President Barack Obama - Term 1 and 2 Thread

[conversationpc]

I figured you would give Limbaugh a pass,or the benefit of the doubt because after all, he is a good republican. If anything, he should never get a fucking pass. Hope he like Cheney, enjoys Hell.

I just gave you two good solid reasons why Limbaugh is a piece of shit, but of course you want it from another source right? I would love to see Senator Kerry kick the living shit out of Limbaugh.

Do you ever pay attention or do you have trouble keeping your concentration while you're pounding your meat stick?

Anyway, you FIGURED I'd give Limbaugh a pass? Have you never read ANYTHING I've posted on here. I've never had a good thing to say about the guy because I DON'T LIKE HIM. However, if someone's going to claim he was on welfare for six years, then back it up with some citations. I did a short search and only found a reference to his being on unemployment BRIEFLY. I'll be more than glad to admit his hypocrisy in regards to welfare if there is an unbiased source I can look at.

Do you REALLY think Kerry could "kick the living shit out of Limbaugh"? The guy can't even keep his eyes open to catch a football, for crying out loud...



http://i101.photobucket.com/albums/m48/ ... n_lol3.gif

BTW...That "meat stick" comment was purely for your own entertainment.

[Lula]

It is Unconstitutional...10th Amendment...look it up...beyond that we can't afford it...no more than you could afford to just go buy a Ferrari.

we'll see how this argument holds up. it is interesting and i think it will open the door to a public option. to say the law violates state sovereignty might be a stretch and i think it could be argued that a lack of health care can have a damaging or negative impact on the economy. i don't pretend to know it all here, just what i learned during a constitutional law class . there are big dogs that'll take this on. i'm on the side of doubting it will be ruled as unconstitutional. i'm of the camp that believes we can't afford not to do it.

[7 Wishes]

It is Unconstitutional...10th Amendment...look it up...beyond that we can't afford it...no more than you could afford to just go buy a Ferrari.

Very few Constitutional scholars would agree with you, especially since the fines will be enforced in the form of a tax. It's downright frightening that some people actually believe this, and it has everything to do with the fact that Obama is black.

Where was this outrage when Bush was bailing out the banks with nary enough regulation to ensure small businesses actually received loans? What about the second tax cut, which most economists agree helped usher in the second Bush recession? The Republicans passed that via reconciliation, I'll remind you. Between that - which was entirely debt- and defecit- financed, and the two wars, the cost was over a trillion dollars PER YEAR. Why did no one scream out then? Where were the tea baggers, dittoheads, and mouth-breathing Palinites then? The CBO never validated either, and actually warned the second tax cut would cost hundreds of billions of dollars (and given that trickle down does NOT and did NOT work, it had NO POSITIVE EFFECT WHATSOEVER).

Here you have a program which, despite its faults, is NOT debt- or defecit- financed, and per the non-partisan CBO, will actually REDUCE the defecit for the next 20 years (and, BTW, will NOT result in higher premiums or higher taxes for 90% of all Americans) - and NOW you're stomping in the aisles? Some maniacs out there are actually calling for a revolution - as if that would happen (or the Supreme Court would even consider denying the right of the Federal Government to levy a tax)! It's really unbelievable.

And, incidentally - polls are now showing Americans are evenly divided in their support (or lack thereof) of the bill. By the time November rolls around, and most people see the tangible benefits it will provide them, I can assure you your "rebellion of outrage" will have little impact in the House or Senate. So, dream on. And for the love of God, hold the officials whom YOU elect to the same exacting standards you're holding the Democrats to - if you had, we wouldn't be in this fucking mess right now in the first place! It's complete bullshit that you have no problem with the GOP strong-arming (via reonciliation) going to war in Iraq, bailing out the banks, bankrolling the first stimulus, and supporting the tax cuts - ALL OF WHICH WERE FORCED THROUGH BY REPUBLICANS AND ALL OF WHICH WERE DEBT- AND DEFECIT- FINANCED!!!!!!!

[RossValoryRocks]

It is Unconstitutional...10th Amendment...look it up...beyond that we can't afford it...no more than you could afford to just go buy a Ferrari.

Very few Constitutional scholars would agree with you, especially since the fines will be enforced in the form of a tax. It's downright frightening that some people actually believe this, and it has everything to do with the fact that Obama is black.

