SOCIALIST Sen. Bernie Saunders wants a Dem. CHALLENGER to Pres. Obama

[RDD_1210]

We are in agreement. Clearly, Obama is the fiscal Conservative and political Moderate he told us he was when he was campaigning. That's as clear as Jake Starkey's Moderate Republican credentials

Who will represent the Far Left?

Obama ran on a lot of things. Did you believe them all? I surely didn't. I was easy to see through that pompous and empty rhetoric.

In fact, I walked down to my local Obama campaign office and asked them for details on what Obama was going to cut when he went through the budget, line by line. I told them that if they provided me details that I would vote for Obama and help out their campaign. They scurried around and couldn't find any "details" which this President lacks. So, I walked out and voted 3rd party.

As for who will represent the Far Left? I have no idea. Why don't you stroll over to Democratic Underground and ask them. I keep getting banned over there for calling them out on their warmongering, police state policies, the war on the poor, war on transparency, etc.

Will the Left, because there's no such thing as the FarLeft, set forth what they want from a candidate or it this like asking for the Global Warming Theory?

Look, Frank making another exaggerated argument. Add it to the list.

 

[initforme]

"So I am in favor of drafting Bernie Sanders for President. I believe him to be the only hope the American middle class has to survive."

Wow, best post of the day. Frankly, I dont see either party wanting the middle class to survive. Yet the middle class is solely what built this nation. I think they would like a theocracy or plutocracy or rule by the wealthy and the rest of us peasants. Maybe its the plan.

 

[Liability]

Obama ran on a lot of things. Did you believe them all? I surely didn't. I was easy to see through that pompous and empty rhetoric.

In fact, I walked down to my local Obama campaign office and asked them for details on what Obama was going to cut when he went through the budget, line by line. I told them that if they provided me details that I would vote for Obama and help out their campaign. They scurried around and couldn't find any "details" which this President lacks. So, I walked out and voted 3rd party.

As for who will represent the Far Left? I have no idea. Why don't you stroll over to Democratic Underground and ask them. I keep getting banned over there for calling them out on their warmongering, police state policies, the war on the poor, war on transparency, etc.

Will the Left, because there's no such thing as the FarLeft, set forth what they want from a candidate or it this like asking for the Global Warming Theory?

Look, Frank making another exaggerated argument. Add it to the list.

Wow. This RDD guy is REALLY adept at identifying exaggeration.

Wonder what else he knows about the tools of rhetoric?

 

[CrusaderFrank]

I support Bernie Sander running as a Third Party Candidate!

Draft Bernie!

Run, Bernie, run!

 

[Liability]

I support Bernie Sander running as a Third Party Candidate!

Draft Bernie!

Run, Bernie, run!

With apologies to the YES network,

BERN, baby, BERN!

 

[Wry Catcher]

Since Fly Catcher still can't address the point, as he always does, he deflects.

Despite Fly Catcher's endless cowardice, the FACTS remain. Pretty stark, too.

The CONSTITUTION crafts a limited government of enumerated powers.

Conservatives value that; liberals don't.

Bullshit. That's an assertion you can't prove, nor is it true.

It is true and it has already been proved time and time and time again.

As you know.

We the people are the government, LIEability, in both the real and the abstract. The people spoke in November 2010 and changed course, once again; they did in 2006 and in 2008 and many times over the course of our history. This fact is apparent to everyone but to those who gain power only to lost it. The American people reject radicalism, in that respect I will agree that we are conservative - Americans support tradition but not to the extent they will reject a better mouse trap.

History records a nation whose people are curious and embrace innovation, accept iconoclasts and faith healers and other eccentrics but rarely follow them and reject those who want to effect change by revolution not evolution, as do the radical Republicans of which you seem to be a part.

The Democrats overreached on healthcare reform, and the special interests who profited from a broken system feared for the life of their golden goose. Going after reform was a mistake, it should have, in hindsight, been folded into a debate on its costs to business, industry and government (on all levels).

The Republcans have been painted into a corner by the new right, a coaltion of special interests and callous conservatives wanting to fix decades of deficit spending in one year. Moderates on both sides of the aisle know this is insane, and so do most Americans

A budget is a plan, and budgets are based on facts and projectons, not ideology. The GOP is in the process of overreaching and cannot articulate any reasonable argument to support their plan, a plan based on emotion alone.

 

[Liability]

Bullshit. That's an assertion you can't prove, nor is it true.

It is true and it has already been proved time and time and time again.

As you know.

We the people are the government, LIEability, in both the real and the abstract. The people spoke in November 2010 and changed course, once again; they did in 2006 and in 2008 and many times over the course of our history. This fact is apparent to everyone but to those who gain power only to lost it. The American people reject radicalism, in that respect I will agree that we are conservative - Americans support tradition but not to the extent they will reject a better mouse trap.

