E-mail updates
Follow on Twitter
Subscribe to RSSMANCHESTER, N.H. -- Just one day after unveiling his new jobs plan, GOP candidate Jon Huntsman poked fun at front-runner Rick Perry and the rest of the Republican field, before highlighting his new tax proposals and slamming President Obama at New Hampshire's campaign trail mainstay, Politics and Eggs.
"I may not have the Texas Rangers, I might not have a large entourage," Huntsman joked to a packed house. "But I did bring a secret weapon that nobody has, and that's the finest human being I've ever know over 28 years, my wife Mary Kaye Huntsman."
Huntsman also went after the rest of the Republican field, calling for more substantive discussion.
"The fact we're not touching on the truly serious issues of the day, we are talking more about personalities. We are talking about venues where people are going to make speeches as opposed to the substance itself," Huntsman told reporters. "I think the country is crying out for substance."
In a diversion from his usual stump speech, Huntsman focused on his new jobs plan and highlighted experience living in countries "that we compete with," regaling the audience with stories from China.
Here at home though, Huntsman is having a tough time competing himself, with low poll numbers after a summer of sustained New Hampshire campaigning. But Huntsman remains confident in the Granite State and ignores the current poll numbers.
"Everyone is looking for the front-runner today without remembering we have probably had three or four front runners in the race already," he said. "And we are likely to have more in the months to come."
"We are going to win in New Hampshire," he declared to an audience picking at eggs and bacon. Huntsman made the same claim early last month.
While Huntsman attempts to break out, he said voters can expect him to maintain a civil toned campaign. "Civility can coexist with the facts," he said. He added, "All I want at this point in history is for America to save America...we have to get in the game."
Huntsman said he would balance China's human-rights abuses and economic opportunity "always very sensitively." "But the U.S. must be in the game in pushing for religious liberties and human rights, because if we don't no one else will," Huntsman said.
In a flub, Huntsman misidentified the Arab Spring as the "Jasmine Revolution," a separate attempted protest in China during his final days as ambassador.
For the presidential trivia lovers out there, apparently Huntsman doesn't care for eggs.
He declared he prefers politics over eggs at this rite of passage event.
"Politics I can do," he said, "but eggs I'm not much into. Good to see pancakes here."
Leave a Comment:
And in return we're getting more worn out whack jobs trying to out pray one another!
It really is a shame that Huntsman doesn't stand ANY chance of being the Republican candidate in 2012!
He's the ONLY one in the current crop of characters who isn't certifiably INSANE!
Well then - he just lost MY vote! lol
I'll take a avocado, bacon & Monterrey jack cheese over some boring flap-jacks any-day!
If the country is crying out for substance, they won't find it in the GOPTP.
Ron Indiana
If the country is crying out for substance, they won't find it in the GOPTP.
Ron
Although, Huntsman is sane--People are not into the Huntsman job plan-- More tax cuts for the rich.
Reportedly, Texans and the TeaPeople love the 'swagger man'!
If Blago, formerly of Illinois, is facing prison.....why isn't the 'swagger man'? His pay to play appears to be the same as Blago.
Oh, wait, I know.....Blago is a Democrat! Gotta prosecute!
The White House can't figure out why a budget is important, can't come up with a plan .... and now can't even schedule an address without it taking a couple tries.
Business lost confidence in this guy a long time ago. The American public has lost confidence.
Substance?
The country is crying ....... because we are not allowed to clean the irrelevant substance in the White House out until next football season.
On (quote) "substance':
The President and the Democratic Party above all want to create jobs & a 21st century America. Putting America back to work has been their priority for 30 months. Whereas creating jobs is not a GOP/TP priority and they've consistently blocked job creating on every level.
GOP Governors and Senators are interested in firing as many people as possible (500,000 government employees/first responders so far).
GOP House and Senate, TP/Corporations/ALEC/Norquist & right wing 'think tanks' like ALEC: have clearly shown that ending the Obama presidency is more important to their crash-the-economy strategy than creating jobs for all Americans.
Boehner has demonstrated his political anti-JOBS stance repeatedly this year.
chilled
Reportedly, Texans and the TeaPeople love the 'swagger man'!
If Blago, formerly of Illinois, is facing prison.....why isn't the 'swagger man'? His pay to play appears to be the same as Blago.