Where was this outrage when Bush was bailing out the banks with nary enough regulation to ensure small businesses actually received loans? What about the second tax cut, which most economists agree helped usher in the second Bush recession? The Republicans passed that via reconciliation, I'll remind you. Between that - which was entirely debt- and defecit- financed, and the two wars, the cost was over a trillion dollars PER YEAR. Why did no one scream out then? Where were the tea baggers, dittoheads, and mouth-breathing Palinites then? The CBO never validated either, and actually warned the second tax cut would cost hundreds of billions of dollars (and given that trickle down does NOT and did NOT work, it had NO POSITIVE EFFECT WHATSOEVER).

Here you have a program which, despite its faults, is NOT debt- or defecit- financed, and per the non-partisan CBO, will actually REDUCE the defecit for the next 20 years (and, BTW, will NOT result in higher premiums or higher taxes for 90% of all Americans) - and NOW you're stomping in the aisles? Some maniacs out there are actually calling for a revolution - as if that would happen (or the Supreme Court would even consider denying the right of the Federal Government to levy a tax)! It's really unbelievable.

And, incidentally - polls are now showing Americans are evenly divided in their support (or lack thereof) of the bill. By the time November rolls around, and most people see the tangible benefits it will provide them, I can assure you your "rebellion of outrage" will have little impact in the House or Senate. So, dream on. And for the love of God, hold the officials whom YOU elect to the same exacting standards you're holding the Democrats to - if you had, we wouldn't be in this fucking mess right now in the first place! It's complete bullshit that you have no problem with the GOP strong-arming (via reonciliation) going to war in Iraq, bailing out the banks, bankrolling the first stimulus, and supporting the tax cuts - ALL OF WHICH WERE FORCED THROUGH BY REPUBLICANS AND ALL OF WHICH WERE DEBT- AND DEFECIT- FINANCED!!!!!!!

I am too tired right now to tell you how absolutely wrong you are on EVERYTHING you said. I will put together all the citations to show you what a complete and utter idiotic bunch of crap you just posted is.

I will make sure I bring copies to MRII as well...we can go over it step by step over a beer.

[7 Wishes]

The beer(s) sound(s) good.

But, seriously...I'm not wrong, at least when it comes to the facts...whether we agree on this being sound policy is of course eternally subject to debate, BUT...insofar as the GOP passing debt- and defecit- financed legislation via reconciliation in the first six years under Bush, I am spot on.

[RossValoryRocks]

The beer(s) sound(s) good.

But, seriously...I'm not wrong, at least when it comes to the facts...whether we agree on this being sound policy is of course eternally subject to debate, BUT...insofar as the GOP passing debt- and defecit- financed legislation via reconciliation in the first six years under Bush, I am spot on.

Sure they did...and its not that I don't care about that...but we can't change the past...its the future that concerns me now. The politicians are all in it for themselves.

We need to reforms portions of our health care, I agree, this bill though in unsustainable monetarily.

The Constitution lays out what the government can do...everything else falls to the States and/or the people...In no section of the Constitution does it allow the Federal Government to do what it is doing. The 10th Amendment comes into play here. The commerce clause doesn't come into play because right now ALL insurance is done INTRAstate, not interstate. Most if not all the portions of this law are unconstitutional on those grounds. Of course the democrats are saying it isn't so, what else would they say???? But you don't have to be a Constitutional Law professor to actually READ the Constitution and precedent to understand.

The CBO projection are nothing but smoke and mirrors...because they are projections based on a TON of assumptions...and all those assumptions are made by having faith in the politicians to do what they say they are going to do...I am not willing to give them the benefit of the doubt, based on what they have done for as long as I have been alive.

[7 Wishes]

Regardless of how I feel about the bill, I believe turning around the Bush recession, unemployment, and reuniting Damn Yankees should have been the top priorities of the Obama Administration.

[slucero]

The beer(s) sound(s) good.

But, seriously...I'm not wrong, at least when it comes to the facts...whether we agree on this being sound policy is of course eternally subject to debate, BUT...insofar as the GOP passing debt- and defecit- financed legislation via reconciliation in the first six years under Bush, I am spot on.

Sure they did...and its not that I don't care about that...but we can't change the past...its the future that concerns me now. The politicians are all in it for themselves.

