Eight years...no new wars. I like him.

That's one way of looking at it. Another might be that Department of Defense Budgets continue to escalate under his "leadership", and that his foreign policy is ambiguous at best, thus setting the stage for what we now see playing out in the Middle East and North Africa. Lots of new wars as a result and more to come.

I guess some people won't get over this election loss for four years.

What worries me is how long it will take the country to recover from the next four years.

What worries me is if we will be able to recover AT ALL. Having this Neville Chamberlain clone in power at such a scary moment in history is very bad timing.

Eight years...no new wars. I like him.

8? don't count your chickens before they've hatched.

Impeach him then. Go for it.

Anything is possible with this guy. Just a day ago you said his appointments were 100% legal, then it was quickly proven illegal and unconstitutional - from a constitutional law professor who swore an oath to uphold the Constitution. As soon as the press gets over those chills running up their leg, O's days are numbered. He's over-reaching, and he's likely to pay the price for it.

Impeach him then. Go for it.

Anything is possible with this guy. Just a day ago you said his appointments were 100% legal, then it was quickly proven illegal and unconstitutional - from a constitutional law professor who swore an oath to uphold the Constitution. As soon as the press gets over those chills running up their leg, O's days are numbered. He's over-reaching, and he's likely to pay the price for it.

one can only hope and pray

Impeach him then. Go for it.

Maybe it was 100% legal only in the mind of an obscure Constitutional lawyer.

It doesn't rise to the "high crimes and misdemeanors" quality of criminal actions in my mind so impeachment on this issue would seem to be unlikely.

If the District Court's opinion is upheld it could invalidate all ruling and regulations made by the NLRB during the time the illegally appointed members were in attendance. That would be blessing enough.

There will be other opportunities to impeach him later.

Relax, you guys. The election is over. Obama won fair and square; now, he seems to be damned if he does something, and damned if he doesn't.

Now is the time for all good men to come.... sorry. Now is the time for all good men, and politicians in Washington, to work together to solve the major problems the country is facing. This sort of bickering, sterile and unproductive as it is, goes on there as well, I have no doubt.

And yes, we Brits do it too, I'm afraid!

Impeach him then. Go for it.

Maybe it was 100% legal only in the mind of an obscure Constitutional lawyer.

It doesn't rise to the "high crimes and misdemeanors" quality of criminal actions in my mind so impeachment on this issue would seem to be unlikely.

If the District Court's opinion is upheld it could invalidate all ruling and regulations made by the NLRB during the time the illegally appointed members were in attendance. That would be blessing enough.

There will be other opportunities to impeach him later.

It's not a blessing at all. What it is IS a waste of time, resources, taxpayer money and a failure to see justice done. All because people chose to elect a dilletante, an amateur at best. A man of no beliefs or core convictions. He doesn't even know why he's there except for the fact he was electable. And in the interests of full disclosure, I am in agreement with most of what Obama claims to want, but like George Bush before him, I loathe him for having the audacity to think he was man enough for the job. He's a fiction.

Relax, you guys. The election is over. Obama won fair and square; now, he seems to be damned if he does something, and damned if he doesn't.

Now is the time for all good men to come.... sorry. Now is the time for all good men, and politicians in Washington, to work together to solve the major problems the country is facing. This sort of bickering, sterile and unproductive as it is, goes on there as well, I have no doubt.

And yes, we Brits do it too, I'm afraid!

I understand what you are saying however I believe the man was put in office to turn the economy around, create jobs and get the green back back on track, thus far he has been a social butterfly with beer sumits and talk shows and has relied on GW's pre-existing programs to get his economic achievments. I do not understand how Gays being able to get married or feel better about their place in society creats jobs? I do not understand how pitting the haves against the have nots creates jobs or improves the economy? Obama is a social worker at best and TBH would be probably be happier in Europe.

Interesting. Let me turn this around. How does advocating discrimination against gay people like the core of the republican party has for decades help the economy?