History records a nation whose people are curious and embrace innovation, accept iconoclasts and faith healers and other eccentrics but rarely follow them and reject those who want to effect change by revolution not evolution, as do the radical Republicans of which you seem to be a part.

The Democrats overreached on healthcare reform, and the special interests who profited from a broken system feared for the life of their golden goose. Going after reform was a mistake, it should have, in hindsight, been folded into a debate on its costs to business, industry and government (on all levels).

The Republcans have been painted into a corner by the new right, a coaltion of special interests and callous conservatives wanting to fix decades of deficit spending in one year. Moderates on both sides of the aisle know this is insane, and so do most Americans

A budget is a plan, and budgets are based on facts and projectons, not ideology. The GOP is in the process of overreaching and cannot articulate any reasonable argument to support their plan, a plan based on emotion alone.

Actually, Fly Catcher, you got that fundamental aspect of our Republic wrong, too.

No surprise.

Although the Constitution refers to "We, the People," that is largely just nicely couched rhetoric.

PROPERLY understood (thus explaining why YOU'D miss it) the UNION is WE, the STATES.

You, being a pontificating propagandized dull-witted stooge, BUY in whole the nonsense about how the GOP is supposedly owned by special interests. But with complete predictably you gloss over entirely the fact that the liberal Democrat Parody is OWNED by special interests.

A budget "plan" is not a work of science fiction, stupid.

It is pretty BASIC stuff albeit with very large numbers and major problems of our own making over much time and piss-poor effort. But it's still just one thing in its essence: it is accounting for (i.e. often approximating) what we will be taking IN as so-called "revenue" and how we will be spending it.

You idiot libs (and a whole assortment of faithless others over the years) have been FAR TOO CONTENT to ignore the hard part. You guesstimate revenue, you ALWAYS seem to find new cause to confiscate the WEALTH of WE, the PEOPLE (whom you falsely claim to defend) and then regardless of the numbers you SPEND more than we can afford and put it all on "credit" without a fucking concern for the fact that someday we are going to have to pay the damn piper.

You dickweed.

Yeah, budgets are SUPPOSED to be based on facts. But take the mote outta your own hypocritical eye, then, asshole. YOUR "budgets" have been pretty much entirely fiction, not fact and even at this dire late hour, idiots like you STILL refuse to believe that the illusory party IS over. It's time to pay the fucking tab.

So stop your caterwauling, you prissy pussy. STFU and man up. We need to rein in spending IMMEDIATELY AND MASSIVELY. PERIOD.

 

[Wry Catcher]

It is true and it has already been proved time and time and time again.

As you know.

We the people are the government, LIEability, in both the real and the abstract. The people spoke in November 2010 and changed course, once again; they did in 2006 and in 2008 and many times over the course of our history. This fact is apparent to everyone but to those who gain power only to lost it. The American people reject radicalism, in that respect I will agree that we are conservative - Americans support tradition but not to the extent they will reject a better mouse trap.

History records a nation whose people are curious and embrace innovation, accept iconoclasts and faith healers and other eccentrics but rarely follow them and reject those who want to effect change by revolution not evolution, as do the radical Republicans of which you seem to be a part.

The Democrats overreached on healthcare reform, and the special interests who profited from a broken system feared for the life of their golden goose. Going after reform was a mistake, it should have, in hindsight, been folded into a debate on its costs to business, industry and government (on all levels).

The Republcans have been painted into a corner by the new right, a coaltion of special interests and callous conservatives wanting to fix decades of deficit spending in one year. Moderates on both sides of the aisle know this is insane, and so do most Americans

A budget is a plan, and budgets are based on facts and projectons, not ideology. The GOP is in the process of overreaching and cannot articulate any reasonable argument to support their plan, a plan based on emotion alone.

Actually, Fly Catcher, you got that fundamental aspect of our Republic wrong, too.

No surprise.

Although the Constitution refers to "We, the People," that is largely just nicely couched rhetoric.

PROPERLY understood (thus explaining why YOU'D miss it) the UNION is WE, the STATES.

You, being a pontificating propagandized dull-witted stooge, BUY in whole the nonsense about how the GOP is supposedly owned by special interests. But with complete predictably you gloss over entirely the fact that the liberal Democrat Parody is OWNED by special interests.

A budget "plan" is not a work of science fiction, stupid.

It is pretty BASIC stuff albeit with very large numbers and major problems of our own making over much time and piss-poor effort. But it's still just one thing in its essence: it is accounting for (i.e. often approximating) what we will be taking IN as so-called "revenue" and how we will be spending it.