We need to reforms portions of our health care, I agree, this bill though in unsustainable monetarily.

The Constitution lays out what the government can do...everything else falls to the States and/or the people...In no section of the Constitution does it allow the Federal Government to do what it is doing. The 10th Amendment comes into play here. The commerce clause doesn't come into play because right now ALL insurance is done INTRAstate, not interstate. Most if not all the portions of this law are unconstitutional on those grounds. Of course the democrats are saying it isn't so, what else would they say???? But you don't have to be a Constitutional Law professor to actually READ the Constitution and precedent to understand.

The CBO projection are nothing but smoke and mirrors...because they are projections based on a TON of assumptions...and all those assumptions are made by having faith in the politicians to do what they say they are going to do...I am not willing to give them the benefit of the doubt, based on what they have done for as long as I have been alive.

violates 2 that I can think of off the top of my head...


-10th Amendment: Reserves all powers not granted to the federal government to the states and then the people. Health care is not a power granted to the federal government.

-14th Amendment requires equal protection under the law. Nebraska and Louisiana are being treated differently than Connecticut

[RossValoryRocks]

The beer(s) sound(s) good.

But, seriously...I'm not wrong, at least when it comes to the facts...whether we agree on this being sound policy is of course eternally subject to debate, BUT...insofar as the GOP passing debt- and defecit- financed legislation via reconciliation in the first six years under Bush, I am spot on.

Sure they did...and its not that I don't care about that...but we can't change the past...its the future that concerns me now. The politicians are all in it for themselves.

We need to reforms portions of our health care, I agree, this bill though in unsustainable monetarily.

The Constitution lays out what the government can do...everything else falls to the States and/or the people...In no section of the Constitution does it allow the Federal Government to do what it is doing. The 10th Amendment comes into play here. The commerce clause doesn't come into play because right now ALL insurance is done INTRAstate, not interstate. Most if not all the portions of this law are unconstitutional on those grounds. Of course the democrats are saying it isn't so, what else would they say???? But you don't have to be a Constitutional Law professor to actually READ the Constitution and precedent to understand.

The CBO projection are nothing but smoke and mirrors...because they are projections based on a TON of assumptions...and all those assumptions are made by having faith in the politicians to do what they say they are going to do...I am not willing to give them the benefit of the doubt, based on what they have done for as long as I have been alive.

violates 2 that I can think of off the top of my head...


-10th Amendment: Reserves all powers not granted to the federal government to the states and then the people. Health care is not a power granted to the federal government.

-14th Amendment requires equal protection under the law. Nebraska and Louisiana are being treated differently than Connecticut

Someone, 7 I think, said why can the states (not the federal government) make us buy auto insurance...because driving is not a right, its a priviledge...while everyone has the right to live their life the way they see fit (within reason of course) so mandating health coverage for everyone is a completely different animal.

The apportionment clause says all taxes and duties, with the exception of the income tax, has to be apportioned dependent on population of the said states. Depending on HOW they decide to fund this will depend on if that comes into play as well.

[7 Wishes]

A rule which consolidates a vote on a bill and accompanying amendments, or, as in this case, a reconciliation measure and an amended bill, is within the House's powers under Article I, Section 5, Clause 2.

The interstate commerece clause in Article 1 SUPPORTS the right of Congress to regulate healthcare.

BTW - good luck to Romney in 2012 if he decides to run on this issue - since Massachusetts' universal healthcare package was signed off by none other than Mitch.

[conversationpc]

BTW - good luck to Romney in 2012 if he decides to run on this issue - since Massachusetts' universal healthcare package was signed off by none other than Mitch.

I'm not a Romney fan at all but hasn't he expressed regret at the healthcare laws in Massachusetts? If I remember correctly, their current governor has also been warning that the national plan is going to bankrupt the country.

[7 Wishes]

Dave, I think his main regret probably entails the dicey position in which it puts him heading into 2012 election mode.

[conversationpc]

Dave, I think his main regret probably entails the dicey position in which it puts him heading into 2012 election mode.

That could very well be. I'm just not that familiar with his position on it.

[RedWingFan]

after his unemployment ran out - as he, by his own account, mowed the occasional lawn and mostly sat on his couch, watching TV, and eating potato chips. Now THAT was proactive of him.

Where'd you get this info from?