Does anybody know what happened to this bill?

http://www.wnd.com/2012/03/obama-impeachment-bill-now-in-congress/

Going to war without the consent of congress - and Libya was a shining success unraveling by the day.

Interesting. Let me turn this around. How does advocating discrimination against gay people like the core of the republican party has for decades help the economy?

No, of course it doesn't.... but gay rights, however much it pleases you (and me), should not be a top priority. Restore the shattered economy, create jobs, and sort out the US's overseas commitments first.

Interesting. Let me turn this around. How does advocating discrimination against gay people like the core of the republican party has for decades help the economy?

No, of course it doesn't.... but gay rights, however much it pleases you (and me), should not be a top priority. Restore the shattered economy, create jobs, and sort out the US's overseas commitments first.

This is ridiculous. Who said it was a TOP priority? For Obama, it is one issue among many. If you're saying don't only vote on one issue, sometimes valid, but it depends. Remember there were Jews in Germany who voted for Hitler on the grounds of not voting on only one issue. Gays are a TINY minority. If they aren't going to support the president who has supported them more than any other president by a long shot, who is? The republican party USA is the party of HATRED towards gays and has been for decades. Are you American? American gays know that and consider so called Log Cabin Republicans basically self haters.

Of course I am closer to Obama than any right wing republican on most ALL issues, so for me, this is NOT complicated. A lot of people try to argue that Jews shouldn't have supported Obama because republicans were better on Israel. That's a more complicated issue because the republicans are closer to RIGHT WING Israelis, so why should LIBERAL Jews support RIGHT WING anything, and to suggest that Obama isn't a good ally of Israel in general was a total lie.

Gays are a TINY minority.

Correct and most Republicans support gay rights, but consider gay marriage to be a frivolous issue that is not a right.

to suggest that Obama isn't a good ally of Israel in general was a total lie.

Horse manure. Give him time now that he does not have to worry about the Jewish vote.

Gays are a TINY minority.

Correct and most Republicans support gay rights, but consider gay marriage to be a frivolous issue that is not a right.

No they do not. I'm gay and I follow these things. Its even worse the people who are for really severe treatment of gays are almost always republicans and almost never democrats. You can't run away from the truth about the Karl Rove wedge of hate of that party. If you think marriage is only issue, well, it's not.

Interesting. Let me turn this around. How does advocating discrimination against gay people like the core of the republican party has for decades help the economy?

No, of course it doesn't.... but gay rights, however much it pleases you (and me), should not be a top priority. Restore the shattered economy, create jobs, and sort out the US's overseas commitments first.

This is ridiculous. Who said it was a TOP priority? For Obama, it is one issue among many. If you're saying don't only vote on one issue, sometimes valid, but it depends. Remember there were Jews in Germany who voted for Hitler on the grounds of not voting on only one issue. Gays are a TINY minority. If they aren't going to support the president who has supported them more than any other president by a long shot, who is? The republican party USA is the party of HATRED towards gays and has been for decades. Are you American? American gays know that and consider so called Log Cabin Republicans basically self haters.

Of course I am closer to Obama than any right wing republican on most ALL issues, so for me, this is NOT complicated. A lot of people try to argue that Jews shouldn't have supported Obama because republicans were better on Israel. That's a more complicated issue because the republicans are closer to RIGHT WING Israelis, so why should LIBERAL Jews support RIGHT WING anything, and to suggest that Obama isn't a good ally of Israel in general was a total lie.

Obama said it was his TOP PRIORITY. Of course he has said that many times about many subjects, few of which he has delivered on.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------

http://www.mrc.org/node/38728

He made history in his inaugural on that issue for sure, but there is little he can do with executive power about it that he hasn't already DONE.

to suggest that Obama isn't a good ally of Israel in general was a total lie.

Horse manure. Give him time now that he does not have to worry about the Jewish vote.

