You can always rely on Bill Maher to come up with some hateful left-wing nonsense.

Is there anything Obama could have done to get your vote? As it is now, the R party is blocking anything that might help the economy just to help their chances of winning. Bill Maher called this TREASON.

BTW, I predict the supreme court will let ALL of the Obamacare bill stand. What do you think?

Well, he could have shown us just a teensy bit of leadership and that might have helped his cause.

Now, let's look at your claim that the Republicans are blocking the economy and committing TREASON, according to the guy you have previously claimed is nothing but a comedian. I might add he is also a BAD comedian, but that's beside the point. Not beside the point is Maher recently donated $1,000,000 to the Obama reelection campaign. Hardly somebody with an unbiased opinion.

1. The Republican House has passed over 30 jobs bills and sent them to the Democratic Senate for action. What has the Democratic Senate done with those bills?

2. The Republican House has passed a federal budget the past two years and sent it to the Senate for action. What has the Democratic Senate done with that budget?

3. Please provide a link to the most current federal budget acted on by the Democratic Senate. (Hint: You will need to go back to 2009 when the Senate approved the budget AFTER Obama was elected so it would be his.)

4. The Democratic administration led by Obama has presented three budgets for approval by Congress. They have ALL been voted down by Congress without one single Democratic party vote. This is the only sign of bi-partisanship taken by Congress in the past two years.

5. Which party is holding up approval of the Keystone Pipeline project and all the jobs that it would entail?

6. Which party is holding up drilling permits on federal land, even while drilling on private and state controlled land is booming?

7. Which party passed Obamacare, without knowing what was in it until they passed it?

8. Which party's administration has issued more than 100 job killing regulations? Google this for your answer: new obama administration regulations. An example: http://www.usnews.co...ed-tape-in-july

These are just a few quickies from my rapidly fading memory bank. As I gain more recall I will post them.

In response to your question about Obamacare and the SCOTUS decision. My feeling is the decision will be 5-4 against the mandate and, perhaps some other features, but I don't feel the entire bill will be declared unconstitutional.

However, since Congressional clerks wrote the entire bill after Obama kicked the can down the road to them, they failed to include a Severability clause. The SCOTUS could, therefore, legally declare the entire bill unconstitutional...which is exactly what I hope they do.

Following is an interview with Lanny Davis, a long time Democratic party operative and attorney. I found it interesting.

_______________________________________________________

Lanny Davis Goes Off On Obama Aides: “You Have Vicious People Who Are Working For The President”

Former Clinton aide takes Obama officials to task for saying Cory Booker is “dead to us.” “It may be meltdown unless they come to their senses. Why would they want to create enemies, or depict people as enemies: who are their friends?”

posted Jun 8, 2012 5:23pm EDT

Zeke Miller

http://www.buzzfeed....mpaign-you-have

America, now learning what kind of man Mitt Romney really is.

At age 18, he violently assaulted a fellow student to enforce his views of normality in gender appearance. Such an attack today in the US would almost always result in suspension, expulsion, or even serious criminal charges.

Now we learn Mitt Romney was a police impersonator.

To some observers, Romney’s alleged masquerading as a cop to intimidate innocent drivers shows a character defect that is also revealed by other bullying incidents during his youth. When those incidents were disclosed in the Washington Post earlier this year, Romney issued an apology of sorts, stating that he had done “stupid” things and was sorry if he had harmed anyone.

http://www.nationalm...tness-says-yes/

America, now learning what kind of man Mitt Romney really is.

At age 18, he violently assaulted a fellow student to enforce his views of normality in gender appearance.

Was the kid in need of medical care? OMG, I didn't know that!

NOBODY over the age of 30 cares that 50 years ago a group of teenagers cut the "long" hair off another student. That and worse happened all the time and was part of growing up. Maybe the whiny youth of today care but they rarely vote anyway. Especially after their messiah turned out to be just a regular politician after all.

Such an attack today in the US would almost always result in suspension, expulsion, or even serious criminal charges.

