally dubious and (b) this is transparently a cheap election-year pander. Exit question: What will the next Republican president use this exciting new precedent for, pray tell?

Update: Via Free Republic, enjoy this 2008 AP story describing how Democrats successfully used pro forma Senate sessions to block evil monarchical lawless cowboy president George W. Bush from making recess appointments of his own.

Update: Corrected a typo in the post above.


Related Posts:

Breaking on Hot Air

Blowback

Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.

Trackbacks/Pings

Trackback URL

Comments

Comment pages: 1 2 3 4 5

Bush did it 270 times.

freshface on January 4, 2012 at 7:01 PM

Lying won’t help you here. I already posted the link from the Congressional Research Service-Bush did it 171 times.

G-

Del Dolemonte on January 4, 2012 at 7:45 PM

We have a dictator in the White House.

joecollins on January 4, 2012 at 7:45 PM

If a person did not vote, then seriously, they need to STFU & stick their heads back in the sand & continue to get screwed up the butt & LIKE it.

Badger40 on January 4, 2012 at 7:13 PM

Seriously, if you think that is a persuasive argument, then you really need therapy. Are you gay?

Tell you what, try that on a friday night at your favorite pub. Go up to some loud mouth drunk an tell him that. He’ll quiet down right away, I’m sure.

Do I sound like a loud mouth drunk to you? You want to try and shut me up? You need an address? I’m on facebook, send me a friend request. Send me an email if your peabrain can figure out what it might be.

Skandia Recluse on January 4, 2012 at 7:46 PM

this sounds like the right follow-up…mass mortgage refi.

Here’s the brilliance. 1. One of the designers is from AEI…and Romney advisor 2. pay people to vote for barry 3. stimulus to economy…make barry look good going into Nov.

Mayer estimates that some $3.7 trillion of mortgages would be refinanced. That’s right, this would be the Mother of All Mortgage Refinancing Plans. It would help roughly 30 million borrowers save $75 billion to $80 billion a year. As Mayer puts it: “This plan would function like a long-­lasting tax cut for these 25 or 30 million American families.”

And the beauty part for Obama? He wouldn’t need approval from Congress to do it. Even though many Republicans would scream that the plan would reward irresponsible homeowners who took on too much leverage — indeed, talk of a housing bailout is what launched the Tea Party movement – they probably couldn’t stop it. And Hubbard already has an answer to the moral hazard issue: “This proposal requires borrowers to give up a share of future appreciation in order to participate. Lenders must eat a portion of the losses as well. Everyone gives a little bit.”

http://blog.american.com/2012/01/january-surprise-is-obama-preparing-a-trillion-dollar-mass-refinancing-of-mortgages/

i think there’s no way Rs are going to win. Barry has been laying back and waiting for the third year. Swoop in with something big. Stocks go way up, gdp goes up, jobs get better, people have more confidence

Rs are standing around scratching their head and saying wtf happened?

Remember f/f already own most of the mortgages. it is almost a fait accompli

r keller on January 4, 2012 at 7:47 PM

I can’t wait for Boehner to cave on the next budget deal to show Obowma who he is dealing with…

… Oh, wait!

Seven Percent Solution on January 4, 2012 at 7:51 PM

Don’t expect the Republican Party to take any action against Barack Obama for his illegal and unconstitutional action on his recent appointments. Sure, they’ll beat their chests and make the rounds on the talk shows to denounce him; but remember, the GOP also supported his illegal action in Libya. They’ll fund him, they’ll vote with him. In the end, nothing will be done, so by their inaction, they’ll have fully supported a return to a dictatorship.

madmonkphotog on January 4, 2012 at 7:51 PM

Any questions?

Mr Galt on January 4, 2012 at 7:44 PM

Not really.
Pretty much nailed it.

Mimzey on January 4, 2012 at 7:52 PM

RedSoxNation on January 4, 2012 at 6:44 PM
It would be ironic if Obama’s own hubris does him in on ObamaCare.
INC on January 4, 2012 at 6:52 PM<

I agree.

RedSoxNation on January 4, 2012 at 7:53 PM

My money is on epaulettes.

rogerb on January 4, 2012 at 7:35 PM

With a chest full of campaign medals representing each escape from a sand trap on the world’s golf courses. Next he will be asking for hazard pay. ;-)

Yoop on January 4, 2012 at 7:54 PM

“Lenders must eat a portion of the losses as well. Everyone gives a little bit.”
 
r keller on January 4, 2012 at 7:47 PM

 

“I think when you spread the wealth around, it’s good for everybody”
 
- President Barack H. Obama

 
Stupid me, taking out a mortgage we could pay even if one of us lost our job. And paying it every month ever since. Idiot.

rogerb on January 4, 2012 at 7:54 PM

They’ll fund him, they’ll vote with him. In the end, nothing will be done, so by their inaction, they’ll have fully supported a return to a dictatorship.

madmonkphotog on January 4, 2012 at 7:51 PM

So far thats true.
If they don’t wake up….gonna get ugly. In fear for their own political (pension) survival, they may, in a way, unite with the left against the people and the rule of law.

Mimzey on January 4, 2012 at 7:57 PM

RedSoxNation on January 4, 2012 at 6:44 PM
It would be ironic if Obama’s own hubris does him in on ObamaCare.

Yeah, we should be so lucky.

PatriotGal2257 on January 4, 2012 at 7:57 PM

This story has been on the WaPo site for well over an hour now. And only 1 comment:

Gonna keep an eye on this WaPo story to see how many more agree with this Fluffer.

Del Dolemonte on January 4, 2012 at 6:57 PM

2 hours now since this WaPo story appeared. Only 2 Comments total.

Either the WaPo Kos Kids know they can’t credibly defend O’bama on this, or (much more likely) they are waiting for their Democrat Talking Points to tell them how to think.

Del Dolemonte on January 4, 2012 at 7:57 PM

Just wait until that lame duck session after the election. I have NO doubts he will do as much damage as he can. I would not be surprised if he burned down the White House. I’m not kidding.

SouthernGent on January 4, 2012 at 7:59 PM

no more working with king obama…just want to see impeachment proceedings for him

sadsushi on January 4, 2012 at 8:01 PM

Please lock this petulant child in a closet, and don’t let him out until after the elections.

so-notbuyingit on January 4, 2012 at 8:02 PM

From 2007, Zsa Zsa’s site crowed about Harry Reid blocking Bush Recess Appointments-of course, today Dingy said when O’bama does it, it’s “no problem”.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2007/11/15/reid-making-plans-to-bloc_n_72830.html

Del Dolemonte on January 4, 2012 at 8:02 PM

A lot of this is distraction tactic.
Notice how the Fast & Furious and the DOJ on trial is “under the radar”..same with Solyindra, MF Global, Voter ID, etc.etc.
That is the tactic.
As soon as the attention is on these recess appointments, they will achieve another of their goals somewhere else..when focus shifts to that..they will be working on something else..
It will not stop until we are either under a form of communist rule, or the administration is out of power.
Like it or not…thats the truth imo.

Mimzey on January 4, 2012 at 8:03 PM

Why not….?
Is somebody gonna’ stop him ?

