Enough with the hyperbole!

About half of Americans APPROVE of Obama's performance!

http://www.realclear...roval-1044.html

Considering the unemployment situation, that's doing pretty good.

There is no way he will be judged the worse president in history.

He will get his two terms and by the end of that he will be poised to be in the top pier of presidents.

nobody beats the Texan village idiot being the worst president.

nobody beats the Texan village idiot being the worst president.

They all suck....One had teh Patriot Act & the next extended it & added this

http://nextgenjournal.com/2012/01/the-ndaa-debate/

This is gonna hurt...

Bill Clinton blockbuster: Obama’s an ‘amateur’

“Barack Obama,” Bill Clinton said, according to book excerpts, “is an amateur.” ... according to the book, Bill Clinton unloaded on Obama and pressed Hillary to run against her boss during a gathering in the ex-president’s home office in Chappaqua last August that included longtime friends, Klein said. “The economy’s a mess, it’s dead flat. America has lost its Triple-A rating . . . You know better than Obama does,” Bill said.

Read more:

http://www.nypost.co...N#ixzz1ueJGxSVm

This is gonna hurt...

Bill Clinton blockbuster: Obama’s an ‘amateur’

“Barack Obama,” Bill Clinton said, according to book excerpts, “is an amateur.” ... according to the book, Bill Clinton unloaded on Obama and pressed Hillary to run against her boss during a gathering in the ex-president’s home office in Chappaqua last August that included longtime friends, Klein said. “The economy’s a mess, it’s dead flat. America has lost its Triple-A rating . . . You know better than Obama does,” Bill said.

Read more:

http://www.nypost.co...N#ixzz1ueJGxSVm

I'll beat the liberal press to it...The Clinton's claim this conversation never took place.

Sounds just like Bill and Hillary, though.

Bill has a point. My guess is that Hillary would be a lot better than our current president.

Bill has a point. My guess is that Hillary would be a lot better than our current president.

The Clinton's are political professionals, that's for sure. Maybe it wasn't their original plan but it sure is working out this way. Four years ago Hillary was the main target of right wingers. She had her fans on the left but her negatives were too high to win a general election. I certainly never would have voted for her. Today? After Obama? Hell yes I'd vote for her.

It used to be that Democrats and Republicans held different positions on the issues, but at the core they both still saw America as #1. I don't get that feeling with Obama at all. There is nothing in his background or how he acts today that would point to him loving his country (or its traditional allies). Nothing in his background that made him remotely qualified to lead the country - and it shows.

I love Hillary Clinton!

Rev Wright bribed by Obama campaign to stop preaching

When sermons of Obama’s Chicago pastor, Jeremiah Wright, surfaced during the Iowa primaries, it threatened to derail Obama’s campaign. ABC aired one where Wright screamed, “Goddamn America!” Edward Klein interviewed Wright, who told him Obama’s team tried to buy his silence.

‘Man, the media ate me alive,” Wright told me when we met in his office at Chicago’s Kwame Nkrumah Academy. “After the media went ballistic on me, I received an e-mail offering me money not to preach at all until the November presidential election.”

Read more:

http://www.nypost.co...M#ixzz1umDtyIem

Smart move!

Obama Veep Drama?!?

OK, I think it's rather obvious that Hillary Clinton is not going to want to be Secy of State for four more years.

So how about this for a scenario?

Biden switches jobs to be Secy of State. Hillary, instead of being VP, retires and decides to run or not in 2016 (which she doesn't need to be VP for anyway).

So that leaves an opening for Obama to pick another VP to juice up his close campaign.

So if that happened, who would be Obama's VP?

I don't have a clue. Any good suggestions.

So that leaves an opening for Obama to pick another VP to juice up his close campaign.

So if that happened, who would be Obama's VP?

I don't have a clue. Any good suggestions.

Sarah Palin

So that leaves an opening for Obama to pick another VP to juice up his close campaign.

So if that happened, who would be Obama's VP?

I don't have a clue. Any good suggestions.

Sarah Palin

That would certainly shake things up! I'd love to hear her pro Obama speeches! OK, I know it's very remote that it won't be Biden but on the other hand if he feels he's losing, why not dump him? I don't see Biden as 2016 material but I think he does.

Obama Veep Drama?!?

OK, I think it's rather obvious that Hillary Clinton is not going to want to be Secy of State for four more years.

So how about this for a scenario?

Biden switches jobs to be Secy of State. Hillary, instead of being VP, retires and decides to run or not in 2016 (which she doesn't need to be VP for anyway).

So that leaves an opening for Obama to pick another VP to juice up his close campaign.

So if that happened, who would be Obama's VP?

I don't have a clue. Any good suggestions.

Hillary would be smart to distance herself from the Obama admin if she wants to be president in 2016. So if Obama were to pick someone to replace Biden it would have to someone too crazy and dumb to know better than to join a sinking ship. Let's say, Al Franken.

I guess Obama is such a brilliant, brave, visionary, leader that not a single member of the US Congress can understand...whoa!!.getting dizzy just thinking of all the spin that's sure to come out of the White House.

Obama budget defeated 99-0 in Senate

President Obama's budget suffered a second embarrassing defeat Wednesday, when senators voted 99-0 to reject it. Coupled with the House's rejection in March, 414-0, that means Mr. Obama's budget has failed to win a single vote in support this year.

http://www.washingtontimes.com/blog/inside-politics/2012/may/16/obama-budget-defeated-99-0-senate/

Obama’s inevitable shellacking

Just about every objective indicator foreshadows a huge re-election defeat for President Obama. With every day that passes, Mr. Obama looks more like a loser.