In your view, any boy in school 50 years ago who ever hugged or kissed a little girl on the cheek is guilty of sexual harassment or worse because in today's crazy liberal-led world of education, children who hug or kiss are guilty of assault.

These leaks came from the White House. Who else would it benefit? Just exactly how dumb does he think the public is?

How dumb does Obama think the public is? This video nails it...

Hitler Parody Time: DNC loses Wisconsin

http://dailycaller.c...isconsin-video/

[media=]

[/media]

America, now learning what kind of man Mitt Romney really is.

At age 18, he violently assaulted a fellow student to enforce his views of normality in gender appearance. Such an attack today in the US would almost always result in suspension, expulsion, or even serious criminal charges.

Now we learn Mitt Romney was a police impersonator.

To some observers, Romney’s alleged masquerading as a cop to intimidate innocent drivers shows a character defect that is also revealed by other bullying incidents during his youth. When those incidents were disclosed in the Washington Post earlier this year, Romney issued an apology of sorts, stating that he had done “stupid” things and was sorry if he had harmed anyone.

http://www.nationalm...tness-says-yes/

Smoke screen alert!!!

It's fine and dandy to minimize the terror felt by gay kids subject to brutal anti-gay bullying, but is actually a very serious issue. Psychiatrists opine it is directly linked to high rates of depression and suicide among gay youth. It doesn't make these kids not gay; it makes the victims miserable, suicide victims, and sometimes dead of violence in cases like Matthew Shepard. The idea of condoning this kind of hateful violence as a "normal" part of growing up is indeed nauseating. Also, please don't tell me you actually believe Romney's denial of remembering the violent incident. He was 18.

A high proportion of boys, at least, bully other kids at some stage in their development. They usually grow out of it, some sooner, some in young adulthood, a few never. But if you try to exclude every person who has bullied another at some stage or other, for whatever reason, you won't have many potential candidates left.

I think it is too bad anyone gets bullied but they do. As long as homosexuals are only 2-4% of the population, they are going to be prime targets and legislation is not going to change how children act towards other children that they consider weird.

I think it is too bad anyone gets bullied but they do. As long as homosexuals are only 2-4% of the population, they are going to be prime targets and legislation is not going to change how children act towards other children that they consider weird.

I thought after the Columbine school shooting that it would be the beginning of the end of bullying. Here you had two kids who didn't fit in, coming to school armed to the teeth and murdering a lot of fellow students. In the end it had no effect at all on bullying, it still goes on, maybe even worse than before. If the thought that some weird kid you pick on might bring a gun to school someday doesn't make kids rethink bullying, no legislation in the world will.

Some positive news about Obama for a change...

http://blogs.independent.co.uk/2012/06/11/obamas-legacy-doesnt-live-up-to-the-terms-of-his-nobel-prize/

As Obama nears the end of his first term as President, he has done little to live up to the terms of the award. The conflict in Afghanistan, which the UN estimates has killed nearly 12,000 civilians so far, continues under his watch. He has overseen the continued operation of Guantanamo Bay, which he pledged to close within the first year of his Presidency, and which still houses 172 inmates. He has brought the conflict in Iraq to an end, but only after the deaths of over 100,000 Iraqi civilians, and with the country still divided and war-torn. Now he is personally approving targets for a covert drone operation in Pakistan which has killed an estimated 27 people in the last three days alone.

I think it is too bad anyone gets bullied but they do. As long as homosexuals are only 2-4% of the population, they are going to be prime targets and legislation is not going to change how children act towards other children that they consider weird.

I thought after the Columbine school shooting that it would be the beginning of the end of bullying. Here you had two kids who didn't fit in, coming to school armed to the teeth and murdering a lot of fellow students. In the end it had no effect at all on bullying, it still goes on, maybe even worse than before. If the thought that some weird kid you pick on might bring a gun to school someday doesn't make kids rethink bullying, no legislation in the world will.