NeoKong on January 4, 2012 at 5:18 PM

DrewM over at Ace’s blog said this:

As for the politics of this…we’re going to see calls for the GOP to begin impeachment proceedings. Let’s just not even think about that. It’s simply not going to happen and it’ll give Obama exactly what he wants. He’ll claim that Republicans are focusing on political games instead of helping the American people, blah, blah, blah.

There’s really not much the GOP can do. A lawsuit will never work (any court will call it a “political question” and punt) and going nuclear will play into Obama’s hands.

Basically Obama is running for President and he wants his opponent to be “Congressional Republicans”. Sometimes the best strategy is to skip a fight you want to have and should have simply because simply engaging in it is a win for your opponent.

Think of it as ignoring a comment troll. It’s unsatisfying but effective.
Let the GOP candidates take this fight to Obama while the House actually focuses on things like the tax bill that’s coming up in 2 months.

Really, he said it.

SouthernGent on January 4, 2012 at 8:08 PM

“The principles of a free constitution are irrecoverably lost when the legislative power is nominated by the executive.”
-Edward Gibbon

mittens on January 4, 2012 at 8:10 PM

Mimzey on January 4, 2012 at 8:03 PM

Good reminder. Issa’s wants Holder to testify on Feb. 2.

http://dailycaller.com/2012/01/04/holder-to-testify-on-fast-and-furious-before-issa%E2%80%99s-committee/

Holder testified about Fast and Furious before the House Judiciary Committee two times in 2011 — on May 3 and on Dec. 8. He also testified about the scandal before the Senate Judiciary Committee in early November 2011. Holder hasn’t, however, testified before Issa’s committee on Fast and Furious.

INC on January 4, 2012 at 8:12 PM

“I think when you spread the wealth around, it’s good for everybody”

- President Barack H. Obama

And, in case that didn’t sink in with anyone:

“At some point, you’ve made enough money.”

– Barky of the 84 IQ, who will dictate to you peons when that point is … when he feels like it.

ThePrimordialOrderedPair on January 4, 2012 at 8:14 PM

Really, he said it.

SouthernGent on January 4, 2012 at 8:08 PM

Yeah … Drew’s an idiot. He always has been.

ThePrimordialOrderedPair on January 4, 2012 at 8:16 PM

Any strongly-worded press release from McConnell?

SouthernGent on January 4, 2012 at 8:20 PM

I’m not really sure why Obama thinks this will appeal to the average American. Most are already terrified of him and the democrats. Blatant power grabs, ignoring the Constitution and laws don’t exactly give people a sense of calm and comfort.

This may sit well with communists and corrupt union leaders, but most folks … and especially some young people aren’t going to care for it one bit.

darwin on January 4, 2012 at 5:29 PM

Terrified? More like white-hot rage.

PatriotGal2257 on January 4, 2012 at 8:25 PM

We’ll find that out
IF
we have elections in 2012.

burrata on January 4, 2012 at 5:36 PM

Suspending elections or “appointing” himself President for 2013- is no less Unconstitutional and illegal than what he’s done today.

If this precedent stands, a President can make a recess appointment ANY MOMENT CONGRESS leaves the chamber. As in in the middle of the night between one day’s session and the next!

wildcat72 on January 4, 2012 at 8:25 PM

If the republicans had a set they would make it clear that they hold any decision from the Dodd-Franks faux head to be null and void and having no authority under the law.

JIMV on January 4, 2012 at 8:29 PM

Hey, maybe he should just deem himself the winner and put a stop to the election. Voting is just a petty formality anyway.

JellyToast on January 4, 2012 at 8:32 PM

Now that Iowa is over, the livestock farmers who were caucusing… need to go home and start to recycle some of the product, of their business.
From now, until the election, or until the Republican Senators or House members… “get it”…every time they geld one of their bulls or boars…the farmer needs to package the remains of their process…and send them to the House and Senate members…until “they get some” or their office, is full of “them!”….OK?
(For you city folks…they call them- Rocky Mountain Oysters)

KOOLAID2 on January 4, 2012 at 8:36 PM

If the republicans had a set they would make it clear that they hold any decision from the Dodd-Franks faux head to be null and void and having no authority under the law.

JIMV on January 4, 2012 at 8:29 PM

States need to start declaring that ANY decision by this illegally constructed NLRB are null and void within their borders. This would FORCE the courts to strike the appointments down. No state, no citizen should have to abide by a ruling by people who do not hold their posts legitimately.

There needs to be an end to recess appointments anyway. They were put into law basically because back in the day Congress DID NOT meet all the time and it would take DAYS for them to travel to Washington for a session. It was meant for critical jobs to be able to be filled in the interim.

Recess appointments should only be allowed to serve until Congress is back in session or 90 days, whichever is greater.

NOT a whole term.

Also, a recess appointee should never be eligible for a government job ever again.

wildcat72 on January 4, 2012 at 8:38 PM

Duncan Sunahara v. Hawaii Dept. of Health, SOH et al. Case #1CC12-1-000006. (Little Virginia Sunahara’s brother can’t seem to get a certified copy of his little sister’s B.C. from HDOH!)

DixT on January 4, 2012 at 8:39 PM

So I call Mitch McConnell’s office to see if he has the huevos to contest this in court. First time I pose the question, I get put on hold for ten minutes. I call back, pose the question and phone girl says “I’ll take a message.”

Yeah that means no.

sandiegoconservative on January 4, 2012 at 8:41 PM

This is a significant step in the relentless disintegration of our form of government.

What will the next step be? Is it now up to the President to decide when congress is or is not in session?

Amphipolis on January 4, 2012 at 8:43 PM

Think of it as ignoring a comment troll. It’s unsatisfying but effective.
Let the GOP candidates take this fight to Obama while the House actually focuses on things like the tax bill that’s coming up in 2 months.

There’s a problem here, though. I agree, impeachment right now isn’t the way to go. We have an election in 11 months. But, on the other hand.. the more that is ignored the more he’s going to try to get away with. The more he gets away with, the more the Narcissist tends to think he really is invincible. The only thing he has faced for all that he has done is decreasing poll numbers for both him and his party.

I would agree to impeachment if our GOP was filled with men and women of character and virtue. But they don’t seem to have much spine either. Or much creativity. The only reason impeachment isn’t an option, is due to our current crop of Republicans.
But, having said that, something needs to be done. What’s the next things he’s going to try. You’ve got Michelle Obama out there saying she sorta likes to be called “Your Excellency” on this kid’s show called ICarlie. It gives you the mindset of these two.

Speaking here not knowing congressional procedures and powers, I’d still think that there ought to be a way to defund these offices/appointees. Their appointments are unconstitutional and should not be recognized by congress. Not by congress nor by the states. That would bring this to the attention of the American people and isolate Obama and these appointees.

If congress recognizes these appointments while at the same time complaining they are unconstitutional, what good is that? If they are unconstitutional then their offices should not receive tax dollars nor should congress or the states recognize anything they do. Not their positions, duties or titles. They are acting outside of the constitution and thus outside of the law.
That would be a bold move and I think a good one.

JellyToast on January 4, 2012 at 8:50 PM

Ladies and gentlemen, it’s time to fight back and work at the state Evelyn to seize back their usurped power and neuter the federal government. We must reinstitute federalism before Obama and his party reduce us all to slaves.

