Posted on 10/11/2010 11:11:47 AM PDT by 2ndDivisionVet
Remember he, His Gracious Self, said he’d rather be a BRILLIANT one term president than a mediocre two-termer. Of course, that is why people said he never had any sense to begin with.
Hugo ain't gona like the comparison
Maybe I’m just a cold-hearted hateful b!tch, but I want to see the total mental melt-down!
I realize that it could put our country in an even more precarious position for a short time, until someone steps in, but that is the LEAST he & the people who foisted him upon us deserves, in my opinion.
All of these NGOs should divulge their donors. Think Progress, AmCham, and Planned Parenthood. On the long order of business is to legislate complete openness, or no tax privileges.
When a narcissist like Obama has a collision with reality, he blames reality and anyone who accepts it as valid...and thereby remains stuck in his self-absorbed ignorance.
It is Obama's narcissism that has enabled him to cling to such a thoroughly disproved and discredited notion as socialism.
Obama has at long last come to a personal end game in his losing battle with reality. He is under attack from all directions.
He must either admit defeat and have a breakdown...and start down the long road to therapeutic recovery OR completely disconnect from reality by entering some kind of dissociative fugue.
That’s creepy.
"What a dick."
Not very deep or eloquent, I know, but there it is.
Assuming windflier means the dems would have <= 40 senators after 2012 to give the GOP a filibuster-proof majority that’s not an outlandish thought. If we get to near 50 in 2010 there’s enough seats in play for 2012 that it may happen if political conditions don’t improve for the dems
Dems are only about 1/3 of the country’s registered voters. Self-described liberals are about 20% compared to 40% for self-described conservatives. And those liberals are concentrated in their enclaves. If each right-leaning state elected two conservative senators we’d have our bloc of 66 senators, enough to override a veto.
Our problem is when dems and rinos lie about their intentions to get elected. But everything is out in the open now and sides are formed.
I hope you’re right: if true, perhaps enough Democrats can be peeled off to vote on all of the conservative agenda items so as to be a veto-proof majority against Obama.
Me too, although I predict "Health Reasons" - not family, or kids. Watch how gray he lets his hair get.
Also, watch Hillary!. If she steps down from the SoS, it's on. And, it's bad for Republicans. She's got all of the same leanings as BO, only she's more competent politically.
We'll see. Frankly, what really worries me is the damage that the Dems could do - especially in a 2010 lame duck session - when they thrash around in their death throes.
I've been reading - with much enjoyment - the stories here on FR detailing how much armtwisting needs to go on to get people to show up to his speeches.
And, it's not like he's going deep in the heart of Texas, either. These were traditionally liberal enclaves like Manhattan, and college campuses. :-)
I've been reading - with much enjoyment - the stories here on FR detailing how much armtwisting needs to go on to get people to show up to his speeches.
And, it's not like he's going deep in the heart of Texas, either. These were traditionally liberal enclaves like Manhattan, and college campuses. :-)
The news here in Florida is that Barky is going to tell Meeks to stand aside and back Charlie, as per the WSJ. The Meeks campaign is denying the report but I woud doubt they would run with a story like that without some credible basis to draw from.
My bet is that Barkey is coming down to deliver the bad news to Meek himself since Meek has never polled anywhere near second place, especially with Marco now over the 50% mark. Stick a fork in it!
Rick Scott has also now gone over the 50% mark as well. Bondi is leadng by 5 and similar leads for Atwater in the CFO race.
He figures that being "commander in chief" means that he is in control of the military...but....being "commander in chief" and "being in control" are separate issues....he might want to have a heart to heart with Gen Petreaus about that.
And if that comes true, we get President Plugs.
And if that comes true, we get President Plugs.
So what? Biden would be better than this evil bastard.
Careful there wbill. Barkey is competent as a campaigner, that we already know is the same as politician now days, but he is horrible in governing as is Hitlery. Her biggest gaffe ever was her proclomation of proudly being a early 20th Century Progressive.
Since the 2008 election, the meaning of Progressive has been exposed and now she has a problem with identifying with that as her political ideology in such a strong way. We have Beck to thank for beating that drum until it was exposed and now ridiculed for what it really is.
Agreed. I have a feeling that his globalist masters might be hanging him out to dry or at least threatening to if he doesn’t deliver the goods with this election. He’s said some weird and getting weirder things in the past week and he’s appearing manically desperate.
If BHO were not doing great, perhaps irreparable damage to the USA, I could *almost* pity him. Almost...
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.