I think the reference to Columbine is a bit misleading; you're taking a freak incident to draw conclusions about the normal way of things.

Bullying (I was at a boarding school, and we knew a bit about it) is an adolescent response by a boy (or a girl, presumably) who is trying to dominate the weaker kids. If they're a bit odd, they're obvious targets. In my schooldays, one gay boy went under; he wasn't clever or good at games, and had nothing to fight back with. Another, who was unhappy at school because of how he was treated, was unhappy as an adult, and finished up in prison for murder. All very nasty, and all very sad, no doubt.

Why do they try to dominate? Because they're potentially the leaders of the next generation. Most will fail; the select few will become real leaders, e.g. POTUS. One of my schoolfellows became a Brigadier... and he was one of the worst bullies of the lot.

I'm not saying we should condone bullying; I'm saying it's a normal feature of the human animal... which is often not a very nice animal at all.

Romney as an adult STILL does not think being gay is an OK thing to be. If he did, he would not be donating his personal monies (as opposed to his required 10 percent tithing to the anti-gay Mormon "church") to organizations dedicated to "curing" homosexuals including one Mormon one that used to use SHOCK THERAPY on gays trying to change. Trying I say because it doesn't work and often leads to suicides. Don't try to whitewash or rationalize the kind of man Romney is today. There were hints when he was young, the brutal attack, the felonious police impersonation, but now you can see the adult today. The world needs to know the truth. Such a man of hate does not belong in the oval office. We want presidents who care for ALL American citizens, all races, all classes, yes straight and gay as well.

Some positive news about Obama for a change...

http://blogs.indepen...is-nobel-prize/

As Obama nears the end of his first term as President, he has done little to live up to the terms of the award. The conflict in Afghanistan, which the UN estimates has killed nearly 12,000 civilians so far, continues under his watch. He has overseen the continued operation of Guantanamo Bay, which he pledged to close within the first year of his Presidency, and which still houses 172 inmates. He has brought the conflict in Iraq to an end, but only after the deaths of over 100,000 Iraqi civilians, and with the country still divided and war-torn. Now he is personally approving targets for a covert drone operation in Pakistan which has killed an estimated 27 people in the last three days alone.

Man that reads/sounds terrible doesn't it.

Aside from all the lives lost on both sides what if anything has changed long term?

Then you have all the $$$ spent that we did not have....boggles the mind.

Romney as an adult STILL does not think being gay is an OK thing to be. If he did, he would not be donating his personal monies (as opposed to his required 10 percent tithing to the anti-gay Mormon "church") to organizations dedicated to "curing" homosexuals including one Mormon one that used to use SHOCK THERAPY on gays trying to change. Trying I say because it doesn't work and often leads to suicides. Don't try to whitewash or rationalize the kind of man Romney is today. There were hints when he was young, the brutal attack, the felonious police impersonation, but now you can see the adult today. The world needs to know the truth. Such a man of hate does not belong in the oval office. We want presidents who care for ALL American citizens, all races, all classes, yes straight and gay as well.

If the person Romney had bullied had been Asian, black, Hispanic, would you have been so angry about it? I doubt it.

I'm not whitewashing or defending Romney, just trying to see things in perspective. BTW, our Prince Harry (or was it William?) impersonated a Nazi.

Don't try to whitewash or rationalize the kind of man Romney is today.

He is a good, very succesful family man who the left are trying to demonize, but it keeps backfiring. They will do anything to keep a liberal in the White House even though he is destroying the country with his failed policies.

Don't try to whitewash or rationalize the kind of man Romney is today.

He is a good, very succesful family man who the left are trying to demonize, but it keeps backfiring. They will do anything to keep a liberal in the White House even though he is destroying the country with his failed policies.

Did he give the money to the anti-gay conversion group or not? Answer: he did. You think that is OK. I think it is disgusting. What if he gave money to try to convert Jews? Would that be OK? The young man who violently attack a fellow gay student grows up to be a man who gives money to a group that causes gay people to commit suicide. The FACTS demonize.