Oh, wait, I know.....Blago is a Democrat! Gotta prosecute!
Here's another Reason...
http://ametia.files.wordpress.com/2011/08/rp.jpg?w=600
"Substance"apparently means whatever the person using the term says it does. For example, although Huntsman in many ways is indeed a 'sane" candidate, he really is no different from any of the others when it comes to "substance." The entire GOP field, including Huntsman, ultimately does NOT want to govern the country. They want to break it up into pieces and sell it off, thus creating "shareholder value" - for whom? The shareholders of the big companies that end up getting some of those pieces, certainly - but not the "shareholders" of the nation, the American people.
The entire program of the GOP/TP is to avoid governance and tear down the nation.
There are 281,000 federal employees ........ that work just for regulatory agencies. (That is more than the total number of employees working for McDonald's, Ford, Boeing and Disney .... combined.)
They crank out a new rule or reg every 2 hours and 20 minutes 24/7/365 year after year.
How does anyone create jobs in this environment ...... well except for jobs in foreign countries?
Bev,
Gun toting, bible banging...........that's funny, and ironically sums it up!
Bob numbers:
You may be on to something here. If we can do away with all those damned inconvenient regulations we can cut some serious costs. We won't need cops, sheriffs, jails, prisons, judges or any of that other stupid expensive stuff that goes along with regulatory enforcement.
What other great ideas do you have?
David Walker...
That is one of the most IDIOTIC replies I have EVER read on this vine!
Bob was talking about federal employees (not cops, judges, etc... that are primarily at the local level) that work in REGULATORY departments. Cops are not regulatory employees... besides that... who would arrest all the homies looting the electronics stores? (that statement is there just to pi$$ David off :-)
Sorry to burst the liberal bubble but my dog could run against Mr. Obama next year and win. He's toast.
Lean Forward!...lol
mmnord,
"Lean Forward?"
What do liberals and slinkies have in common?
Neither are really good for anything, but they do bring a smile to your face when you lean them forward at the top of the stairs.
The Libs know what that is....lmao...code for socialism on PSMBC
Sick of the Bickering:
Oh federal regulation! You mean like the F.B.I., the D.E.A., the A.T.F., the E.P.A., the F.D.A., and stuff like that?
Idiotic? It's you people who keep bitching about regulation and then can't tell us what regulations you want out of the way. What is it you don't like? Clean water? Gee, if businesses could only pollute water, well, they could pollute water and of course pass the savings on to the consumer. If only Big Coal could pollute the air, well, Big Coal could pollute the air and pass the savings on to the consumer.
Get a grip. Regulations have a place. What you advocate is outright lawlessness, and that is exactly what we got when Wall Street began its systematic looting of this country. It's what we got with dead lakes and burning rivers.
Your buddy says business lost confidence in the President. What you chuckleheads don't understand is that America has lost confidence in business.
Another moron. The federal government borrows $0.40 for every dollar they spend. So to start trimming that back, lets stop subsidizing these "Green" energy failures like:
http://www.nbcbayarea.com/news/local/Solyndra-Shutting-Down-128802718.html
and this:
http://www.washingtontimes.com/blog/watercooler/2011/aug/15/stimulus-backed-green-energy-firm-files-bankruptcy/
Hey David old buddy old pal,
Sounds like I DID pi$$ you off... Mission Accomplished!
BTW... the federal law enforcement agencies that you mentioned spend most of their time tracking down your homies (after they left the electronics store i guess) for dealing crack on the corner, while packing unregister heat.
Those same federal agents really don't have to spend that much time tracking down Wall Street executives. So you are right... we DO need them!
Now crawl back to the hood!
Davie just loves his government. The more the better. Anything less, and according to Davie, we'd all die.
Davie is hysterical, just like Obama has become.
Who's ready for some more Gun Runner Follies?
Man they suck as this governing thing. Giving guns to criminals. Holder is just brilliant.
So if Green technologies are not part of the answer what is? I read the MSN article aout solyandra and it also said that competitors were able to produce the panels cheaper. It sounds like they happened to be frontrunners but the johnny come lately types underpriced their technology and product. It happens to a lot of new technology think of the classic tale of Beta vs. VHS. One came first but was not successful. The failure of this company although unfortunate doesn't prove that the technology isn't sound and the energy created isn't needed. Here is me getting all hope and changey but I'm not willing to bet on China or Saudi Arabia in lieu of the United States.
