Obama Issues Statement Indicating He Won’t Abide by Provision in Budget Bill

[formerlurker]

You would think Democratic professionals, who read the same numbers Republicans do and pick up similar trends, would be hanging their heads in despair.

They are not. They have hope. Their hope is that Republicans in the early caucus and primary states will go crazy.

They hope the GOP will nominate for the presidency someone strange, extreme or barely qualified. They hope that in a mood of antic cultural pique, or in a great acting out of disdain for elites, or to annoy the mainstream media, Republican voters will raise high candidates who are unacceptable to everyone else. Everyone else of course being the great and vital center, which hires and fires presidents. The Democrats' hope is that centrists will look at the Republican nominee and, holding their nose, choose the devil they know. Especially if the one they don't know seems to have little horns under his hair.

Republicans voting in recent presidential primaries have tended to pick the candidates who are viewed as the moderate in the race—Bob Dole in 1996, George W. Bush in 2000, John McCain in 2008. But in truth, there are some pretty antic candidates out there this year.

The great question of the coming year is not, "Will Obama reignite his base?" or, "Will the Democrats outraise and outspend the GOP?" It is: Will the GOP be serious? Will Republicans be equal to their history, their tradition and the moment? If they are—if they recruit and support candidates who can speak to the entire country, who have serious experience and accomplishments, who are grounded and credible, then they will win centrist support. And with it they will likely win the thing without which they cannot achieve the big changes they seek, and that is the presidency

.

http://online.wsj.com/article/declarations.html



Forget that and we have already lost 2012.

[formerlurker]

Facts eh? The weapon of the president? I suppose King Stinky holds all the cards doesnt he?

Repeat after me -- a government shutdown would have killed the GOP in the 2012 elections.

Whining you want more doesn't change that fact.

[Janice]

Hehe .... that is too much. That wsj article is shot with about as many holes as you are my friend. LOL.

[formerlurker]

Peggy Noonan a RINO too?  I should keep a list. 

[dandi]

Newt would have been in Obama's face, called him out and won.

If that were the case, Newt would have done that to Clinton in 95. 

Reality is, Newt caved when he all but had the game won.

[Janice]

Peggy Noonan a RINO too?  I should keep a list.

Indeed you should. She used to be 'all in' on our side. She used to absolutely 'knock 'em out of the park'.

I dont know what happened. Maybe the 'conventional wisdom' bug finally caught up with her.

Its a shame really. And shes not the only one in recent times ...

[Lacarnut]

Hehe .... that is too much. That wsj article is shot with about as many holes as you are my friend. LOL.

Correct. Dole and McCain were losers from the start. These blue blood northeastern Rockefeller RINO's want another repeat of those type of candidates. Bush was lucky. He had the good fortune to run against 2 sorry Democrats. Moderation will not get the job done. Repubs need a strong, ass kicking conservative that will take on Obama on the economy, health care, debt, employment, etc.

It is time for Boehner to stand up and fight on the debt ceiling and the upcoming budget. If he does not, the Repub base will get disgusted with him wimping out. The Tea Party might just put up a candidate in 2012 if the Repubs do not get their act together.  

[formerlurker]

Indeed you should. She used to be 'all in' on our side. She used to absolutely 'knock 'em out of the park'.

I dont know what happened. Maybe the 'conventional wisdom' bug finally caught up with her.

Its a shame really. And shes not the only one in recent times ...

Tea Party to the Rescue
How the GOP was saved from Bush and the establishment.
By PEGGY NOONAN

Two central facts give shape to the historic 2010 election. The first is not understood by Republicans, and the second not admitted by Democrats.

The first: the tea party is not a "threat" to the Republican Party, the tea party saved the Republican Party. In a broad sense, the tea party rescued it from being the fat, unhappy, querulous creature it had become, a party that didn't remember anymore why it existed, or what its historical purpose was. The tea party, with its energy and earnestness, restored the GOP to itself.

In a practical sense, the tea party saved the Republican Party in this cycle by not going third-party. It could have. The broadly based, locally autonomous movement seems to have made a rolling decision, group by group, to take part in Republican primaries and back Republican hopefuls. (According to the Center for the Study of the American Electorate, four million more Republicans voted in primaries this year than Democrats, the GOP's highest such turnout since 1970. I wonder who those people were?)