That’s because there is doom and gloom everywhere you look. When government mathematical fudging is stripped away, unemployment is stuck over 10 percent. Economic growth is practically nonexistent and promises to slide downhill even more in the coming months with Europe and its banks rapidly collapsing. Due to Mr. Obama’s out-of-control deficit spending, the national debt is at a heart-stopping $15.7 trillion, which erases a whole year of economic output by our entire country. With the Supreme Courtpoised to strike down Obamacare, his only signature legislative achievement, the president will have nothing to show for four years in office other than record misery.

http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2012/may/15/obamas-inevitable-shellacking/

Obama Veep Drama?!?

OK, I think it's rather obvious that Hillary Clinton is not going to want to be Secy of State for four more years.

So how about this for a scenario?

Biden switches jobs to be Secy of State. Hillary, instead of being VP, retires and decides to run or not in 2016 (which she doesn't need to be VP for anyway).

So that leaves an opening for Obama to pick another VP to juice up his close campaign.

So if that happened, who would be Obama's VP?

I don't have a clue. Any good suggestions.

Hillary would be smart to distance herself from the Obama admin if she wants to be president in 2016. So if Obama were to pick someone to replace Biden it would have to someone too crazy and dumb to know better than to join a sinking ship. Let's say, Al Franken.

Only someone anti-Obama would suggest Al Franken.

Perhaps Anthony Weiner could make a comeback as Obama's VP choice?

From today's news reports:

_______________________________________________________

Warning Signs in Wisconsin for Obama

By Neil King Jr.

In a potentially ominous sign for the Obama campaign, a new poll has declared Wisconsin a true tossup state, finding President Barack Obama and Mitt Romney locked in a 46%-46% tie among likely voters.

As the Obama team eyes potential paths to victory in November, all count on the president winning the reliably blue states of New England, the Midwest and the Upper Midwest, all of which went for Al Gore in 2000 and John Kerry in 2004. A loss of any of the bigger traditionally blue states—particularly Pennsylvania, Michigan or Wisconsin—would scramble the Obama math and make matters much easier for Mr. Romney, allowing him to lose in Virginia or Ohio without that automatically jeopardizing his chances.

http://blogs.wsj.com/washwire/2012/05/16/warning-signs-in-wisconsin-for-obama/

As the election draws closer, if Romney is leading in the polls, how do you think that would change his campaign? When you're behind, you need to attack more. But if you're leading, you can afford to rise above that. What do you guys think?

As the election draws closer, if Romney is leading in the polls, how do you think that would change his campaign? When you're behind, you need to attack more. But if you're leading, you can afford to rise above that. What do you guys think?

IMHO Romney needs to use a refined version of Chicago politics to defeat Chicago politics. In other words, nearly any attack on Obama's policies and actions during his three years is acceptable and probably necessary. He will need to bring any discussion back on the topics with which Obama is vulnerable...which are many.

Obama now has a record he can run on and he will not do so. Romney needs to run on Obama's record of indecision and bad decisions and continually link him to the Chicago gang, big labor, crony capitalism, Eric Holder, etc. etc.

Romney needs to be focused and not be sidetracked by the red herrings Obama's campaign will come up with. Be polite, gentlemanly and never discuss Obama's family.

Forget about replacing Biden at the bottom of the ticket, WHO are they going to get to replace Obama at the top of it?

From a promotional booklet of Obama's literary agent back in 1991.

http://www.breitbart...ndonesia-Hawaii

Yeah, that's a funny blooper and I'm sure a collector's item. But he was born in Hawaii and anyone who believes differently is TIN FOIL HAT CITY.

Yeah, that's a funny blooper and I'm sure a collector's item. But he was born in Hawaii and anyone who believes differently is TIN FOIL HAT CITY.

Read the article. No one is claiming that he wasn't born in Hawaii.Yet is IS newsworthy that Obama's own literary agent promoted him as being born in Kenya all the way up until 2007 - just 2 months after Obama had declared he was running for President. Obama surely had to fact check his own bio and saw nothing wrong with it - until he realized it could disqualify him for the top office. Of course, he is probably just like Elizabeth Warren, that blond woman Democrat politician who was also at Harvard Law who pretended to be 1/32 American Indian so she could use her false background to open doors. Now THAT sounds like something Obama would do.

American Indian of the blond hair, blue eyed tribe in Massachusetts.

No connection there at all.

No connection there at all.

Both obviously liars and cheats.

Yeah, that's a funny blooper and I'm sure a collector's item.

Not a blooper at all. It was fully intentional and was used for at least 16 years.

I think it was all about the economy. Now I'm confused!

If I was running an Obama PAC, I would run ads about Mormonism.

Just the facts.

Their actual theology. Which by any standard is incredibly bizarre. You don't need to call it a cult. The facts speak for themselves.

Their mission system.

The underwear thing.

The fact their goal in life is to be a God of their own planet, each of them

The fact that they do Mormon rituals for dead people of other faiths.

The facts about their relatively recent history of anti-black racism and the connection of polygamy to Romney's relatives.

The facts about Romney's major leadership role in the Mormon church.

Nothing inflammatory. Just the cold hard objective facts.

Superimposed on all the media. An image of Mitt Romney.

Pretty much all religions are "incredibly bizarre". We are just more used to some of them.

Pretty much all religions are "incredibly bizarre". We are just more used to some of them.

Could be true but the right wing PACS regularly broadcast four Pinocchio LIES so if we've got the stupid PAC system, I don't see any moral/ethical problem with educating the American people about the objective FACTS about Mormonism and to link that 100 percent with Romney, who is not just any old Mormon, rather he has been a major leader of that church.