I know the right's deal is that green energy is not cost effective yet, but when will it ever be if increased research development and trial and error is not allowed. The GOP can laugh and swipe but eventually the cost will be effective and competitive. We can not all sit on our hands, continue to drill a finite resource and pout that the US refuses to compete and inovate. For those so enthused to not leave a debt for their children they seem non chalant about leaving an energy crisis for their children.
Hey Yellowdog,
You need to check out the Congressional Research Service - US Fossil Fuel Resources: Terminology, Reporting, and Summary dated November 30, 2010.
Look at page the chart on page 18 - We have more energy resources than any country on the planet and this literally is just half the story. It doesn't include shale, doesn't include new discoveries such as the largest reserve ever found in the Gulf, etc.
http--epw.senate.gov-public-index.cfmFu
There are tons of articles about new finds, new developments etc.....let me know if you would like a few (Investors Business Daily alone would probably change your thinking.)
Bottom line is that we have centuries to figure out the green stuff, in the mean time let's put people back to work and grow the economy with the cheap stuff we know works, reduces our dependence, provides federal revenues, reduces the trade deficit ....
bob 180,
I am a realist. I'm not running out to participate in "Burning man" festivities or signing up for a commune.
I know that the US has a great deal of natural resources including coal, natural gas and shale. In the interim I think those resources have to and should be used to provide jobs, grow the economy etc. I only think that there has to be a balance between economic growth in accessing these resources and jeopardizing the environment which we all live in are could potentially effect us all detrimentally.
Green energy has to play a part, technology always advances. I believe there is a need to support these initiatives now. With more demand for green energy and technology from consumers it will allow for its further propagation that will eventually lead to a less expensive, better product.
Yellowdog,
First, I'm sure I come across as an extremist - easy to do in an extreme environmetnt such as FR, but regardless- I do enjoy your comments and respect your pragmatic approach.
As far as "balance," I don't really see balance in Obama's agenda.
One fifth of our coal generation will be taken off line in 18 months or so. You are probably aware that coal provides almost 50% of electric energy generation, hence energy prices will start skyrocketing, there will be rolling brownouts and blackouts, and over 1.4 million jobs will be lost over the next years.
We have the technology to clean these plants up, yet altough Congress gives us 5-7 years to prepare to change lightbulbs, Obama allows no time for the coal plants to up grade.
This is his cap and trade agenda by executive fiat...... against the wishes of the American people and by usurping the role of Congress.
There is no balance here. I understand the Feistys and Bevs blind faith, it would surprise me if you really concur and approve of this.
Pragmatic?
I believe you live in Texas. Seems like I read where Texas has the largest wind industry in the US, yet for all the investment, when they need to meet the demand, it isn't there - it doesn't work.
When high pressure fronts sit on Texas all summer, the wind doesn't blow, hence no wind electricity when Texas really needs it and thus the threat of power outages.
What about the Gulf?
The shut down of the Gulf has/will cost over 400,000 jobs.
Does this seem smart ..... balanced when Obama sends billions to Brazil to drill in much more dangerous / deep water?
Obama has defied federal judges orders, defied contempt orders, defied governors and senators and the will / wishes of the Gulf state citizenry ....... why?
Ten rigs have left the Gulf for other parts of the world. Eight other rigs have been diverted to other areas. The energy industry has no faith in Obama's games. Any doubt about their coming back until Obama is out of office? He knew what he was doing. He literally caused more economic damage than the actual spill.
There is no balance.
Oh well .... right?
Thanks for your comments Yellowdog.
Huntsman - voice of reason and intelligence in the Teapublican wasteland!!
Substance huh? In the debate, I hope this equation can be explained: Record Corporate Profits = Need for Less Taxes and Regulations. Where is Katie Couric when we need her...
Bob 180 - As long as you aren't Bob 188 in disguise I don't see you as that extreme.
I added a note about the regulations with coal fired plants in a post yesterday. I warned that there could be a negative consequence to deeming the fly ash hazardous that would prevent this essential waste product from being used in concrete.
Listen I know there are some regulations out there that could do some harm despite their good intentions. I think Obama made a concilatory step in listening to business about redundant and ineffective regulations, there was a story about it on FR last week. I'm sure you think it is too little too late.