Because of this, because they did not go third-party, Nov. 2 is not going to be a disaster for the Republicans, but a triumph.

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052702304023804575566503565327356.html#printMode

I have had my issues with Peggy Noonan over the  years - I think I refused to read her for a year stretch several years back.   

That said, whatever do you mean?  Peggy Noonan has ALWAYS been a conventional wisdom columnist, and she is the first one to be critical of her party -- never gave a flying fig who was president, or who she offended. 

Perhaps you have her confused with someone else. 

[Janice]

Correct. Dole and McCain were losers from the start. These blue blood northeastern Rockefeller RINO's want another repeat of those type of candidates. Bush was lucky. He had the good fortune to run against 2 sorry Democrats. Moderation will not get the job done. Repubs need a strong, ass kicking conservative that will take on Obama on the economy, health care, debt, employment, etc.

Yup. Exactly right. Apparently you can 'see the writing' on Peggy Noonans wall.

We should see more and more of such 'conventional wisdom' proffered by the media 'elites' as the elections near. Especially if real conservatives enter the ring. If that happens, there will be a fever pitch to steer this conversation. And not towards conservatism either.

This is as predictable as the sun coming up.

[formerlurker]

Correct. Dole and McCain were losers from the start. These blue blood northeastern Rockefeller RINO's want another repeat of those type of candidates. Bush was lucky. He had the good fortune to run against 2 sorry Democrats. Moderation will not get the job done. Repubs need a strong, ass kicking conservative that will take on Obama on the economy, health care, debt, employment, etc.

It is time for Boehner to stand up and fight on the debt ceiling and the upcoming budget. If he does not, the Repub base will get disgusted with him wimping out. The Tea Party might just put up a candidate in 2012 if the Repubs do not get their act together.  

Read her entire article, and you are seriously mistaken if you think you can take the White House without the moderates.  You don't have the votes.

[formerlurker]

Yup. Exactly right. Apparently you can 'see the writing' on Peggy Noonans wall.

We should see more and more of such 'conventional wisdom' proffered by the media 'elites' as the elections near. Especially if real conservatives enter the ring. If that happens, there will be a fever pitch to steer this conversation. And not towards conservatism either.

This is as predictable as the sun coming up.

I love this "elite" talk -- you belong to some underground grass roots media group that I never heard of?    What in the hell.   Peggy Noonan, take her or leave her, has been covering politics probably longer than you have been alive.   

History, you either learn from it or you keep repeating it.   

[Janice]

Read her entire article, and you are seriously mistaken if you think you can take the White House without the moderates.  You don't have the votes.

This is the mistake many on our side make. Yes we want the moderates. But we dont water down our values to attract them. Instead we 'educate' them. We make our case why our ideas are the best. And rather than us moving to the left, we convince the moderates to move towards us. This is what Reagan did, and he took the states to a landslide victory.

Most Americans are conservative, even if they dont know it. But the left has so corrupted the language and the culture. Every election presents an opportunity for our side to 'educate' the voters why our ideas are the best. And it becomes a bit more problematic because of our current public 'indoctrination' centers (govt schools) we all attend. And the Uni's are even worse. Its an uphill battle but it must be fought ... our we will lose everything.

This is what we need now. Remember the media will always be in the democrat camp, so dont expect them to root for us, even when we do 'moderate'. They want us to moderate so that we will lose. Like what happened with McCain.

The 'conventional wisdom' offered by the media to conservatives is usually dead wrong. Do you think they really want us to win? Why would they offer such advise? I'll tell you why. Because they want us to lose. Bank on it.

[Lacarnut]

Read her entire article, and you are seriously mistaken if you think you can take the White House without the moderates.  You don't have the votes.

Many of the members of the Tea Party are Independent voters. There is no moderate party or group. That is just a made up term. Independent voters have moved away from Obama in droves. Most of them are right of center.

Putting up a so called moderate (your terminology) will wind up being another disaster for Republicans. A me too candidate like Romney will assure Obama of 4 more years. Voters want a reversal of Obama policies; not to moderate them. The perfect candidate for the Repubs will go after Obama in a vigorous way on the following issues. Jobs, debt, energy, spending, taxes, etc. We do not need a moderates to trim around the edges. Bush did not veto a single bill his first 7 years in office. Republicans better get some balls or we will wind up in the ditch with finances like Japan,Greece, Portugal, Ireland, etc.