That is what the republicans have been saying and the trouble with that is that there is actually no evidence that is actually the truth. If you mean Obama will try to pressure the Israelis to try harder to make peace with the Palestinians and back off of illegal settlements, I can assure the majority of American Jews are totally on board with that. The survival of Israel as a Jewish state DEPENDS on there someday being a real Palestinian state. Otherwise, Israel will just get eaten up by demographics.

The survival of Israel as a Jewish state DEPENDS on there someday being a real Palestinian state. Otherwise, Israel will just get eaten up by demographics.

to suggest that Obama isn't a good ally of Israel in general was a total lie.

Horse manure. Give him time now that he does not have to worry about the Jewish vote.

That is what the republicans have been saying and the trouble with that is that there is actually no evidence that is actually the truth.

Most people consider insisting that Israel return to the 67 lines before negotiations to be evidence enough.

Barak Hussein Obama has both given names of Arabic roots.

Barak (a variant of Mubarak) means 'blessed one' in Arabic - that is, blessed by Allah.

Hussein means 'to be good'.

If you think this guy is a friend to the Israelis, then you had better reconsider.

He is the biggest con-trick ever foisted on the American people, and they are too gullible to realise it.

There will be no substantive aid to Israel while this man is in power.

to suggest that Obama isn't a good ally of Israel in general was a total lie.

Horse manure. Give him time now that he does not have to worry about the Jewish vote.

That is what the republicans have been saying and the trouble with that is that there is actually no evidence that is actually the truth. If you mean Obama will try to pressure the Israelis to try harder to make peace with the Palestinians and back off of illegal settlements, I can assure the majority of American Jews are totally on board with that. The survival of Israel as a Jewish state DEPENDS on there someday being a real Palestinian state. Otherwise, Israel will just get eaten up by demographics.

Obama sure has a knack of pressuring the Israelis, first he leaked that Israeli jets had been stationed in Azerbaijan ready to hit Tehran, then he was instrumental in an Islamic supremacist takeover in Egypt, to whom he has okayed the sale of F16's and tanks to in spite of strong reservations in congress. Yet Obama said Netanyahu didn't know what was best for Israel. If Obama lasts another 4 years I predict strong relations between Israel and Russia, or China.

I dont know if it is matter of changing times but i do remember when Regan put a missle in a loud mouths bed and how that resulted in keeping the guys trap shut for quite some time. roll the clock forward and it seems to me the world looks at the USA under Obama as another UN all talk and no action except for the Bush programs that were already in place when he took office.

Also of course he is the Abraham Lincoln to American gay people.

You're certainly being magnanimous in your comparison to Abraham Lincoln. Ol' Honest Abe's thinking never really needed to "evolve" on the immorality of slavery.

No I am not.

Which president is associated for all time with emancipation of slaves?

Lincoln.

Which president will be associated for all time with executive level action towards gay equality?

OBAMA.

It must happen from the supreme court but when it does happen Obama's leadership will never be forgotten.

People act like civil rights and equality are trivial issues. No they are not. They are huge issues and of the utmost importance and priority.

These issues were pushed first at state level. The federal government was only playing catch up. Many people forget that America is a nation of states and that states have rights under its federalists system. Though the national government overreaches constantly and often unconstitutionally it is most often the states that act as change agents.

]Most people consider insisting that Israel return to the 67 lines before negotiations to be evidence enough.

You might want to RETHINK that tired anti-Obama talking point. The truth is it is a VERY MAINSTREAM idea including among more moderate Israelis, who recently scored unexpected gains in the Israeli election.

http://www.theatlant...updated/239162/

I'm amazed at the amount of insta-commentary out there suggesting that the President has proposed something radical and new by declaring that Israel's 1967 borders should define -- with land-swaps -- the borders of a Palestinian state. I'm feeling a certain Groundhog Day effect here. This has been the basic idea for at least 12 years. This is what Bill Clinton, Ehud Barak and Yasser Arafat were talking about at Camp David, and later, at Taba. This is what George W. Bush was talking about with Ariel Sharon and Ehud Olmert. So what's the huge deal here? Is there any non-delusional Israeli who doesn't think that the 1967 border won't serve as the rough outline of the new Palestinian state?