You idiot libs (and a whole assortment of faithless others over the years) have been FAR TOO CONTENT to ignore the hard part. You guesstimate revenue, you ALWAYS seem to find new cause to confiscate the WEALTH of WE, the PEOPLE (whom you falsely claim to defend) and then regardless of the numbers you SPEND more than we can afford and put it all on "credit" without a fucking concern for the fact that someday we are going to have to pay the damn piper.

You dickweed.

Yeah, budgets are SUPPOSED to be based on facts. But take the mote outta your own hypocritical eye, then, asshole. YOUR "budgets" have been pretty much entirely fiction, not fact and even at this dire late hour, idiots like you STILL refuse to believe that the illusory party IS over. It's time to pay the fucking tab.

So stop your caterwauling, you prissy pussy. STFU and man up. We need to rein in spending IMMEDIATELY AND MASSIVELY. PERIOD.

I thank you for this useful post; you've made it quite clear you're insane. Have a nice evening.

 

[JoeB131]

President Obama never has been an "Ultra Liberal". He's more of a slightly left centrist in the vein of William Clinton..and in fact..I think he leans a bit more right..then Bill.

Everything about Obama screams "Wonky Nerd". He's a straight arrow, personally...attends church, has strong family values and is a lousy dancer.

You don't get credit for "attending Church" when you claim you sat there for 20 years and never realized the "Pastor" was a rabid lunatic.

My problem with Obama is not where he sits on the political spectrum. I'd agree, he's centrist, and on a personal level, not a bad person. I'm sure his kids love him. That isn't the point.

My problem with Obama from day 1 was that he had the least real experience of any president. Part of that was his youth when elected, but the other was that he really never gained the experience to understand problems.

His whole experience was 4 years in the US Senate. He's never run a state, a city or a business. He never served in the military. Even though he was a doctor of law, (JD), he actually litigated few cases in courts.

In short, he never got the experience to run something and get a job done, and it's showing. Even when his party controlled congress, he found himself getting rolled by Pelosi and Reid, and Reid seems to have even hijacked these Debt negotiations.

 

[Douger]

That's right. Bernie is a socialist and is the reason Vermont is probably the best state to live in.Free and equal.

 

[Liability]

That's right. Bernie is a socialist and is the reason Vermont is probably the best state to live in.Free and equal.

Vermont is a dump. Even the cows wear flannel shirts.

And yes, Bernie is a socialist. The dumb-ass voters of Vermont want it that way because they are not free and equal. They are dim-witted jokes.

 

[Liability]

We the people are the government, LIEability, in both the real and the abstract. The people spoke in November 2010 and changed course, once again; they did in 2006 and in 2008 and many times over the course of our history. This fact is apparent to everyone but to those who gain power only to lost it. The American people reject radicalism, in that respect I will agree that we are conservative - Americans support tradition but not to the extent they will reject a better mouse trap.

History records a nation whose people are curious and embrace innovation, accept iconoclasts and faith healers and other eccentrics but rarely follow them and reject those who want to effect change by revolution not evolution, as do the radical Republicans of which you seem to be a part.

The Democrats overreached on healthcare reform, and the special interests who profited from a broken system feared for the life of their golden goose. Going after reform was a mistake, it should have, in hindsight, been folded into a debate on its costs to business, industry and government (on all levels).

The Republcans have been painted into a corner by the new right, a coaltion of special interests and callous conservatives wanting to fix decades of deficit spending in one year. Moderates on both sides of the aisle know this is insane, and so do most Americans

A budget is a plan, and budgets are based on facts and projectons, not ideology. The GOP is in the process of overreaching and cannot articulate any reasonable argument to support their plan, a plan based on emotion alone.

Actually, Fly Catcher, you got that fundamental aspect of our Republic wrong, too.

No surprise.

Although the Constitution refers to "We, the People," that is largely just nicely couched rhetoric.

PROPERLY understood (thus explaining why YOU'D miss it) the UNION is WE, the STATES.

You, being a pontificating propagandized dull-witted stooge, BUY in whole the nonsense about how the GOP is supposedly owned by special interests. But with complete predictably you gloss over entirely the fact that the liberal Democrat Parody is OWNED by special interests.

A budget "plan" is not a work of science fiction, stupid.

It is pretty BASIC stuff albeit with very large numbers and major problems of our own making over much time and piss-poor effort. But it's still just one thing in its essence: it is accounting for (i.e. often approximating) what we will be taking IN as so-called "revenue" and how we will be spending it.