This is a manifestation of the Cloward-Piven strategy whereby he is seeking to overwhelm his enemies, the GOP, to move his agenda forward.

How the heck will the GOP be able to undo all of this at the federal level? I don’t think they will be able to. Even if the GOP wins the presidency and gains control of the Senate, there is no way they will get 60 votes so the socialists who remain in the upper chamber will filibuster day in and day out to stop the GOP from undoing the damage Teh One has caused. We are paying the price for GOP cowardice and timidity.

Personally I say the HE double hockeysticks to the federal government, elect overwhelming conservative majorities in Red states and start ignoring the diktats of the federal government when it is clear that their legislation and other acts are unconstitutional.

IMO our only salvation is to turn to the states.

Using Obamacare as an example, if the 26 states suing over it were to simply say that since the constitution doesn’t give the Feds the power to implement the system that they will instead simply ignore it and prevent its implementation within their borders then O-care would collapse.

If the SCOTUS upholds what is clearly constitutional do we then meekly submit to our further enslavement?

When will we have had enough?

Charlemagne on January 4, 2012 at 8:52 PM

This really makes me sick to my stomach, but I don’t know what makes me feel worse: That the One did this, or that the republicans in Congress won’t do anything about it.

Darksean on January 4, 2012 at 8:55 PM

I refuse to submit. To a dictator in chief, OR to have government earn more from my labors than I do.

wildcat72 on January 4, 2012 at 8:55 PM

Some nice election wallpaper for your laptop. Ha.

BKeyser on January 4, 2012 at 8:59 PM

I can see the future already: 300 years from now they’ll still be uncovering executive orders, recess appointments and probably many non-recess appointments made by the Caesar-in-Chief that nobody had ever previously seen–buried alongside receipts from his excessive golf outings and extravagant vacations.

stukinIL4now on January 4, 2012 at 9:07 PM

Yeah, I saw Romney’s speech. He said Obama “is a nice guy, he’s just in over his head.”

Bad ass. Hell, I thought I was watching Clint Eastwood at the end of Unforgiven.

Dime IV on January 4, 2012 at 7:16 PM

Haha.

conservative pilgrim on January 4, 2012 at 9:10 PM

BKeyser on January 4, 2012 at 8:59 PM

Nice flikr photos. Some really good photochops in there.

tom daschle concerned on January 4, 2012 at 9:11 PM

Apparently pro-forma isn’t enough. Just as filibusters, holds and other Senate rules are extra-Constitutional, so might pro forma sessions be. Maybe the Mitch McConnell should have cut his vacation short to preside.

But, if this Constitutional outrage is so grand, how did we all feel about Bush’s massive disregard for the 4th Amendment and habeas corpus, or Reagan’s Iran-Contra thing. I’m thinking massive civil liberties violations and secret wars are a little more ominous than the appointment of a few bureaucrats.

Though, unlike the Republican caucus I’m not on the payroll of Wall-Mart (executive suite, not floor staff) or Goldman Sachs, so my outrage has yet to be rented.

urban elitist on January 4, 2012 at 9:17 PM

You are a moron. Did you watch Romney’s speech yesterday. You people need to stop this nonsense. If you are going to talk about Romney, at least say what he did…and not make up your own crap.

Nonsense.

Chudi on January 4, 2012 at 5:22 PM

Stellar argument Chudi.

So what did Romney say yesterday? No worries. Give Romney time and he’ll change his mind. He has a track record of doing that.

conservative pilgrim on January 4, 2012 at 9:24 PM

urban elitist on January 4, 2012 at 9:17 PM

Go crawl back under your rock.

ThePrimordialOrderedPair on January 4, 2012 at 9:26 PM

Though, unlike the Republican caucus I’m not on the payroll of Wall-Mart (executive suite, not floor staff) or Goldman Sachs, so my outrage has yet to be rented.

urban elitist on January 4, 2012 at 9:17 PM


Your Boy is essentially on the staff at Goldman Sachs.

You can snark away liar, you aren’t going to win hearts and minds when you advocate for corporatism.

tom daschle concerned on January 4, 2012 at 9:27 PM

Anyone rooting for Romney, Perry or Gingrich…should just shut it on this.

RomneyCare
Gardisil
Healthcare mandate

All power grabs. Just like there is no sin worst than the other, in my eyes, all power grabs are equal.

That is why Ron Paul is the only one with higher ground in this election…even with all his coocooness

#justsaying

Can.I.be.in.the.middle on January 4, 2012 at 9:29 PM

But, if this Constitutional outrage is so grand, how did we all feel about Bush’s massive disregard for the 4th Amendment and habeas corpus

urban elitist on January 4, 2012 at 9:17 PM

Er, you do know that O’bama kept that program going, don’t you? At least until a Federal Judge (appointed by Pappy Bush, btw) said that one particular case broke the law?

On January 23, 2009, the administration of President Barack Obama adopted the same position as his predecessor when it urged U.S. District Judge Vaughn Walker to set aside a ruling in Al-Haramain Islamic Foundation et al. v. Obama, et al. The Obama administration also sided with the former administration in its legal defense of July, 2008 legislation that immunized the nation’s telecommunications companies from lawsuits accusing them of complicity in the eavesdropping program, according to testimony by Attorney General Eric Holder.

F-

Del Dolemonte on January 4, 2012 at 9:29 PM

Though, unlike the Republican caucus I’m not on the payroll of Wall-Mart (executive suite, not floor staff) or Goldman Sachs, so my outrage has yet to be rented.

urban elitist on January 4, 2012 at 9:17 PM

Our current (Democrat) “Secretary of State”, who has absolutely no qualifications for said job, was on Wal-Mart’s Board of Directors for 6 years. What’s your point?

F-

Del Dolemonte on January 4, 2012 at 9:31 PM

Badger40

I didn’t vote in our city elections here last year. Does that mean I must STFU? Am I no longer allowed to express political opinions in public? Can I post on this site only as long as I don’t express any political opinions? Would telling folks what my cat did with some string be an “opinion? Wow. A whole new category of suppression of free speech.

Oh wait. If I recall correctly, you’re a member of a Teachers’ Union, aren’t you. Figures.

Horace on January 4, 2012 at 9:32 PM

urban elitist

O/T – You thanked me for my military service on a thread a couple of days ago and I didn’t respond. I was rude and what you did was honorable. So, belatedly, Thanks.

Horace on January 4, 2012 at 9:34 PM

Has Obowma changed the ‘Pledge of Allegiance’ yet…?

… It’s so hard to keep up.

/

Seven Percent Solution on January 4, 2012 at 9:36 PM

“Right now, the biggest threats facing our country are from Washington. We have record debt and deficit spending, the biggest intergenerational theft in the history of the world. We have a system that punishes job creators and leaves many millions unemployed. We have an unsecured border that allows the drug cartels to operate freely in our country, and results in 400,000 illegal crossings into our state every year.

How have our leaders responded to these threats? This Congress approved the largest debt ceiling increase in American history. The administration transferred 2,000 high powered weapons to the most dangerous criminals in North America, punishing whistleblowers and rewarding those responsible for “Fast and Furious.” Then they sued Arizona for doing the job they won’t do. While Americans watch their savings disappear, we have credible allegations of insider trading by members of Congress.