I don't know if he gave them money or not, but the country has much more important issues to deal with right now than that one. A president who authorizes major security leaks in an attempt to get reelected is one of them.

What if he gave money to try to convert Jews?

You seem to be getting him mixed up with Ron Paul.

I don't know if he gave them money or not, but the country has much more important issues to deal with right now than that one. A president who authorizes major security leaks in an attempt to get reelected is one of them.

There is NO PROOF whatsoever of these allegations and they have been vehemently denied by President Obama. The Romney contributions to anti-gay groups on the other hand is a matter of public record.

Did the right wing republican party DELIBERATELY sabotage the American economy for partisan political gain? The answer is ... YES. Bill Maher calls it treason. I call it a good reason to kick ALL of the republicans out!

Be it ideology or stratagem, the GOP has blocked pro-growth policy and backed job-killing austerity – all while blaming Obama

http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2012/jun/09/did-republicans-deliberately-crash-us-economy

Well, guess what, most people realize that the current administration leaked and that Obama screwed up the economy even more than it was already. All the spin in the world does not change that.

I agree with you, Jingthing, that it would be bad for US gays to have an anti-gay president. But how much of an issue is this in the election? I guess (and it is only a guess) that most gays live in safe democratic states, and they're not going to vote for Romney anyway. The rural Republican states would vote for Romney if he sprouted horns and a tail. I think you're letting your one-track mind run away with you.

Much more important are the issues which people are thinking about in the potential swing states. You Americans know about these much better than I do, but I would imagine they think far more about what is going to put more money in their pockets, put a house over their heads, give them good medical treatment than about the rights of any minority. The exception would be where the minority is big enough to endanger the jobs of the majority (states with a lot of Hispanics or African-Americans.).

Did the right wing republican party DELIBERATELY sabotage the American economy for partisan political gain? The answer is ... YES. Bill Maher calls it treason. I call it a good reason to kick ALL of the republicans out!

Be it ideology or stratagem, the GOP has blocked pro-growth policy and backed job-killing austerity – all while blaming Obama

http://www.guardian....rash-us-economy

The esteemed Guardian really should do a little research on their sources before they print articles such as this one.

From the link:

_________________________________________________________

"But increasingly, Democrats are making the argument that the real culprit for the country's economic woes lies in a more discrete location: with the Republican Party."

In recent days, Democrats have started coming out and saying publicly what many have been mumbling privately for years – Republicans are so intent on defeating President Obama for re-election that they are purposely sabotaging the country's economic recovery. THESE CHARGES ARE NOW BEING LEVIED BY DEMOCRATS SUCH AS SENATE MAJORITY LEADER HARRY REID AND OBAMA'S KEY POLITICAL ADVISER, DAVID AXELROD." (Caps added)

_________________________________________________________

Of course Democrats are making the argument. They do this in order to confuse the electorate about the lack of cooperation provided by the Democratic US Senate, led by the Senator from Nevada, HARRY REID. Reid has refused to call to the Senate floor any of the 30+ jobs bills passed by the Republican led House of Representatives. They are still languishing in committee while the economy continues to fall.

David Axelrod was Obama's campaign chairman for the 2008 election and holds the same position today. Of course he will blame Obama's failings on the other party, and the previous administration, and the European economic troubles, and big banks, and Wall Street...ad nauseam.

Obama's had this economy for over three years and it is still spiraling down, even though he had a super majority in both the House and Senate for the first two years of his Presidency. Nothing was done then and nothing is being done now by the Democrats.

The Republicans have had voting control of one half of the Legislative Branch for less than two years and NO input to the Executive Branch. This is all simply more smoke and mirrors and I am surprised the Guardian would fall for it. Are they in the tank for Obama too?

Bill Maher is an HBO comedian, and a particularly bad one at that, who donated $1,000,000 to the Obama campaign. Maybe he's hoping to become the Ambassador to the Court of St. James if Obama is reelected! Now wouldn't that be a hoot?