You idiot libs (and a whole assortment of faithless others over the years) have been FAR TOO CONTENT to ignore the hard part. You guesstimate revenue, you ALWAYS seem to find new cause to confiscate the WEALTH of WE, the PEOPLE (whom you falsely claim to defend) and then regardless of the numbers you SPEND more than we can afford and put it all on "credit" without a fucking concern for the fact that someday we are going to have to pay the damn piper.

You dickweed.

Yeah, budgets are SUPPOSED to be based on facts. But take the mote outta your own hypocritical eye, then, asshole. YOUR "budgets" have been pretty much entirely fiction, not fact and even at this dire late hour, idiots like you STILL refuse to believe that the illusory party IS over. It's time to pay the fucking tab.

So stop your caterwauling, you prissy pussy. STFU and man up. We need to rein in spending IMMEDIATELY AND MASSIVELY. PERIOD.

I thank you for this useful post; you've made it quite clear you're insane. Have a nice evening.

On the contrary:

Disagreement with you is proof of an abundance of sanity, you bombastic, dishonest, overly-gullible, propagandized moron.

 

[Greenbeard]

Yet for the Socialist Senator from the lame State of Vermont, that's not far ENOUGH left.

It's a surprise to learn that Obama is to the right of actual socialists? Sometimes I forget that you guys have actually started believing your own bullshit.

Let me be the first to welcome you back to reality.

 

[Liability]

Yet for the Socialist Senator from the lame State of Vermont, that's not far ENOUGH left.

It's a surprise to learn that Obama is to the right of actual socialists? Sometimes I forget that you guys have actually started believing your own bullshit.

Let me be the first to welcome you back to reality.

I see you still have no ability to comprehend basic English, shithead.

It was the ACTUAL devout Socialist who maintains that the far left President isn't far enough left.

Do try to keep up, someday, idiot.

 

[Greenbeard]

It was the ACTUAL devout Socialist who maintains that the far left President isn't far enough left.

In other words, Obama is to the right of actual socialists. Amazing discovery!

 

[Liability]

It was the ACTUAL devout Socialist who maintains that the far left President isn't far enough left.

In other words, Obama is to the right of actual socialists. Amazing discovery!

Take it up with your fellow shithead, Sen. Saunders. He's the one ringing the alarm, ya moron.

 

[LibocalypseNow]

Socialist nutters squabbling with Marxist Communist nutters? You gotta love it. Pretty fun entertainment. Hopefully they'll both be booted out of power in 2012. They have failed miserably. What a mess.

 

[Sarah G]

Remarkably, the Socialist wants a challenger to the ultra liberal President Obama to serve as an anchor, of sorts, to stop the President's alleged drift to the RIGHT! ". . . I think one of the reasons the president has been able to move so far to the right is that there is no primary opposition to him . . . ."



Sanders: Would be 'good' for Obama to face primary challenge - The Hill's Blog Briefing Room

This President (with a couple of exceptions which I concede) has been as far left as anybody could possibly be and still be an American President.

There has never been as far left a flaming lib in the Oval Office as this President.

Yet for the Socialist Senator from the lame State of Vermont, that's not far ENOUGH left.

Putting his "reason" aside, who agrees with ol' Bernie?

SHOULD the President get a CHALLENGER from within the ranks of the liberal Democrat Parody?

Bernie can challenge him if he likes but you and Bernie are both stupid if you think Obama is a left winger.

 

[Liability]

Remarkably, the Socialist wants a challenger to the ultra liberal President Obama to serve as an anchor, of sorts, to stop the President's alleged drift to the RIGHT! ". . . I think one of the reasons the president has been able to move so far to the right is that there is no primary opposition to him . . . ."



Sanders: Would be 'good' for Obama to face primary challenge - The Hill's Blog Briefing Room

This President (with a couple of exceptions which I concede) has been as far left as anybody could possibly be and still be an American President.

There has never been as far left a flaming lib in the Oval Office as this President.

Yet for the Socialist Senator from the lame State of Vermont, that's not far ENOUGH left.

Putting his "reason" aside, who agrees with ol' Bernie?

SHOULD the President get a CHALLENGER from within the ranks of the liberal Democrat Parody?

Bernie can challenge him if he likes but you and Bernie are both stupid if you think Obama is a left winger.

No Sarah. Once again (to nobody's great surprise) it is YOU are are wrong and stupid, dumb ass.

President Obama is absolutely a left winger.

Denial of reality is a hallmark of you ridiculous liberoidals.

 

[LibocalypseNow]

Socialists and Marxist Communists have a long history of despising each other. Adolf Hitler a Socialist,hated Stalin and the Communists. The funny thing is,they're the same entity in the end. There are no real differences between a Socialist and a Communist. They're the same thing and they're both bad for America. So make 2012 count people.