It’s time for a new Sheriff in Washington. The American people are sounding a giant 911 call on Washington. And I’m responding.

Are you with me?” (Sheriff Paul Babeu)

VorDaj on January 4, 2012 at 9:36 PM

Del Dolemonte on January 4, 2012 at 9:29 PM

I could go on at length about my differences between Obama and myself on civil liberties issues (and signing statements).

I know this goes against the cheap pigeonholing you apply to Obama supporters, but I do have differences with the man on significant issues.

Your Boy is essentially on the staff at Goldman Sachs.

You can snark away liar, you aren’t going to win hearts and minds when you advocate for corporatism.

tom daschle concerned on January 4, 2012 at 9:27 PM

Yeah, they love Dodd-Frank. Just ask the lobbyists they’ve dispatched.

Kind of refreshing actually, that there are bankers out there
who recognized that being a capitalist doesn’t mean an unchecked license to manipulate the system and steal from the American people. Also, Republican social policies continue to be so loathsome that fair-minded people who might be more moderate are voting Blue with their wallets. Imagine — someone thinking that a solvent, equitable America is more important than that last 3.9% on their last million.

urban elitist on January 4, 2012 at 9:37 PM

Satan is half white.

leftnomore on January 4, 2012 at 9:48 PM

Kind of refreshing actually, that there are bankers out there who recognized that being a capitalist doesn’t mean an unchecked license to manipulate the system and steal from the American people. Also, Republican social policies continue to be so loathsome that fair-minded people who might be more moderate are voting Blue with their wallets. Imagine — someone thinking that a solvent, equitable America is more important than that last 3.9% on their last million.

urban elitist on January 4, 2012 at 9:37 PM

Er, I’ve been in the Mortgage Industry for 30 years. It was the Democrats in Congress who threatened the Lenders to make loans to people who didn’t have the means to pay them back. When Bush (and McCain) and the Republicans tried to reign them in back in 2004 and 2005, the Democrats who controlled the Banking Committee simply laughed at them and said they were over-reacting to a problem that didn’t exist.

As for “Republican social policies”, the Democrats controlled both houses of Congress from 2007 until a year ago. What exactly are you babbling about?

Del Dolemonte on January 4, 2012 at 9:51 PM

I could go on at length about my differences between Obama and myself on civil liberties issues (and signing statements).

But you won’t, because they don’t exist.

You’re just a blind pathetic bigot who does whatever Barack Obama tells you.

Everyone here knows that.

Case in point.

Kind of refreshing actually, that there are bankers out there
who recognized that being a capitalist doesn’t mean an unchecked license to manipulate the system and steal from the American people.

But, since you endorse and support both and with Obama’s direct endorsement, that makes you a liar.

But of course, that’s no surprise. You’re a blind pathetic bigot who does whatever Barack Obama tells him to do.

northdallasthirty on January 4, 2012 at 9:52 PM

Er, you do know that O’bama kept that program going, don’t you? At least until a Federal Judge (appointed by Pappy Bush, btw) said that one particular case broke the law?

F-

Del Dolemonte on January 4, 2012 at 9:29 PM

Of course.

But urban elitist is nothing more than an ignorant Obama bigot.

When Bush did this, urban elitist and the screaming Obama Party, including the pathetic child Barack Obama, said it was illegal, unconstitutional, a war crime, and justification for impeachment, arrest, trial before an international tribunal, imprisonment, and even execution.

But now when Barack Obama does it, urban elitist and Barack Obama spin for it, endorse it, and support it.

That is because we’re talking about ignorant bigots. Idiot urban elitist endorses, supports, and spins for everything that the liar Barack Obama does.

northdallasthirty on January 4, 2012 at 9:56 PM

Rise with healing, Lord !!
Just about our only Hope, folks !!
I swear …
Oy.

pambi on January 4, 2012 at 10:04 PM

Also, Republican social policies continue to be so loathsome that fair-minded people who might be more moderate are voting Blue with their wallets. Imagine — someone thinking that a solvent, equitable America is more important than that last 3.9% on their last million.

urban elitist on January 4, 2012 at 9:37 PM

You aren’t making any sense at this point. Dismissed.

tom daschle concerned on January 4, 2012 at 10:05 PM

Er, I’ve been in the Mortgage Industry for 30 years. It was the Democrats in Congress who threatened the Lenders to make loans to people who didn’t have the means to pay them back. When Bush (and McCain) and the Republicans tried to reign them in back in 2004 and 2005, the Democrats who controlled the Banking Committee simply laughed at them and said they were over-reacting to a problem that didn’t exist.

As for “Republican social policies”, the Democrats controlled both houses of Congress from 2007 until a year ago. What exactly are you babbling about?

Del Dolemonte on January 4, 2012 at 9:51 PM

I don’t want suggest that you are ill-informed, but the Democrats didn’t control any committees in 2005.

The Republicans controlled both houses of Congress and the Presidency during the bubble period — with a Randian at the head of the Fed.

Long term R social policies like hating the gays, trashing the environment, that sort of thing.

I could go on at length about my differences between Obama and myself on civil liberties issues (and signing statements).

But you won’t, because they don’t exist.

You’re just a blind pathetic bigot who does whatever Barack Obama tells you.

Everyone here knows that.

Ask me. National security doctrine that allows the government to quash suits and investigation simply by invoking national security, without judicial review? Obama for; me against. But you have no idea what that is. Assassinating American citizens without trial — possibly my one area of agreement with Ron Paul.

But, I got a million.

Case in point.

Kind of refreshing actually, that there are bankers out there
who recognized that being a capitalist doesn’t mean an unchecked license to manipulate the system and steal from the American people.

But, since you endorse and support both and with Obama’s direct endorsement, that makes you a liar.

But of course, that’s no surprise. You’re a blind pathetic bigot who does whatever Barack Obama tells him to do.

northdallasthirty on January 4, 2012 at 9:52 PM

That’s not even relevant. For what it’s worth, I’m happy to Corzine do time.

You, my friend, are blind and pathetic.

urban elitist on January 4, 2012 at 10:06 PM

Assuming Obama makes Hillary his VP and wins and the GOP picks up a number of Senate seats, this could make impeachment possible in his next term. Many Dem Senators would prefer Hillary and they could claim they were defending the confirmation power of the Senate from encroachment by an overweaning executive. They also would run the next election with an incombant rather than a lame duck.

Hope we don’t have to worry about such a thing in 2013 because he loses, but Obama attacking the power of the institution that can convict him and remove him from office is pretty bold.

KW64 on January 4, 2012 at 10:08 PM

wildcat72 on January 4, 2012 at 8:38 PM

I’ve been posting about this very thing over on RedState.

It’s time.

Charlemagne on January 4, 2012 at 10:09 PM

There’s nothing to debate here.

Obama is a dictator, and the rule of law means nothing.

And the Congressional RiNOs are doing nothing about it.

Any questions?

Mr Galt on January 4, 2012 at 7:44 PM

Indeed. The whole Congress is complicit.

Peppa Pig on January 4, 2012 at 10:09 PM

That is because we’re talking about ignorant bigots. Idiot urban elitist endorses, supports, and spins for everything that the liar Barack Obama does.

northdallasthirty on January 4, 2012 at 9:56 PM

I love you. In my brief time here, no one has done more to confirm every stereotype an ignorant, ranting, fact free — and given your frequent resort to this term — bigoted jerk than you.

