If this is your first visit, be sure to
check out the FAQ by clicking the
link above.  You may have to register
before you can post: click the register link above to proceed.  To start viewing messages,
select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. 

Welcome to the new PC Perspective forums!  Have a look around and tell us what you think in our feedback forum.  If you notice any bugs or style issues, please report them in this thread. 

Re: The 2012 Election Thread

Originally Posted by Keven

It's times like these that I understand why the masses just sit down in front of the TV all night and watch American Idol and shovel sun chips into their faces.  Sometimes following politics and being politically active is hard. 

Sad thing is, if people were as interested in politics as football.  We wouldn't be in the situation we are . 

* Should add i made the " all star" team when i was in school for football...cant stand watching it now.  Feels like im watching everyone else have fun.  Its like being a kid on time out during recess. 

Re: The 2012 Election Thread

Originally Posted by Invictus

I was staying out of this until now.  But your posts show a massive misunderstanding of how this economy actually works.  And whats even more sad is that you buy the job numbers put out.  Not figuring in the almost 1 million people that are no longer counted in the jobless numbers...i must ask,do you even understand the process they use to figure these numbers?? 

And the tea baggers only seem to care about Obama care.  They didnt stop any of Obama's power grabs.  Or the unconstitutional manner upon which he governs.  Im no fan of the Tea Party or the Republicans. 

I could go into greater detail about the economy or those job numbers, but i have a feeling the information would be lost on you. 

Keep buying into the hype, your just another tool used at the voting box. . 

And you're a 20 yr old Redneck from Florida that hasn't a clue about politics.  Obama power grabs?  ROFL. 

Re: The 2012 Election Thread

Originally Posted by Mountain Mania

And you're a 20 yr old Redneck from Florida that hasn't a clue about politics.  Obama power grabs?  ROFL. 

Cheney/ bush was the ultimate power grab......

Ah, the ignorant trying to belittle someone.  When someones argument is weak, they result to ignorant belittling.  I guess i must be a poor redneck, considering how high property value still is in this area...and the fact that i live on the beach. 

Your arguments are weak at best and totally unknowledgeable at worst.  If you want to debate facts thats one thing.  But to espouse Obama support considering the things he has down, shows a toolish personality or a complete naivety. 

Obama has done nothing if not bastardize the Constitution.  If you cant see that, then you my friend are as much as a sheep as the Republicans that vote for Romney. 

The Republican Party is crying power grab, but even with the recess appointment of Richard Cordray, Obama has made fewer recess appointments than Reagan, Clinton, and both Bushes. 

According to the Congressional Research Service, “President William J. Clinton made 139 recess appointments, 95 to full-time positions.  President George W. Bush made 171 recess appointments, of which 99 were to full-time positions.  As of December 8, 2011, President Barack Obama had made 28 recess appointments, all to full-time positions.”  Before Clinton, George H.W. Bush made 77 recess appointments, and Ronald Reagan made 240. 

Ronald Reagan averaged more recess appointments in a year (30) than Barack Obama has made during his entire presidency.  Yet, Republicans have deemed Obama’s most recent appoint of Richard Cordray to head the CFPB an unconstitutional power grab.  Republicans are threatening to take the matter to court, but they are unlikely to be successful. 

In 2004, Democrats unsuccessfully tried to challenge the constitutionality of George W. Bush’s recess appointment of Judge William Pryor.  The GOP congressional leadership is reportedly outraged that Obama would use a recess appointment to get around there obstruction, but interestingly many of these same Republicans who are outraged today were defending the constitutionality of George W. Bush’s recess appointment of Pryor. ( Democrats hold the same shifting positions on recess appointments, which indicate that this is more about political bluster than constitutionality). 

The Republican Party is crying power grab, but even with the recess appointment of Richard Cordray, Obama has made fewer recess appointments than Reagan, Clinton, and both Bushes. 

According to the Congressional Research Service, “President William J. Clinton made 139 recess appointments, 95 to full-time positions.  President George W. Bush made 171 recess appointments, of which 99 were to full-time positions.  As of December 8, 2011, President Barack Obama had made 28 recess appointments, all to full-time positions.”  Before Clinton, George H.W. Bush made 77 recess appointments, and Ronald Reagan made 240. 

Ronald Reagan averaged more recess appointments in a year (30) than Barack Obama has made during his entire presidency.  Yet, Republicans have deemed Obama’s most recent appoint of Richard Cordray to head the CFPB an unconstitutional power grab.  Republicans are threatening to take the matter to court, but they are unlikely to be successful. 

In 2004, Democrats unsuccessfully tried to challenge the constitutionality of George W. Bush’s recess appointment of Judge William Pryor.  The GOP congressional leadership is reportedly outraged that Obama would use a recess appointment to get around there obstruction, but interestingly many of these same Republicans who are outraged today were defending the constitutionality of George W. Bush’s recess appointment of Pryor. ( Democrats hold the same shifting positions on recess appointments, which indicate that this is more about political bluster than constitutionality). 

It's usually customary to include a linky to the original article.  Not surprisingly it came from a pretty liberal source that makes no mention whatsoever about the minor detail of the pro forma session:

Hate to rain on you and By Jason Easley's parade.. but the issue is that it was not a recess appointment as pro forma sessions were still being held.  Why not take some time to collect the 411 before coming back? 

"The most dangerous myth is the demagoguery that business can be made to pay a larger share, thus relieving the individual.  Politicians preaching this are either deliberately dishonest, or economically illiterate, and either one should scare us...
Only people pay taxes, and people pay as consumers every tax that is assessed against a business." 