When high pressure fronts sit on Texas all summer, the wind doesn't blow, hence no wind electricity when Texas really needs it and thus the threat of power outages.
Correct that is why just like in the stock market you can't put all your eggs in one basket. There has to be balance in energy production. Balance which includes using new 21st century green technologies but that also utilizes the 19th century type production of electricity via oil and coal.
Obama's actions regarding oil production in the Gulf did not happen in a vacumm. Due to the oil companies track record in the Gulf, in Texas - Beaumont, Galveston and the coastal area there has to be some regulation. These entities do not always work in our best interests. Some of the air in our Texas towns are starting to become as polluted as LA.
Balance, I try every once and a while, but I'm not sure if we will have balance here at FR or even truthfully if I want it all the time. I will throw out a politically enduced rant from time to time and twitch and moan.
What was I talking about...Oh yeah balance at FR. I think we will have better luck passing a balanced budget amendment in the Congress and having it ratified in 2/3 of the states before we have balance at FR.
Thanks for the chat.
Huntsman is polling slightly behind...
http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2012/president/us/republican_presidential_nomination-1452.html
...ME!
And I'm not exactly "Mr. Popularity"...
He couldn't get 5 votes here, why does he get ANY press?
The media folks think they have their John Anderson, that's why.
If they do, it'll work out as well for Obama as it did for Carter. I seem to recall some crying on the left side of the aisle that the Republicans had pulled a fast one- that they'd let the democrats believe that Anderson hurt Reagan, when he really hurt Carter.
There was a similar attempt here in NJ in 2009- didn't work out so well for Corzine.
I'm of the belief that third parties hurt incumbents, all the time.
Because Huntsman is the only real candidate you got. Maybe Romney. The others are circus side-show freaks. Geezus, I keep wondering if the rest of america is really this stupid??
I'm of the belief that third parties hurt incumbents, all the time.
____________________________________________________________________________
Can't say I disagree with your point, especially in national elections...
Perot, Anderson, NADER(!!!!)
A challenge from within the party for a sitting president is also usually a harbinger of defeat, even if they beat down the insurgent.
LBJ had RFK and several others
Ford had Reagan
Carter had Kennedy
Sort of Ironic that the two, "icons" of their parties and their era, one Republican, one Democrat, were both instrumental in fracturing their party in an election year and costing their rival the election.
If he hadn't changed his positions on several issues in order to please the Tea Party, I would certainly take him more seriously.
After watching the spectacle on the last thread, about nothing more than a substanceless dispute over when to give a speech about proposed legislation that probably carries no hope whatsoever of ever becoming law in this poisoned partisan political environment, I have to agree with him wholeheartedly about crying out for substance.
Since January, at least, we've seen nothing but political theatre of the WORST possible kind, from both sides, including the suspicious timing of the debt ceiling crisis so that it ended with a phony crescendo right before both sides were scheduled to go on recess. And then they took the recess, anyway, even though the stock market was tanking and we were in the process of having our credit rating downgraded. And the President seemed to think a little bus tour would make us all feel better. If that doesn't make one cynical about the process, I don't know whatever could.
But frankly, I sincerely doubt that John Huntsman will be the one who changes that.
Hey Anna,
"Since January, at least, we've seen nothing but political theatre of the WORST possible kind, from both sides,.."
_________________________________________________________________________________________
This "both sides" thing will mark you as a "Phony independent" or worse. There is no constituency here for those without a "team" to root for. Welcome to the wilderness:)
Who you talk'n about Annie? Huntsman or Obama?
You are critical of a politician for changing positions to suit the prevailing sentiment of not just his own party, but of the country?
Really?
Tea Party - you know the Taxed Enough Already gang seems to have not set the tone of the debate, but to have won that debate.
After all Obama has already cut taxes and is now calling for more cuts.
Heck at this point it kinda looks like Obama has changed his position on several issues to "please the tea party" cause he sure can't seem to pleas the dems anymore.
Man the names he gets callwd over on the libbie websites is astounding. They sure are taking his decision to re-schedule hard.
Why is that? Huge football fans?
Around here, you don't mess with the Packers, especially for a speech that isn't any more likely to move us off the dime than anything else that's happened so far this year. My particular concern is not with that, however, so much as it is with the phony baloney political theatre that keeps getting substituted for real, serious, honest debate -- on BOTH SIDES, Spanky.