Still waiting!!!! You didn't happen to get this bit of data from Phil Jones did you 7 Wishes?

[RedWingFan]

A rule which consolidates a vote on a bill and accompanying amendments, or, as in this case, a reconciliation measure and an amended bill, is within the House's powers under Article I, Section 5, Clause 2.

The interstate commerece clause in Article 1 SUPPORTS the right of Congress to regulate healthcare.

This nugget of idiocy goes right up there with, Bush is responsible for the existence of terrorism.

[Rockindeano]

BTW - good luck to Romney in 2012 if he decides to run on this issue - since Massachusetts' universal healthcare package was signed off by none other than Mitch.

I'm not a Romney fan at all but hasn't he expressed regret at the healthcare laws in Massachusetts? If I remember correctly, their current governor has also been warning that the national plan is going to bankrupt the country.

If the war in Iraq hasn't accomplished bankruptcy, no health care plan, no matter how big, will bankrupt this nation. LOL, you all keep forgetting about that desert arcade over there in the sand lot...while our guy is trying to wrap up recess over there and get our boys home. Man, Obie should get an extra year for having to clean up all the shit you guys left out on the yard!

[Rockindeano]

A rule which consolidates a vote on a bill and accompanying amendments, or, as in this case, a reconciliation measure and an amended bill, is within the House's powers under Article I, Section 5, Clause 2.

The interstate commerece clause in Article 1 SUPPORTS the right of Congress to regulate healthcare.

This nugget of idiocy goes right up there with, Bush is responsible for the existence of terrorism.

Could you imagine if we all here took the same poly sci class in college? You would have TNC, 7 wishes, me, Behshad, RWF, ConversationPC, FF, St John for comedic effect, Lula, Barb, Slucero, SeparateWayz and Tito for racist smack. That would be a interesting class. How many time you think the police would be called?

[RedWingFan]

A rule which consolidates a vote on a bill and accompanying amendments, or, as in this case, a reconciliation measure and an amended bill, is within the House's powers under Article I, Section 5, Clause 2.

The interstate commerece clause in Article 1 SUPPORTS the right of Congress to regulate healthcare.

This nugget of idiocy goes right up there with, Bush is responsible for the existence of terrorism.

Could you imagine if we all here took the same poly sci class in college? You would have TNC, 7 wishes, me, Behshad, RWF, ConversationPC, FF, St John for comedic effect, Lula, Barb, Slucero, SeparateWayz and Tito for racist smack. That would be a interesting class. How many time you think the police would be called?

Sign me up. I wouldn't miss it. But I'll be damned if I'm going to be seated behind you!!!

[RedWingFan]

A rule which consolidates a vote on a bill and accompanying amendments, or, as in this case, a reconciliation measure and an amended bill, is within the House's powers under Article I, Section 5, Clause 2.

The interstate commerece clause in Article 1 SUPPORTS the right of Congress to regulate healthcare.

Yeah the founders wanted the federal government to force her citizens to buy it's products whether they want them or not. It probably followed this statement!

"The moment the idea is admitted into society that property is not as sacred as the laws of God and there is not a force of law and justice to protect it. Anarchy and tyranny commence, and that property is surely a right of mankind as real as liberty." - John Adams

[conversationpc]

If the war in Iraq hasn't accomplished bankruptcy, no health care plan, no matter how big, will bankrupt this nation.

No, it won't bankrupt us by itself but it'll go a long way in helping to accomplish it, along with Obama's out-of-control spending and over-the-top printing of new currency.

[slucero]

A rule which consolidates a vote on a bill and accompanying amendments, or, as in this case, a reconciliation measure and an amended bill, is within the House's powers under Article I, Section 5, Clause 2.

The interstate commerece clause in Article 1 SUPPORTS the right of Congress to regulate healthcare.

BTW - good luck to Romney in 2012 if he decides to run on this issue - since Massachusetts' universal healthcare package was signed off by none other than Mitch.

Article I, Section 8, Clause 3

"To regulate Commerce with foreign Nations, and among the several States, and with the Indian Tribes; "


I'm not getting how "regulate" can be construed as "mandating the purchase" of anything...

[7 Wishes]

When it's in the form of a tax or the withholding of a tax deduction, then it most CERTAINLY is.