I don't know if he gave them money or not, but the country has much more important issues to deal with right now than that one. A president who authorizes major security leaks in an attempt to get reelected is one of them.

There is NO PROOF whatsoever of these allegations and they have been vehemently denied by President Obama. The Romney contributions to anti-gay groups on the other hand is a matter of public record.

Obama gave money to Rev Wright\s church and they are against gay rights and gay marriage.

I agree with you, Jingthing, that it would be bad for US gays to have an anti-gay president. But how much of an issue is this in the election? I guess (and it is only a guess) that most gays live in safe democratic states, and they're not going to vote for Romney anyway. The rural Republican states would vote for Romney if he sprouted horns and a tail. I think you're letting your one-track mind run away with you.

Much more important are the issues which people are thinking about in the potential swing states. You Americans know about these much better than I do, but I would imagine they think far more about what is going to put more money in their pockets, put a house over their heads, give them good medical treatment than about the rights of any minority. The exception would be where the minority is big enough to endanger the jobs of the majority (states with a lot of Hispanics or African-Americans.).

Gays and their transgender friends make up a very tiny fraction of the voting population but for them this same-sex marriage issue is the most important one out there. I wonder sometimes if they care about jobs or the economy as much? If the answer is yes, how can they be so in the tank for the guy who has done very little to improve the situation? It seems they would sacrifice the well-being of all - including themselves - for the right to their lover's property and wealth down the line if they should ever decide to get married.

I do not think that Romney is "anti-gay", but he is not politically correct either. He is not in favor of gay marriage, but most of the electorate feel the same way. In fact Obama claimed to believe that marriage should only be between a man and a woman until he felt it was politically expedient to claim otherwise and only very recently.

I do not think that Romney is "anti-gay", but he is not politically correct either. He is not in favor of gay marriage, but most of the electorate feel the same way. In fact Obama claimed to believe that marriage should only be between a man and a woman until he felt it was politically expedient to claim otherwise and only very recently.

You think wrong. Sorry, dude, but own up to it, you are supporting an anti-gay candidate.

I made it very clear I was separating Romney's 10 percent tithing to the Mormon church. He must do that as a Mormon. I am talking about his OTHER, RECENT personal donations to two specific groups dedicated to "converting" gay people so they do not have gay feelings anymore with the goal to be heterosexual. NOT the overall chuch! Got it now? Good. One gay conversion was Mormon based. One was not. But this is different than tithing. Psychiatrists think these groups are directly implicated in suicides. One used to regularly use shock therapy. More violence against gay people. Please don't even try to deny these groups are anti-gay. Romney supports them explicitly with his own money. The man as a young man was a violent gay basher. The reality is there. Please don't run from it. Also please support the movement to confront Romney on the gay conversion issue. He gives money to it, he supports it , he wants to be present, the people deserve to hear him own up to this support for this method that causes suicide and treats a minority group as a people with a mental disease needing to be cured.

I do not think that Romney is "anti-gay", but he is not politically correct either. He is not in favor of gay marriage, but most of the electorate feel the same way. In fact Obama claimed to believe that marriage should only be between a man and a woman until he felt it was politically expedient to claim otherwise and only very recently.

You think wrong. Sorry, dude, but own up to it, you are supporting an anti-gay candidate.

Even if Romney is anti-gay, it matters not one iota to me. I don't care that he cut off some kids long hair 50 years ago either. I care more what he plans to do about the economy, jobs and national debt. Just to be fair, I don't care that Obama ate dog and like it, or that he listened to Jeremiah Wright all those years. "It's the Economy Stupid!"

Gay issues are not remotely important to me and the vast majority of voters. Sure, the right to marry is important for some but in the grand scheme of things it is not (I think the institution is a joke these days anyway). So expend all the energy you can about what Romney might or might not think about gays, it doesn't matter to anyone who isn't gay, or to anyone who thinks we have serious economic issues to deal with instead.