How embarrassed your fellow conservatives must be.

I suggest finding a gun, a Bible and maybe a bottle to cling to until you calm down.

urban elitist on January 4, 2012 at 10:11 PM

You aren’t making any sense at this point. Dismissed.

tom daschle concerned on January 4, 2012 at 10:05 PM

Let me rephrase.

Even some people with money think that giving up a little more of it to ensure a clean environment, a society that doesn’t discriminate against gays, demonize minorities, allow the economic infrastructure to deteriorate and run massive debts is a worthy investment. Thus, some Wall Steeters still contribute to Obama despite the fact that legislation he backed is actually a first step towards reigning in the power of Wall Street.

urban elitist on January 4, 2012 at 10:14 PM

I don’t want suggest that you are ill-informed, but the Democrats didn’t control any committees in 2005.

The Republicans controlled both houses of Congress and the Presidency during the bubble period — with a Randian at the head of the Fed.

Sorry, bigot.

You see, the Republicans don’t control the Senate, but screaming liar Barack Obama says the minority party can do whatever it wants and is controlling the agenda.

So what we see again is you just being a stupid bigot and making incoherent statements that don’t match your Obama’s lies.

Long term R social policies like hating the gays, trashing the environment, that sort of thing.

But of course, stupid incoherent bigot urban elitist hates and discriminates against gays, just like his party’s leadership.

That’s what is funny. Incoherent and idiot bigot urban elitist supports and endorses discrimination against and hatred of gays by his Obama Party and his Barack Obama.

Ask me. National security doctrine that allows the government to quash suits and investigation simply by invoking national security, without judicial review? Obama for; me against.

No, you’re not.

You see, when you claimed Bush was doing the same thing, you and your screaming Obama Party, including the pathetic child Barack Obama, said it was illegal, unconstitutional, a war crime, and justification for impeachment, arrest, trial before an international tribunal, imprisonment, and even execution.

Since you aren’t calling for any of those things, you’ve exposed yourself as an incoherent lying bigot who supports and spins for whatever his Obama tells him.

That’s not even relevant. For what it’s worth, I’m happy to Corzine do time.

No, you’re not.

You see, when Enron went under, you and your screaming Obama Party, including the pathetic child Barack Obama, insisted that Bush should be impeached, prosecuted, and put in jail.

Since you aren’t calling for any of those things for Obama, who directly endorsed and supported Corzine’s actions and was regularly meeting with him during the time Corzine was stealing people blind, you’ve exposed yourself as an incoherent lying bigot who supports and spins for whatever his Obama tells him.

northdallasthirty on January 4, 2012 at 10:16 PM

I don’t think republicans should even get into this fight, delegate it to those campaigning right now. We don’t need the topic changed from Obama’s destructive policies (solyndra, fast & furious, debt, etc.) to get into a fight about “consumer protection” and labor appointments. Yes it’s unconstitutional and arrogant as all Hell, but attacking someone right where they want you to is never a good idea. Keep after his weak points, don’t let him seem like he’s just trying to do his job, highlight how terrible he is at it.

RizzyG on January 4, 2012 at 10:18 PM

I love you. In my brief time here, no one has done more to confirm every stereotype an ignorant, ranting, fact free — and given your frequent resort to this term — bigoted jerk than you.

How embarrassed your fellow conservatives must be.

I suggest finding a gun, a Bible and maybe a bottle to cling to until you calm down.

urban elitist on January 4, 2012 at 10:11 PM

Awww, what’s the matter, screaming little brat?

Having your face shoved in the fact that you scream for “regulation” even as you babble and spin for how it’s all right for Obama and the Obama Party to disobey it?

Being constantly reminded how bigots like yourself support and endorse discrimination and hate against gay people?

Poor insane little bigot. You don’t even have the balls to condemn criminals. We can make a fool out of you all day by simply posting examples of what you and your Barack Obama support and endorse.

northdallasthirty on January 4, 2012 at 10:20 PM

Just like Romney!!!

So they say. There will be no difference between the two.

swamp_yankee on January 4, 2012 at 10:21 PM

LMFAO you typed this nugget of goldeness

Let me rephrase.

Even some people with money think that giving up a little more of it to ensure a clean environment, a society that doesn’t discriminate against gays, demonize minorities, allow the economic infrastructure to deteriorate and run massive debts is a worthy investment. Thus, some Wall Steeters still contribute to Obama despite the fact that legislation he backed is actually a first step towards reigning in the power of Wall Street.

urban elitist on January 4, 2012 at 10:14 PM

after saying this:

I love you. In my brief time here, no one has done more to confirm every stereotype an ignorant, ranting, fact free — and given your frequent resort to this term — bigoted jerk than you.

How embarrassed your fellow conservatives must be.

I suggest finding a gun, a Bible and maybe a bottle to cling to until you calm down.

urban elitist on January 4, 2012 at 10:11 PM

You personify everything wrong with the democrat party today. You think that you are smarter and better. You want to put power into the hands of a few for the greater good while sacrificing the risk and reward of individual liberty. You buy, hook line and sinker, all the propaganda from leftist news orgs.

You are a battery. You sleep in red goo. You are the machine. Yet you think you are elite and above it all while supporting the entrenched establishment that sets the rules for the game while profiting from it.

What a laughable human being you are.

Oh, and what despicable perversion do you engage in regularly?

tom daschle concerned on January 4, 2012 at 10:22 PM

I don’t want suggest that you are ill-informed, but the Democrats didn’t control any committees in 2005.

The Republicans controlled both houses of Congress and the Presidency during the bubble period — with a Randian at the head of the Fed.

Sorry, bigot.

You see, the Republicans don’t control the Senate, but screaming liar Barack Obama says the minority party can do whatever it wants and is controlling the agenda.

So what we see again is you just being a stupid bigot and making incoherent statements that don’t match your Obama’s lies.

You’re typing’s too good for you to be blind drunk, so it must be blind rage. Look up I’ve highlighted the part that says we’re talking about 2005.

But of course, stupid incoherent bigot urban elitist hates and discriminates against gays, just like his party’s leadership.

That’s what is funny. Incoherent and idiot bigot urban elitist supports and endorses discrimination against and hatred of gays by his Obama Party and his Barack Obama.

urban elitist on January 4, 2012 at 10:22 PM

Even some people with money think that giving up a little more of it to ensure a clean environment, a society that doesn’t discriminate against gays, demonize minorities, allow the economic infrastructure to deteriorate and run massive debts is a worthy investment. Thus, some Wall Steeters still contribute to Obama despite the fact that legislation he backed is actually a first step towards reigning in the power of Wall Street.

urban elitist on January 4, 2012 at 10:14 PM

Ah, but you and your Obama Party do discriminate against gays.

And you and your wealthy Obama Party regularly cheat on your taxes and commit welfare fraud.

And furthermore, you and your Obama Party are nothing more than filthy racists who demonize minorities.

What’s the matter, lying little bigot? We know, you spin and spin and spin and support all of these because your Barack Obama does. And people see more and more that you’re just a stupid little bigot.

northdallasthirty on January 4, 2012 at 10:24 PM

What a laughable human being you are.

