C,mon, fess up, are you regretting your vote?

[rightwinger]

Let me rephrase:

Libs,

I regret YOUR vote.

Most sincerely yours,

Liability

And I am glad you do. If right wing conservatives supported what Obama was doing he wouldn't be doing his job..

Which is to fix the things the right wing fucked up for the last eight years!

 

[Liability]

Let me rephrase:

Libs,

I regret YOUR vote.

Most sincerely yours,

Liability

And I am glad you do. If right wing conservatives supported what Obama was doing he wouldn't be doing his job..

Which is to fix the things the right wing fucked up for the last eight years!

Well, that ^ was a stupid post!

Look. You have clearly established that you are just a poseur. Not a surprise.

But President Obama's "job" is NOT to fix things that the right did not break at all. The President's "job" is vastly more limited: and if he were DOING his job, properly constrained by the Constitution, which any true rightwinger would want, he wouldn't be doing a tenth of the crap he's doing.

I could disagree with his mere policy preferences and wouldn't mind him and what he's doing nearly so much if he WOULD confine his official behavior to what the Constitution authorizes a President to do.

You, a poseur, will never comprehend that because NONE of you libs desire a LIMITED government.

 

[theDoctorisIn]

So, aside from "...I have a friend who voted for Obama, and now he won't show his face around anymore.." (which of course is probably bullshit), I guess no one regrets their vote.

Sorry, this thread failed.

 

[rightwinger]

Let me rephrase:

Libs,

I regret YOUR vote.

Most sincerely yours,

Liability

And I am glad you do. If right wing conservatives supported what Obama was doing he wouldn't be doing his job..

Which is to fix the things the right wing fucked up for the last eight years!

Well, that ^ was a stupid post!

Look. You have clearly established that you are just a poseur. Not a surprise.

But President Obama's "job" is NOT to fix things that the right did not break at all. The President's "job" is vastly more limited: and if he were DOING his job, properly constrained by the Constitution, which any true rightwinger would want, he wouldn't be doing a tenth of the crap he's doing.

I could disagree with his mere policy preferences and wouldn't mind him and what he's doing nearly so much if he WOULD confine his official behavior to what the Constitution authorizes a President to do.

You, a poseur, will never comprehend that because NONE of you libs desire a LIMITED government.

Are you that ignorant of the American political process. EVERYTHING Obama has done is within his Constitutional powers....EVERYTHING
We have a body known as the Supreme Court who's job it is to maintain checks and balances. If Obama were exceeding his authority, I'm sure the republicans would be the first to bring up the Constitutional issues.
But, since there are none, it is easier for your side to throw out labels that aren't supported by the facts

 

[AllieBaba]

He said he expected those who had money needed to distribute it to those who didn't. As if they don't already.

I regret not voting in the primaries. Cheney wouldn't have been my choice. That was a huge mistake I won't make again.

What??????????????? Cheney was not even running. What are you talking about?

Whoops, meant McCain. I constantly switch their names. It's the white hair.

 

[Liability]

* * * *

Are you that ignorant of the American political process. EVERYTHING Obama has done is within his Constitutional powers....EVERYTHING

* * * *

No no, you moron. It is emphatically and clearly UNTRUE that "everything" your idiot President has done is "Constitutional."

The ignorance is entirely yours.

 

[rightwinger]

* * * *

Are you that ignorant of the American political process. EVERYTHING Obama has done is within his Constitutional powers....EVERYTHING

* * * *

No no, you moron. It is emphatically and clearly UNTRUE that "everything" your idiot President has done is "Constitutional."

The ignorance is entirely yours.

Burden of proof is on you.
Show where anything he has done is being challenged on Constitutional grounds.

The fact that right wing radio says so does not constitute proof.

I'm waiting......I imagine I will wait a long time

 

[rightwinger]

He said he expected those who had money needed to distribute it to those who didn't. As if they don't already.

I regret not voting in the primaries. Cheney wouldn't have been my choice. That was a huge mistake I won't make again.

What??????????????? Cheney was not even running. What are you talking about?

Whoops, meant McCain. I constantly switch their names. It's the white hair.

OK allie...I'll buy your explanation

You had me worried there

 

[oreo]

* * * *

Are you that ignorant of the American political process. EVERYTHING Obama has done is within his Constitutional powers....EVERYTHING

* * * *

No no, you moron. It is emphatically and clearly UNTRUE that "everything" your idiot President has done is "Constitutional."

The ignorance is entirely yours.

Burden of proof is on you.
Show where anything he has done is being challenged on Constitutional grounds.

The fact that right wing radio says so does not constitute proof.

I'm waiting......I imagine I will wait a long time

I believe there is a section within the constitution--that specifically states that the federal government is not to compete with private enterprise. Then of course we do have some kind of monopoly law--that disallows any single entitiy from being the "only" provider.