[formerlurker]

This is the mistake many on our side make. Yes we want the moderates. But we dont water down our values to attract them. Instead we 'educate' them. We make our case why our ideas are the best. And rather than us moving to the left, we convince the moderates to move towards us. This is what Reagan did, and he took the states to a landslide victory.

Most Americans are conservative, even if they dont know it. But the left has so corrupted the language and the culture. Every election presents an opportunity for our side to 'educate' the voters why our ideas are the best. And it becomes a bit more problematic because of our current public 'indoctrination' centers (govt schools) we all attend. And the Uni's are even worse. Its an uphill battle but it must be fought ... our we will lose everything.

This is what we need now. Remember the media will always be in the democrat camp, so dont expect them to root for us, even when we do 'moderate'. They want us to moderate so that we will lose. Like what happened with McCain.

The 'conventional wisdom' offered by the media to conservatives is usually dead wrong. Do you think they really want us to win? Why would they offer such advise? I'll tell you why. Because they want us to lose. Bank on it.

Moderates may agree in fiscal conservatism, but will be alienated if social issues are made a significant part of the platform.   As such, the focus to win for a tea party candidate is the budget and the budget period.   

That of course won't happen as the nonsense (look, look what he said years ago) hit pieces are already coming out.    What a complete waste of time and resources.

Find a strong candidate and support him through the nomination process, then election.   "Educating" the moderates is going to take more than posting on political websites.   You want this candidate to win?  then be prepared to hit the pavement to start knocking on doors to make that happen. 

That never happens.  These seemingly great candidates never make it to the dance because they just don't have the support behind them to get there.  Then all it is on boards is whine whine whine 24/7 about the candidate who did have the support.     

Hopefully, that won't happen this election cycle, but I am not holding my breath.

[formerlurker]

Many of the members of the Tea Party are Independent voters. There is no moderate party or group. That is just a made up term. Independent voters have moved away from Obama in droves. Most of them are right of center.

Putting up a so called moderate (your terminology) will wind up being another disaster for Republicans. A me too candidate like Romney will assure Obama of 4 more years. Voters want a reversal of Obama policies; not to moderate them. The perfect candidate for the Repubs will go after Obama in a vigorous way on the following issues. Jobs, debt, energy, spending, taxes, etc. We do not need a moderates to trim around the edges. Bush did not veto a single bill his first 7 years in office. Republicans better get some balls or we will wind up in the ditch with finances like Japan,Greece, Portugal, Ireland, etc.

HAHAHAHA -- there are no moderates.  Ok, gotcha.     

Democrat, Republican = wide spectrum of beliefs.  You have the far left to the far right.   Blue dog democrats ring any bells with you?    Most of the members hover around the middle.  That does not make them "independents" (which by the way in MA is referred to as "unenrolled").     

One can throw around the politically immature term RINO with reckless abandon, but that doesn't remove them from the party.  Ditto for those blue dogs. 

You don't win elections without them and the unenrolled voters.    You may like to think you can, but you only need to look to history to see that isn't so. 

[formerlurker]

Comparing any candidate today to Reagan is a fool's mission.    Reagan's campaign was absent of these boards and instant news.   Unfair comparison.

The only comparison to that period is that Obama and Carter are cut from the same cloth, and are easy targets for the Republicans.   Let's hope they don't blow it.

[CG6468]

Obama: despite law, I can do what I want on czars

April 16, 2011
Barack Obama

In marked contrast to vows as a candidate not to use presidential signing statements as “an end run around Congress,” President Obama released a statement on the just-signed spending bill saying despite the law’s restrictions on “czars,” he will “construe” the law not to interfere with “presidential prerogatives.”

The move is an aggressive power play by Obama to gain an added advantage from the deal struck a week ago between the president, Republican House Speaker John Boehner and Democratic Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid to narrowly avert government shutdown.

The legislation prohibits government money being spent on four Obama “czars,” newly created positions with far-reaching sway over federal agencies but facing no confirmation vote in the Senate.