Oh, and what despicable perversion do you engage in regularly?

tom daschle concerned on January 4, 2012 at 10:22 PM

That was to northdallasthirty. Read his stuff. He’s a special person.

urban elitist on January 4, 2012 at 10:24 PM

urban elitist on January 4, 2012 at 9:37 PM

As for “Republican social policies”, the Democrats controlled both houses of Congress from 2007 until a year ago. What exactly are you babbling about?

Del Dolemonte on January 4, 2012 at 9:51 PM

In 2008, the Leftist PEW organization polled Republican “social issue voters”. Their results will disappoint you.

Only 41% of what PEW defined as “Social Issue Republican Voters” said abortion should always be illegal. And only 20% of Republicans as a whole said the same thing. Neither is a Majority of Republican view on that topic. In fact it means that anywhere from 59% to 80% of all Republicans have no problem with abortion under certain scenarios.

The only 2 other “Republican social issues” I can think of are stem cells and same sex marriage. Let’s discard the stem cell issue, because any polling data on that will only reflect the scientific ignorance of many of those polled.

While it’s true that most Republicans as a general principle are not thrilled with same sex marriage, so are many others. The Hard-Blue State of Massachusetts had to ignore the voters and use Judicial Activism to make it law, and the voters of the equally Blue State of Californication repealed that State’s same sex law less than 6 months after it took effect. To date, only 6 States out of 58 (4 of which are Democrat States here in New England) have passed this Democrat Social Legislation.

Del Dolemonte on January 4, 2012 at 10:25 PM

Barky’s Finger in the eye to repubs, whats ya going to do about it?

JustHugh on January 4, 2012 at 10:25 PM

I suggest finding a gun, a Bible and maybe a bottle to cling to until you calm down.

urban elitist on January 4, 2012 at 10:11 PM

What exactly are you suggesting?

conservative pilgrim on January 4, 2012 at 10:26 PM

You’re typing’s too good for you to be blind drunk, so it must be blind rage. Look up I’ve highlighted the part that says we’re talking about 2005.

urban elitist on January 4, 2012 at 10:22 PM

LOL…..are you stupid, incoherent little liar bigot?

You screamed and cried that the minority party has no power and cannot possibly do anything in Congress.

I simply pointed out that your liar Barack Obama and your Obama Party are blaming the minority party for obstructing and driving their own agenda.

The incoherence of your argument is why you’re spinning. Perhaps if you weren’t an ignorant bigot, you could make an intelligent argument. But as we see, you’re so stupid that you merely repeat everything your Obama says without putting any thought into it.

northdallasthirty on January 4, 2012 at 10:26 PM

No state, no citizen should have to abide by a ruling by people who do not hold their posts legitimately.

wildcat72 on January 4, 2012 at 8:38 PM

Right you are. And so when you ensconce a guy in office who knows full well he should not legitimately/constitutionally be there, don’t be surprised when he constantly shows utter contempt for the Constitution.

Flotsam Jetsome on January 4, 2012 at 10:27 PM

And we should take a look at what a filthy little racist bigot urban elitist is.

Note how urban elitist and its Obama Party scream and rant about “Mexicans” in government.

Note how urban elitist and its Obama Party scream and rant about Vietnamese in government.

Racist liar filth. But typical of Obama bigots, who are ignorant, stupid, and unable to think for themselves.

northdallasthirty on January 4, 2012 at 10:30 PM

But of course, stupid incoherent bigot urban elitist hates and discriminates against gays, just like his party’s leadership.

That’s what is funny. Incoherent and idiot bigot urban elitist supports and endorses discrimination against and hatred of gays by his Obama Party and his Barack Obama.

Jesse Jackson is not now and has never been a member of the Party’s leadership in any formal sense or, for two decades, in and informal sense. I’m sure, as a fair minded man, you assume that the truth will come out and condemn the Reverend, who has fallen far, sadly, and support full rights for gays. Urban elitists like me, in fact think that Obama is moving too slow on the gay thing and should actively oppose DOMA (another difference between me and him).

You see, when you claimed Bush was doing the same thing, you and your screaming Obama Party, including the pathetic child Barack Obama, said it was illegal, unconstitutional, a war crime, and justification for impeachment, arrest, trial before an international tribunal, imprisonment, and even execution.

Since you aren’t calling for any of those things, you’ve exposed yourself as an incoherent lying bigot who supports and spins for whatever his Obama tells him.

I provide support for the ACLU. The have brought legal action against both Bush and Obama for supporting these policies.

But, since you never read or listen to anything, or provide any evidence, or do anything but froth, there’s no point in further engagement.

Adieu, mon ami, et bon nuit.

urban elitist on January 4, 2012 at 10:32 PM

Oh, but wait, there’s more.

Notice how filthy lying racist bigot urban elite and its Obama Party insist on taking money from “the poor” so that multi-millionaire Nancy Pelosi can demand chocolate-dipped strawberries, grilled chicken salads, and top-shelf liquor on her private jet trips with family and donors.

And notice how filthy lying racist bigot urban elite and its billionaire Obama Party members shriek that avoiding taxes is “unpatriotic” while dodging taxes on their yacht and suing the IRS to avoid paying.

Again, this is no surprise that the idiot bigot urban elite endorses and supports such things. Obama filth like urban elite are nothing more than bigots who think laws and taxes are for other people.

northdallasthirty on January 4, 2012 at 10:35 PM

I suggest finding a gun, a Bible and maybe a bottle to cling to until you calm down.

urban elitist on January 4, 2012 at 10:11 PM

What exactly are you suggesting?

conservative pilgrim on January 4, 2012 at 10:26 PM

That he find comforting things and safely drift off to happy dreams — though not exactly in those word.

Nothing more serious.

urban elitist on January 4, 2012 at 10:35 PM

Jesse Jackson is not now and has never been a member of the Party’s leadership in any formal sense or, for two decades, in and informal sense.

Lie, born of the desperation of an ignorant bigot to spin.

I’m sure, as a fair minded man, you assume that the truth will come out and condemn the Reverend, who has fallen far, sadly, and support full rights for gays. Urban elitists like me, in fact think that Obama is moving too slow on the gay thing and should actively oppose DOMA (another difference between me and him).

Actually, bigot, all you’re doing is making your lies and desperation more obvious, given how clear it is that your Obama Party’s own leadership discriminates against gays.

Too bad that the truth exposes what a filthy lying anti-gay bigot you are.

I provide support for the ACLU. The have brought legal action against both Bush and Obama for supporting these policies.

Lie. You see, when you claimed Bush was doing the same thing, you and your screaming Obama Party, including the pathetic child Barack Obama, said it was illegal, unconstitutional, a war crime, and justification for impeachment, arrest, trial before an international tribunal, imprisonment, and even execution.

Since you aren’t calling for any of those things, you’ve exposed yourself as an incoherent lying bigot who supports and spins for whatever his Obama tells him.

But, since you never read or listen to anything, or provide any evidence, or do anything but froth, there’s no point in further engagement.

Adieu, mon ami, et bon nuit.

urban elitist on January 4, 2012 at 10:32 PM

Poor little bigoted coward. No answer, so like your filthy incoherent little Obama who won’t answer questions and screams and cries when anyone dares criticize him, you run away.