The government run health care option is designed specifically to compete with private health care providers in this country--& once the take over is complete--your government health care will be a monopoly:

 

[theDoctorisIn]

No no, you moron. It is emphatically and clearly UNTRUE that "everything" your idiot President has done is "Constitutional."

The ignorance is entirely yours.

Burden of proof is on you.
Show where anything he has done is being challenged on Constitutional grounds.

The fact that right wing radio says so does not constitute proof.

I'm waiting......I imagine I will wait a long time

I believe there is a section within the constitution--that specifically states that the federal government is not to compete with private enterprise. Then of course we do have some kind of monopoly law--that disallows any single entitiy from being the "only" provider.

You're just making things up. There is no such section of the Constitution.

The government run health care option is designed specifically to compete with private health care providers in this country--& once the take over is complete--your government health care will be a monopoly:

Your point is moot, the section does not exist.

 

[RadiomanATL]

I had 8 people in my family, including my husband who voted for Obama. None of them will vote for him again.

My husband is anti-union and found out after the fact that Obama is pro-union. Then last night he see's Van Jones on television making his racist statements and that just sent him over the edge. I warned all of them and told them that no-one goes to a church and listens to anti-american rhetoric and anti-white rhetoric for TWENTY YEARS and doesn't hear that stuff unless he believes it himself. The evidence is in:

Reverent Wright
Bill Ayers
Van Jones
and many more to come to light in the very near future.

So tell me about your freinds and family that would change thier vote now, if they could.

Your husband doesn't sound like he's too swift on his feet.

 

[goldcatt]

No no, you moron. It is emphatically and clearly UNTRUE that "everything" your idiot President has done is "Constitutional."

The ignorance is entirely yours.

Burden of proof is on you.
Show where anything he has done is being challenged on Constitutional grounds.

The fact that right wing radio says so does not constitute proof.

I'm waiting......I imagine I will wait a long time

I believe there is a section within the constitution--that specifically states that the federal government is not to compete with private enterprise. Then of course we do have some kind of monopoly law--that disallows any single entitiy from being the "only" provider.

The government run health care option is designed specifically to compete with private health care providers in this country--& once the take over is complete--your government health care will be a monopoly:

Where did you hear that stuff?
'Cuz whoever told you the first thing you list is true and the second thing you list applies to Uncle Sam, is full of crap. Stop listening to this person, immediately.
Here's a great place to start: The United States Constitution - The U.S. Constitution Online - USConstitution.net
And some excellent sources for your other point: Antitrust & Competition Law - Guide to Antitrust & Competition Law
You're entitled to any opinions you want, but it's best if they're based on real facts.

 

[rightwinger]

No no, you moron. It is emphatically and clearly UNTRUE that "everything" your idiot President has done is "Constitutional."

The ignorance is entirely yours.

Burden of proof is on you.
Show where anything he has done is being challenged on Constitutional grounds.

The fact that right wing radio says so does not constitute proof.

I'm waiting......I imagine I will wait a long time

I believe there is a section within the constitution--that specifically states that the federal government is not to compete with private enterprise. Then of course we do have some kind of monopoly law--that disallows any single entitiy from being the "only" provider.

The government run health care option is designed specifically to compete with private health care providers in this country--& once the take over is complete--your government health care will be a monopoly:

Oreo

Does this stuff just pop into your head?

I know Liability has run away from his stupid statement, but making stuff up doesn't help his case.



I see Liability still has yet to provide any proof of a Constitutional violation other than he heard it on right wing radio

 

[paperview]

I believe there is a section within the constitution--that specifically states that the federal government is not to compete with private enterprise. Then of course we do have some kind of monopoly law--that disallows any single entitiy from being the "only" provider....

What the hell?

 

[JakeStarkey]

No no, you moron. It is emphatically and clearly UNTRUE that "everything" your idiot President has done is "Constitutional."

The ignorance is entirely yours.

Burden of proof is on you.
Show where anything he has done is being challenged on Constitutional grounds.

The fact that right wing radio says so does not constitute proof.

I'm waiting......I imagine I will wait a long time

I believe there is a section within the constitution--that specifically states that the federal government is not to compete with private enterprise. Then of course we do have some kind of monopoly law--that disallows any single entitiy from being the "only" provider.

The government run health care option is designed specifically to compete with private health care providers in this country--& once the take over is complete--your government health care will be a monopoly:

Quote that part of the Constitution. You won't find it. You made it up. Next.

We will not have a single payer system. That was a Trojan horse from the beginning, and the stoopidcons fell for it, outing themselves. By the end of next month, a two-tier system will have been passed Congress and signed by the President. Next.

 

[NYcarbineer]

[Your husband doesn't sound like he's too swift on his feet.