Re: The 2012 Election Thread

I'm not Obama's biggest fan but seeing theres not an Independent or even a Moderate on the horizon he will get my vote.  We can go back + forth forever, claiming sources are biased.  Another EXTREME right winger is the last thing I want.  Romney (moderate gop posing as conservative) isn't even wanted BY the GOP, even though he has the only legit shot at taking over in Washington. 

Re: The 2012 Election Thread

I'm not Obama's biggest fan but seeing theres not an Independent or even a Moderate on the horizon he will get my vote.  We can go back + forth forever, claiming sources are biased.  Another EXTREME right winger is the last thing I want.  Romney (moderate gop posing as conservative) isn't even wanted BY the GOP, even though he has the only legit shot at taking over in Washington. 

And I believe wikki is about as "neutral" as both you and our resident centrist.  That wikki link (much like your politicsusa article) makes absolutely no mention of Bamma's appointment during a pro forma session.  Matter of fact.. it does not even list it under the "Recent appointments and controversies" heading.. this is all wikki has to offer:

On January 4, 2012, Barack Obama made four recess appointments: Richard Cordray to serve as Director of the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau and appointed three new members to the National Labor Relations Board. 

Nope.. no controversy to see here.  Just a lawsuit questioning the constitutionality of it. 

So, care to talk about the real reason the GOP is upset by the SCOAMF's unconstitutional power grab? 

"The most dangerous myth is the demagoguery that business can be made to pay a larger share, thus relieving the individual.  Politicians preaching this are either deliberately dishonest, or economically illiterate, and either one should scare us...
Only people pay taxes, and people pay as consumers every tax that is assessed against a business." 

The Republican Party is crying power grab, but even with the recess appointment of Richard Cordray, Obama has made fewer recess appointments than Reagan, Clinton, and both Bushes. 

According to the Congressional Research Service, “President William J. Clinton made 139 recess appointments, 95 to full-time positions.  President George W. Bush made 171 recess appointments, of which 99 were to full-time positions.  As of December 8, 2011, President Barack Obama had made 28 recess appointments, all to full-time positions.”  Before Clinton, George H.W. Bush made 77 recess appointments, and Ronald Reagan made 240. 

Ronald Reagan averaged more recess appointments in a year (30) than Barack Obama has made during his entire presidency.  Yet, Republicans have deemed Obama’s most recent appoint of Richard Cordray to head the CFPB an unconstitutional power grab.  Republicans are threatening to take the matter to court, but they are unlikely to be successful. 

In 2004, Democrats unsuccessfully tried to challenge the constitutionality of George W. Bush’s recess appointment of Judge William Pryor.  The GOP congressional leadership is reportedly outraged that Obama would use a recess appointment to get around there obstruction, but interestingly many of these same Republicans who are outraged today were defending the constitutionality of George W. Bush’s recess appointment of Pryor. ( Democrats hold the same shifting positions on recess appointments, which indicate that this is more about political bluster than constitutionality). 

Child eh?  Havnt heard that in awhile.  I cant dispute your opinion of FL.  Its a giant turd hanging off the rear of the country.  But im glad you have established yourself as a liberal elitist with homes all over the US. 

Your justification of Obama's actions by comparing him to another president who bastardized the constitution does nothing to help your point and actually looks as if your trying to make excuses. 

And i wasn't referring to recess appointments .  I was referring not only to his continuation of Bush's failed policies.  But the blatant unconstitutionality of bills/doctrines such as the NDAA, Obamacare, Illegal wars and invasion of religious institutions.  Not to mention his supporting by way of bail out, of the same financial institutions that put our country in its current state.  With out having the creditor of these institutions taking any fault or loss. 

You seem to think im a supporter of Bush or the GOP.  Nothing could be farther from the truth.  But you my friend, have drank the Kool-Aid. 

Re: The 2012 Election Thread

like I said...

Thomas Jefferson to John Page Fairfeilds Dec: 25.  1762. 
... But the old-fellows say we must read to gain knowledge; and gain knowledge to make us happy and be admired.  Mere jargon!  Is there any such thing as happiness in this world?  No: And as for admiration I am sure the man who powders most, parfumes most, embroiders most, and talks most nonsense, is most admired. 

Re: The 2012 Election Thread

Originally Posted by Invictus

Child eh?  Havnt heard that in awhile.  I cant dispute your opinion of FL.  Its a giant turd hanging off the rear of the country.  But im glad you have established yourself as a liberal elitist with homes all over the US. 

Best to just ignore people when they start hurling insults about where you live.  That's Grade A childish. 

Re: The 2012 Election Thread

Part of a good read about this countrys situation by someone that has seen it happen before. 

I had to survive a war that was precipitated by leaders in various European countries who were democratically elected.  Yet once in power, these power-crazed ideologues began to systematically usurp and overthrow the rule of law with the ultimate goal of becoming the government themselves. 

Their lust for power led them to shred any written constitution or traditions as they systematically imposed new regulations, laws, and executive orders geared primarily to centralize authority in the government as individual rights and liberties were extinguished.  Legislatures were abolished or marginalized; organized religion was forced to be subservient to the state, and respect for the sanctity of life was extinguished.  The owners and managers of business and industry were intimidated and compelled to be submissive and loyal to the state.  By the time the populace became aware of what was happening to their respective countries, it was too late. 

The citizens of Germany in the first four years of the 1930s would have found it impossible to imagine what became of their country by 1945 or to think it even remotely possible.  Those in Italy in the 1920s, promised so much by the Mussolini regime, eagerly voted the Fascists into power only to end up with a society torn asunder and a nation lying in ruins.  The same results were played out in Russia, China, and many countries in Eastern Europe.