All you’re doing is demonstrating how helpless bigot leftists like you are in the face of facts. Conservatives will win by continually pounding you, knowing that you will run away like the cockroaches you are.

northdallasthirty on January 4, 2012 at 10:42 PM

As for “Republican social policies”, the Democrats controlled both houses of Congress from 2007 until a year ago. What exactly are you babbling about?

Del Dolemonte on January 4, 2012 at 9:51 PM

I don’t want suggest that you are ill-informed, but the Democrats didn’t control any committees in 2005.

urban elitist on January 4, 2012 at 10:06 PM

I stand corrected…however, my point was that the Democrats on that 2005 Committee all said there were no problems.

BTW, here’s a few of the Far Left Guiding Lights of your Party who were on that Committee that year of 2005:

Ranking Member: BARNEY FRANK, Massachusetts

MAXINE WATERS, California

BRAD SHERMAN, California

BARBARA LEE, California

DEBBIE WASSERMAN SCHULTZ, Florida

and last but not least,

BERNARD SANDERS, Vermont

Meanwhile, The Adults had on the same Committee at the same time:

Gee, only one Looney I can recognize. The rest are all anonymous Republican Congress Critters, not Big Stars like the 6 Dems I list above:

RON PAUL, Texas

But let’s get back to the Ranking Democrat Member:

In 2003, while the ranking minority member on the Financial Services Committee, Frank opposed a Bush administration proposal, in response to accounting scandals, for transferring oversight of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac from Congress and the Department of Housing and Urban Development to a new agency that would be created within the Treasury Department. The proposal, supported by the head of Fannie Mae, reflected the administration’s belief that Congress “neither has the tools, nor the stature” for adequate oversight. Frank stated, “These two entities …are not facing any kind of financial crisis … The more people exaggerate these problems, the more pressure there is on these companies, the less we will see in terms of affordable housing.”

Del Dolemonte on January 4, 2012 at 10:43 PM

That he find comforting things and safely drift off to happy dreams — though not exactly in those word.

Nothing more serious.

urban elitist on January 4, 2012 at 10:35 PM

Actually, filthy bigots like urban elitist and his Barack Obama scream and call for conservatives to be raped, assassinated, and murdered.

The poor incoherent child had to run away. He couldn’t stand up to the onslaught of facts and examples of his stupid bigotry. That’s why he’s making these dumb threats.

northdallasthirty on January 4, 2012 at 10:45 PM

I provide support for the ACLU. The have brought legal action against both Bush and Obama

urban elitist on January 4, 2012 at 10:32 PM

Do you also provide support to Judicial Watch? They went after Clinton but then later also went after Dick Cheney.

Del Dolemonte on January 4, 2012 at 10:47 PM

Gardisil

All power grabs. Just like there is no sin worst than the other, in my eyes, all power grabs are equal.

#justsaying

Can.I.be.in.the.middle on January 4, 2012 at 9:29 PM

Seriously, how is mandating gardasil a powergrab? One reason states mandate vaccines is so that insurance will cover the cost (this depends on various State rules). Last I heard, most states mandate this vaccine or a similar type for hpv.

How is mandating this particular vacation any different from polio, smallpox etc. Do you really think Perry was the only one to ever have “benefited” his campaign warchest by mandating a drug???? If so, a few hundred Gs is chump change compared to a whole slew of payolas received by the pols.

And unlike RomneyCare or ObamaCare, it had an opt-out provision. Furthermore, unlike the two, when Perry got pushback, he acknowledged the will of the people and retreated. Unlike the other two, he didn’t double down and insist that we’ll grow to like it, instead he apologized. Mittness and Oboobi have no apologies because they know more than us rubes.

Finally, Perry did his EO because the part-time legislature wouldn’t be back for over a year and he felt this needed to be available as soon as possible.

The difference is Perry seems to have learned his lesson about overreaching and adapted accordingly.

So with all the facts considered and hysteria ignored, how on earth does he get lumped in the same bucket as a power grabber? Seriously!

As for Michele, even Minnesota has mandated the hpv vaccine, so much for the pot screaming that the kettle was retarded. Frankly, I would point to that episode as the beginning of her decline. Unfortunately, she tripped him enough for him to make unforced gaffes.

Speaking of lessons learned, it’ll be interesting to see what her take-away is from this campaign.

AH_C on January 4, 2012 at 10:51 PM

That was to northdallasthirty. Read his stuff. He’s a special person.

urban elitist on January 4, 2012 at 10:24 PM

She poops bigger turds than you, reprobate.

What perversion do you engage in regularly that requires obfuscation through supporting the lowest common denominator?

tom daschle concerned on January 4, 2012 at 10:51 PM

Keep dancing, Democrat monkeyboy. Dance for our enjoyment. Spin. Spin some more. Do the Democrat Minuet!

SurferDoc on January 4, 2012 at 10:52 PM

Del Dolemonte on January 4, 2012 at 10:43 PM

Bush and the Republicans apparently didn’t care enough to use their majority to do something when they had the power. The bubble was on their watch.

And, to be clear, Fannie and Freddie were a symptom, not a cause. They were the equivalent of two more arrogant, stupid banks.

But I am tired. I will marshal links, etc and deploy at the next relevant discussion.

In the mean time, two facts: half the subprime loans issued in the early oughts were by mortgage companies that had no responsibility under the Community Reinvestment Act and thus were lending for profit motives rather than government pressure. Countrywide, my friend.

And, government pressure never made Bear Stearns leverage themselves at a 40-1 level, thus ensuring that when the downturn came, it would flam spectacularly and light the fuse.

Read “Too Big to Fail” or “The Big Short.”

urban elitist on January 4, 2012 at 10:55 PM

Bush and the Republicans apparently didn’t care enough to use their majority to do something when they had the power. The bubble was on their watch.

Ah, but you see, there was no bubble, bigot boy. There was no problem. Your Obama Party said so. Your Obama Party said there was nothing wrong with Fannie and Freddie. Your Obama Party said they didn’t need any more oversight. Your Obama Party said they should continue buying and securitizing bad loans. Your Barack Obama and your Obama Party supported and endorsed everything they did.

Furthermore, dumb liar bigot, majorities mean nothing according to your Barack Obama. Your Barack Obama and your Barack Obama Party insisted that nothing that happened during their majority was their fault. They said that the minority can stop everything and anything. They said that the minority is responsible for everything.

But I am tired. I will marshal links, etc and deploy at the next relevant discussion.

No, you won’t. You’re running away like the bigoted coward you are,. screaming as the facts are presented.

You lie like your bigot Obama — no surprise, because you’re nothing more than an ignorant bigot who supports everything your Obama does and repeats only Obama talking points.

In the mean time, two facts: half the subprime loans issued in the early oughts were by mortgage companies that had no responsibility under the Community Reinvestment Act and thus were lending for profit motives rather than government pressure. Countrywide, my friend.

urban elitist on January 4, 2012 at 10:55 PM

Nope, sorry. These are facts, lying bigot.

You have nothing but lies, no links, no reference, no nothing, and you’re running away like the pathetic coward that you are.