That's why she met him on e-Harmony.

 

[Joe_Penalty]

I had 8 people in my family, including my husband who voted for Obama. None of them will vote for him again.

My husband is anti-union and found out after the fact that Obama is pro-union. Then last night he see's Van Jones on television making his racist statements and that just sent him over the edge. I warned all of them and told them that no-one goes to a church and listens to anti-american rhetoric and anti-white rhetoric for TWENTY YEARS and doesn't hear that stuff unless he believes it himself. The evidence is in:

Reverent Wright
Bill Ayers
Van Jones
and many more to come to light in the very near future.

So tell me about your freinds and family that would change thier vote now, if they could.

This evidence;

What type of person is Reverend Wright? Did you happen to wake up out of your coma and see his own DVD that he gives to all who want to know about his church. I suggest you watch it.

What type of person is Bill Ayers? You do know that he is a domestic terrorist, don't you, many articles on him and his ideology, just google it.

What type of person is Van Jones?

In his own words, a communist, in his own words, accuses whites of polluting black communities. In his own words accuses the Bush administration of 9-11. Just google it.

You can see all of the evidence, IT'S IN YOUR FACE, just google it all, it's right there in black and white on video on audio, maybe you can think of some fictional character who pretended to be all those people but I doubt that anyone would buy it.

Thank you for responding.

What does a Jeremiah Wright DVD, Bill Ayers being a domestic "terrorist," and some dude named Van Jones's opinion have to do with President Obama's ability to serve as President of the United States?

 

[Liability]

This evidence;

What type of person is Reverend Wright? Did you happen to wake up out of your coma and see his own DVD that he gives to all who want to know about his church. I suggest you watch it.

What type of person is Bill Ayers? You do know that he is a domestic terrorist, don't you, many articles on him and his ideology, just google it.

What type of person is Van Jones?

In his own words, a communist, in his own words, accuses whites of polluting black communities. In his own words accuses the Bush administration of 9-11. Just google it.

You can see all of the evidence, IT'S IN YOUR FACE, just google it all, it's right there in black and white on video on audio, maybe you can think of some fictional character who pretended to be all those people but I doubt that anyone would buy it.

Thank you for responding.

What does a Jeremiah Wright DVD, Bill Ayers being a domestic "terrorist," and some dude named Van Jones's opinion have to do with President Obama's ability to serve as President of the United States?

Are you serious?

When you know things about the man, you can ascertain things about how he will handle the job or why he is doing some of the amazingly f'd up things he is doing. The Rev. Wright is a racist thug who President Obama valued up until political expediency got in the way.

Bill Ayers was one of this President's compatriots -- notwithstanding the Presidents lying denials of how close they actually were. There IS a reason this President chose to lie about that relationship. Bill Ayers is an America-hating terrorist scumbag -- and part of the network of friends and supporters of the President.

The President APPOINTED Jones to be a freakin "czar" (whatever the f*** a "czar" is supposed to mean in our Republic) in the Obama Administration despite the fact that Jones is a racist, a 9/11 Troofer and a self-avowed communist -- or maybe BECAUSE of all those sterling attributes.

The real question is why you would even ASK a stupid question like you just did.

 

[Chris]

Thankfully Rassmussen polls are historically biased. They are a tool of the right wing to somehow convince conservatives that America still loves them

Do you have a legitimate poll??

fivethirtyeight.com rules.

 

[Chris]

In his own words, a communist, in his own words, accuses whites of polluting black communities. In his own words accuses the Bush administration of 9-11. Just google it.

You can see all of the evidence, IT'S IN YOUR FACE, just google it all, it's right there in black and white on video on audio, maybe you can think of some fictional character who pretended to be all those people but I doubt that anyone would buy it.

Thank you for responding.

What does a Jeremiah Wright DVD, Bill Ayers being a domestic "terrorist," and some dude named Van Jones's opinion have to do with President Obama's ability to serve as President of the United States?

Are you serious?

When you know things about the man, you can ascertain things about how he will handle the job or why he is doing some of the amazingly f'd up things he is doing. The Rev. Wright is a racist thug who President Obama valued up until political expediency got in the way.

Bill Ayers was one of this President's compatriots -- notwithstanding the Presidents lying denials of how close they actually were. There IS a reason this President chose to lie about that relationship. Bill Ayers is an America-hating terrorist scumbag -- and part of the network of friends and supporters of the President.

The President APPOINTED Jones to be a freakin "czar" (whatever the f*** a "czar" is supposed to mean in our Republic) in the Obama Administration despite the fact that Jones is a racist, a 9/11 Troofer and a self-avowed communist -- or maybe BECAUSE of all those sterling attributes.

The real question is why you would even ASK a stupid question like you just did.

As Bill Maher said, "The great thing about America is that we don't listen to our religious leaders."