There are basically three choices now:

1. Two states (not easy), that's what calls for the 1967 borders are about

2. Jewish Israel naturally fading away from demographic shift

3. Israel's government becoming even more hard core right wing resulting in even more isolation of Israel and even more antisemitism against global Jews justified by the ugliness of the Israeli government's policies

Frankly, 2 is the most likely result in the long term. 1 is very hard and 3 is probably unsustainable.

REAL friends of Israel (like OBAMA) including the vast majority of American Jews are still hoping for Option 1.

Yes I know Palestinians don't necessary want peace. This could be because they know they can win total victory and destroy Israel by just being patient. Nobody said it would easy.

American gays know that and consider so called Log Cabin Republicans basically self haters.

Many people would say the same thing about Jews that support Obama.

President Bush gave a written commitment that America supported Israel absorbing major settlement blocs in any peace agreement, opposed any return to the 1967 lines and stood firm against the so-called Palestinian right of return to Israel. A resolution that was, adopted June 22, 2004, states that Congress “strongly endorse the principles articulated by President Bush in his letter dated April 14, 2004.

Obama is no "friend" of Israel. He tried to throw Israel under the bus,but back-pedalled when he realized that it would cost him Jewish votes. Unfortunately, he does not have to worry about that anymore.

American gays know that and consider so called Log Cabin Republicans basically self haters.

Many people would say the same thing about Jews that support Obama.

President Bush gave a written commitment that America supported Israel absorbing major settlement blocs in any peace agreement, opposed any return to the 1967 lines and stood firm against the so-called Palestinian right of return to Israel. A resolution that was, adopted June 22, 2004, states that Congress “strongly endorse the principles articulated by President Bush in his letter dated April 14, 2004.

Obama is no "friend" of Israel. He tried to throw Israel under the bus,but back-pedalled when he realized that it would cost him Jewish votes. Unfortunately, he does not have to worry about that anymore.

Jews this time supported Obama at 70 percent.

There was a minor decline from 2008.

That was still a MASSIVELY overwhelming majority of Jewish support for Obama.

I don't doubt there are self hating Jews and also self hating gays. But 70 percent of Americans Jews are supposedly self hating? Not remotely possible especially considering polls overwhelmingly show American Jews support the right of Israel to exist as a Jewish state; in other words they are PRO Zionist. You don't have to love the extreme right wing government and policies of Israel to be a heartfelt Zionist.

How do you know 70% of Jews supported Obama? I thought you had secret ballotting. And before you quote polls at me, may I suggest that many people do not tell polls what they really feel; they say what they think would be acceptable to the pollsters.

There seems to be some confusion about two separate issues, whether people want Israel to exist as a Jewish state, and whether they think this is practicable. I'm all in favour of the Jews having a separate state (and the Kurds, incidentally), but I do not see that it can work when all the countries round Israel are Islamic or partially so (Lebanon). Will Israel fade away? That would be a sad end to a noble aspiration. But if that's what is likely to happen, all Obama could do is defer the inevitable.

I see no logical reason why many Jews would lie about supporting Obama to a pollster. Jewish supporters of Romney would be more likely to lie as American Jews are mostly LIBERAL and many Jews see support of Romney as SHAMEFUL.

There is no confusion that you speak of. The support is CLEARLY for Israel as a Jewish state in ISRAEL. The exact final borders are negotiable. I agree Israel's existence is not secure but believe me that most Jews have not given up the desire to keep it alive. There is honest disagreement on the best tactics to keep it alive but the consensus of American Jews is the two state solution IF it can be negotiated successfully and that means an Israeli government also open to negotiation and Netanyahu clearly hasn't been that.