Filthy little bigot. You lost. You were destroyed by people with facts and links at their disposal, and like a coward, you are running.

northdallasthirty on January 4, 2012 at 11:04 PM

Don’t forget to thank all the Republicans who stayed home in 2008 “to teach McCain and the Republicans a Lesson” nominated a RINO and flipped off the conservative base to go it alone. They have just as much guilt as those who voted for the guy.

Del Dolemonte on January 4, 2012 at 5:48 PM

FIFY.

dominigan on January 4, 2012 at 11:06 PM

The Bamster has thrown down the gauntlet yet again…no amount of constitutional outrage will stop it gang. He doesn’t care…he is a God in his mind. It’s not funny, or satirical or psychoanalyzed or trivial. If you care about the Constitution then get ready to rumble. And I mean are you ready to surrender on your knees or fight on your feet?……..

HatfieldMcCoy on January 4, 2012 at 11:06 PM

She poops bigger turds than you, reprobate.

What perversion do you engage in regularly that requires obfuscation through supporting the lowest common denominator?

tom daschle concerned on January 4, 2012 at 10:51 PM

She? Quite the lady.

She poops out an impressively sized POS every time she posts.

urban elitist on January 4, 2012 at 11:10 PM

Bush and the Republicans apparently didn’t care enough to use their majority to do something when they had the power. The bubble was on their watch.

And, to be clear, Fannie and Freddie were a symptom, not a cause. They were the equivalent of two more arrogant, stupid banks.

In the mean time, two facts: half the subprime loans issued in the early oughts were by mortgage companies that had no responsibility under the Community Reinvestment Act and thus were lending for profit motives rather.

urban elitist on January 4, 2012 at 10:55 PM

1) the race card was still effective, but you want to blame the hapless GOP for not stopping the donks from imperilling the country? Otay.

2) pure mortgage companies got into the crazy game because laws were explicitly written to give them creative rights to “empower” home ownership for the huddled irresponsible masses. Or does Friends of Angelo mean nothing to you? Oh I get it, the new meme must be that the mortgage industry wad not only greedy, they were dumb as rocks to throw wads of cash and favors at progressives for years to no avail.

AH_C on January 4, 2012 at 11:11 PM

Although he tries to slip it all in under another guise
To all his fascist action most foul we must still be wise
In spite of all the Houdini lies
Dancing in Obama’s evermore Mussolini eyes!

VorDaj on January 4, 2012 at 11:19 PM

Crown.Tiara. It will go with his mom jeans.

Badger40 on January 4, 2012 at 7:35 PM

That’s more in keeping with mom jeans.
And he’ll be ever so dashing at ‘Man’s Country’ in Chicago.

Solaratov on January 4, 2012 at 11:23 PM

Bush and the Republicans apparently didn’t care enough to use their majority to do something when they had the power. The bubble was on their watch.

urban elitist on January 4, 2012 at 10:55 PM

….and this is what has happened on Obama’s “watch”(yet all we hear from liberals is that he “inherited” all his problems)


The Obama record:

In January 2007 before the Democrats took over Congress, unemployment was 4.6 percent; now it’s over 9% percent.

America has lost 1.9 million jobs since Obama signed the stimulus.
Chronic unemployment worse than Great Depression

In January 2007 there were 7.1 million unemployed people in America; now there are over 14 million.


US house price fall ‘beats Great Depression slide’

* In January 2007 the median home price was $210,600; today it’s $179,300.
* The poverty rate in 2006 was 12.3 percent; now it’s over 14% percent


2007 Deficit: 162 billion …………..2011 Deficit: 1.6 Trillion
2007 Debt: 9 trillion…………………..2011 Debt: over 14 trillion

2000-2007 strongest productivity growth (2.5) in 4 decades
Robust GDP growth (2-3%) after the devastation of 9/11
In the 13 Quarters since the recession,Obama has only produced .8% GDP growth

The federal government has accumulated more new debt–$3.22 trillion ($3,220,103,625,307.29)—during the tenure of the Democratic 111th Congress than it did during the first 100 Congresses.

3.66 billion dollars a day

When the Pelosi Democrats took control of Congress on January 4, 2007, the national debt stood at $8,670,596,242,973.04. The last day of the 111th Congress and Pelosi’s Speakership on December 22, 2010 the national debt was $13,858,529,371,601.09 – a roughly $5.2 trillion increase in just four years.

Obama Added More to National Debt in First 19 Months Than All Presidents from Washington Through Reagan Combined, Says Gov’t Data

More Americans living in poverty
WASHINGTON — New census estimates show the number of Americans living in poverty is higher than previously known — reaching a new level of 49.1 million, or 16 percent.


More People On Food Stamps Than Ever Before

Since November of 2008, when there were 30,885,000 on Food Stamps, the figure has risen almost 39.87% in two years—22% in 2008–‘09, and “only” 14% in 2009-‘10

Nearly Half of U.S. Lives in Household Receiving Government Benefit

Nearly half, 48.5%, of the population lived in a household that received some type of government benefit in the first quarter of 2010, according to Census data. Those numbers have risen since the middle of the recession when 44.4% lived households receiving benefits in the third quarter of 2008.


Obama Has Now Increased Debt More than All Presidents from George Washington Through George H.W. Bush Combined

The Obama administration passed another fiscal milestone this week, according to new data released by the Treasury Department. As of the close of business on Oct. 3, the total national debt was $14,837,099,271,196.71—up about $44.8 billion from Sept. 30.
That means that in the less-than-three-years Obama has been in office, the federal debt has increased by $4.212 trillion–more than the total national debt of about $4.1672 trillion accumulated by all 41 U.S. presidents from George Washington through George H.W. Bush combined.

….2011 debt to GDP ratio is about 100%

Gallon of Gas in 2008 $1.68….
Gallon of Gas in 2011 $3.85…..

Poverty rate rises as incomes decline – Census

The poverty rate for children rose from 20.7 percent in 2009 to 22 percent last year, making kids more likely than any other age group to be poor. For children under the age of 6, the picture is even bleaker–25.3 percent of them lived in poverty last year. Overall, 15 percent of Americans were poor last year, the highest rate since 1993.

WASHINGTON (AP) – Call it the recession’s lost generation.

In record-setting numbers, young adults struggling to find work are shunning long-distance moves to live with Mom and Dad, delaying marriage and buying fewer homes, often raising kids out of wedlock. They suffer from the highest unemployment since World War II and risk living in poverty more than others – nearly 1 in 5.


After losing more jobs after 9/11 than were lost in the 2009 economic collapse….Bush created (not saved) ..CREATED more jobs than Obama:

despite an unemployment high of just 6.4%, more jobs were lost in the first seven quarters of the 2001 recession than were lost in the first seven quarters of this recession. How is that possible? How could job losses have been worse in 2001 but unemployment so much higher now? Weak job creation. The latest Bureau of Labor and Statistics data show that employers have created 8.6 million fewer new jobs this time around than they did almost a decade ago. Heritage Senior Labor Policy Analyst James Sherk estimates that lower job creation accounts for 65 percent of the recession’s decreased employment.

….but if we are to listen to super smart liberals like yourself….Obama’s the Greatest….you know…like the 4th best President ever!!!!!

Baxter Greene on January 4, 2012 at 11:24 PM

Comment pages: 1 2 3 4 5