[Gin and Tonic Sky]

Yeah the founders wanted the federal government to force her citizens to buy it's products whether they want them or not. It probably followed this statement!

"The moment the idea is admitted into society that property is not as sacred as the laws of God and there is not a force of law and justice to protect it. Anarchy and tyranny commence, and that property is surely a right of mankind as real as liberty." - John Adams

or as friedrich hayek said more simply, |" if the king owns your house, you do exactlly what the king tells you to do, because you live in fear that he's gonna take it way from you."

[separate_wayz]

A rule which consolidates a vote on a bill and accompanying amendments, or, as in this case, a reconciliation measure and an amended bill, is within the House's powers under Article I, Section 5, Clause 2.

The interstate commerece clause in Article 1 SUPPORTS the right of Congress to regulate healthcare.

This nugget of idiocy goes right up there with, Bush is responsible for the existence of terrorism.

Could you imagine if we all here took the same poly sci class in college? You would have TNC, 7 wishes, me, Behshad, RWF, ConversationPC, FF, St John for comedic effect, Lula, Barb, Slucero, SeparateWayz and Tito for racist smack. That would be a interesting class. How many time you think the police would be called?

We'd probably be assigned a group project by the poli sci professor, just so he could have some shits and grins. Then all of you numb-nuts would go out drinking, and I'd be stuck doing all the work for the group. We'd get an 'A'. You're welcome.

[slucero]

A rule which consolidates a vote on a bill and accompanying amendments, or, as in this case, a reconciliation measure and an amended bill, is within the House's powers under Article I, Section 5, Clause 2.

The interstate commerece clause in Article 1 SUPPORTS the right of Congress to regulate healthcare.

This nugget of idiocy goes right up there with, Bush is responsible for the existence of terrorism.

Could you imagine if we all here took the same poly sci class in college? You would have TNC, 7 wishes, me, Behshad, RWF, ConversationPC, FF, St John for comedic effect, Lula, Barb, Slucero, SeparateWayz and Tito for racist smack. That would be a interesting class. How many time you think the police would be called?

That's not even funny Deano.. considering I'm a LATINO.... the interesting thing would be how many times we'd have to pass the hat to get your ass outta the drunk tank.

[Rockindeano]

A rule which consolidates a vote on a bill and accompanying amendments, or, as in this case, a reconciliation measure and an amended bill, is within the House's powers under Article I, Section 5, Clause 2.

The interstate commerece clause in Article 1 SUPPORTS the right of Congress to regulate healthcare.

This nugget of idiocy goes right up there with, Bush is responsible for the existence of terrorism.

Could you imagine if we all here took the same poly sci class in college? You would have TNC, 7 wishes, me, Behshad, RWF, ConversationPC, FF, St John for comedic effect, Lula, Barb, Slucero, SeparateWayz and Tito for racist smack. That would be a interesting class. How many time you think the police would be called?

That's not even funny Deano.. considering I'm a LATINO.... the interesting thing would be how many times we'd have to pass the hat to get your ass outta the drunk tank.

Hey Slu, I am NOT the racist, Tito is.

[slucero]

A rule which consolidates a vote on a bill and accompanying amendments, or, as in this case, a reconciliation measure and an amended bill, is within the House's powers under Article I, Section 5, Clause 2.

The interstate commerece clause in Article 1 SUPPORTS the right of Congress to regulate healthcare.

This nugget of idiocy goes right up there with, Bush is responsible for the existence of terrorism.

Could you imagine if we all here took the same poly sci class in college? You would have TNC, 7 wishes, me, Behshad, RWF, ConversationPC, FF, St John for comedic effect, Lula, Barb, Slucero, SeparateWayz and Tito for racist smack. That would be a interesting class. How many time you think the police would be called?

That's not even funny Deano.. considering I'm a LATINO.... the interesting thing would be how many times we'd have to pass the hat to get your ass outta the drunk tank.

Hey Slu, I am NOT the racist, Tito is.

you should read your own post and diagram your sentence...... "Lula, Barb, Slucero, SeparateWayz and Tito for racist smack"... that's you calling all of us racists.

[Lula]

should read- st john for comedic affect and tito for racist smack. the rest are master debaters .

[Saint John]

should read- st john for comedic affect and tito for racist smack. the rest are master debaters .

Affect or effect?

[Lula]

oh shit