He's "construing" all of us. Or is that "screwing"???

I'll do whatever I want. I am king of the world.

[DLR Pyro]

He's "construing" all of us. Or is that "screwing"???

Time to call a spade a spade.  He's ****ing all of us.

[cavegal]

Just think how bad he will be if he wins re-election? He sorta has constraints now. Wanting to be re-elected keeps him at bay a bit I think. Without that he will finish of this country if he hasn't done it by then or is stopped.

[Rebel]

He didn't teach shit. He was a guest lecturer and "lectured" on the ills of how evil America is and how great community organizing is. He's a ****in' liar.

[Lacarnut]

HAHAHAHA -- there are no moderates.  Ok, gotcha.    

Democrat, Republican = wide spectrum of beliefs.  You have the far left to the far right.   Blue dog democrats ring any bells with you?    Most of the members hover around the middle.  That does not make them "independents" (which by the way in MA is referred to as "unenrolled").      

One can throw around the politically immature term RINO with reckless abandon, but that doesn't remove them from the party.  Ditto for those blue dogs.  

You don't win elections without them and the unenrolled voters.    You may like to think you can, but you only need to look to history to see that isn't so.

I said moderate party. Learn how to read.   How many blue dog democrats are in Congress? Ring a bell with you. How many are outside the South? Ring a bell with you. Most voters are conservative (not middle of the roaders) You read polls? You see what happened to those liberal, RINO, moderate politicans in the last election in state legislatures, Governors and Congressional elections. The voters are not looking for politicans that are moderate.  We had a moderate in McCain the last time and he got his ass kicked.

Like I said before, your boy Romney gets the nomination I say home. He is a flip flopping liar.  

[formerlurker]

I said moderate party. Learn how to read.   How many blue dog democrats are in Congress? Ring a bell with you. How many are outside the South? Ring a bell with you. Most voters are conservative (not middle of the roaders) You read polls? You see what happened to those liberal, RINO, moderate politicans in the last election in state legislatures, Governors and Congressional elections. The voters are not looking for politicans that are moderate.  We had a moderate in McCain the last time and he got his ass kicked.

Like I said before, your boy Romney gets the nomination I say home. He is a flip flopping liar.  

My boy?   Gee, for my elder your maturity level is questionable at best.   Romney isn't my "boy,"  whatever the hell than means.

Romney gets the nomination you are supporting Obama - yeah, I got that and stated so.  You like to repeat yourself don't you?

As for your comments on moderates.   Here is my post:

Read her entire article, and you are seriously mistaken if you think you can take the White House without the moderates.  You don't have the votes.

Your response:

Many of the members of the Tea Party are Independent voters. There is no moderate party or group. That is just a made up term. Independent voters have moved away from Obama in droves. Most of them are right of center.

I do believe it is you that needs to be brushing up on reading comprehension.   

[Lacarnut]

My boy?   Gee, for my elder your maturity level is questionable at best.   Romney isn't my "boy,"  whatever the hell than means.

Romney gets the nomination you are supporting Obama - yeah, I got that and stated so.  You like to repeat yourself don't you?

As for your comments on moderates.   Here is my post:

Your response:

I do believe it is you that needs to be brushing up on reading comprehension.    

Let me spell it out for your juvenile ears. Romney is from MA like you. You will vote for him if nominated. So, that makes him your boy.

I will not vote for him but that does not mean I will vote for Obama. Sounds like some of your screwball RINO logic or should I say moderate to liberal mindset.

Romney is a flip flopper and a liar and he certainly is not a conservative. That is indisputable. Next you will be telling us Scott Brown is a conservative. 

[formerlurker]

Ah, you are immature and extremely politically naive.   

Let me spell it out for you -- you stay home, you vote for Obama by default.

You keep telling yourself otherwise.   

[Lacarnut]

Ah, you are immature and extremely politically naive.   

Let me spell it out for you -- you stay home, you vote for Obama by default.

You keep telling yourself otherwise.   

I stay home and I vote for no one. Zero from zero equals zero not a minus or plus 1. Did you take some of that fuzzy math in school.  I have not missed a Presidential election since Ike.

You keep telling your self that Romney is not a flip flopper and a liar. He can not change his stripes and is certainly not a conservative.