Take some ownership for your side, for a change, unless you want to be out here in the wilderness with me and Dangerfield. One of you guys will have to carry the picnic basket.
Yes. Your point?
Since when have I been an apologist for that? It's wrong, wrong, wrong, wrong, wrong, as REAL economists have been trying to tell him since at least 2009.
Thanks. I like wild flowers. Not afraid of labels. But if I have to have a label, just call me Anomaly.
Good ol Spankster..Always using the 'generic" tax argument. Pity he cannot differentiate between payroll taxes and income taxes or local sate sales and property taxes. Then again like greedy not a biz owner he most likely never had to meet a payroll. Most likely works in one of those "parasitic" occupations like "finance" or "banking" or "law', never really producing anything of substance like those of us in manufacturing.
Good thing for me and my "generic tax argument" that Obama cut all those taxes, eh Torpedo?
Ah, noble is the manufacturing business.
Man, you guys really have self esteem issues.
AM - I own my side, which is lower taxes and regulations. But then again the wilderness is cool too. Well as long as I can rock the motor home - my backpacking days are behind me I fear.
Somehow Spankster I don't picture you as the outdoorsy type. Can't shoot, no survival skills, never been in the military. Spent most of your life serving yourself much like your idols Palin, Romney and all the other republican poltroons who never really served their country. Nah, you prefer to play to fear as opposed to our more noble instincts.
WOW Torpedo! You were able to deduce that he cant shoot, has no survival skill and has never been in the military all from his name?
You are TRULY AMAZING!
I meant your side, in terms of the sniveling, cowardly politicians you support.
With lower taxes, then resign yourself to getting what you pay for.
And not all regulations are bad. I'll challenge you any day on that one.
Motorhome is now the only way to go, Spanky, for most of us. Much more cozy, too.
Nah sicko...The quality of his posts and paucity of ideas makes that readily apparent. Ever played poker much? Understand nuance?
You know something Torpedo... As a matter of fact I do understand nuance... But my style is more of an IN YOUR FACE player! You see, I believe that until you can back up your bet with results... no one is going to fall for your bluff. However, if you have what it takes... you only have to prove yourself early on to gain their respect.
Perhaps that fella sitting in the White House could learn a lesson from this discussion.
As for your assumptions (regarding Spanky's character)... they tend to lead me to make some assumptions about you...
SOTB:
Spanky wears big boy Pull Ups now...he can speak for himself...
ANd is Spanky harping on the old tax code thingie he loves so much? Say it ain't so!
...and here I thought he would take me up on the CERN study discussion I suggested we have yesterday...
...if only he wouldn't try so hard for mediocrity...
He is the only one you and your minions agree with. That is exactly why he WILL NOT be the nominee. If Democrats like him; 9 out of 10 times he is not someone the Republican party wants to represent them.
In 2016 we will be lambasting the goofy crop of Liberal candidates. What goes around, comes around. I remember saying the same thing back when you Liberals were on here ridiculing Bush. I told you back then if Obama won he was going to get drilled daily.
LOL!
Yeah ITM - we all l@@k to you as the fountain of intelligence...NOT!
Yet another intellectually stimulating comment from the Nasty Redhead!
ITM... what do you mean Back when?
They (like Obama) STILL ridicule Bush every single day.
It's really all they've got.
SickOfTheBickering
"Yet another intellectually stimulating comment from the Nasty Redhead!"
........he said, while offering his own intellectually stimulating comment about a 'Nasty Readhead' somewhere.
Drive your tricycle somewhere else...
you are no better than any of the rest of us with your AMAZING contributions to this vine!
SickOfTheBickering
"Drive your tricycle somewhere else...
you are no better than any of the rest of us with your AMAZING contributions to this vine!"
He said, as he posted an AMAZING contribution to this thread, proving once and for all that he is better than any of the rest of us on this thread.
Drive By Instigator...
You are obviously intellctually challenged, or perhaps it's just a reading comprehension thing...
But I said "you are no better than the rest of us..." US means all of us (including me).
SOOOOOOOO... Once again you got it WRONG since I included myself with all others and therefore did not make the comment that I am.... how did you put it... "better than any of the rest" of you.
You keep throwing mud... but it just isn't sticking big boy!
NOW... we could play this 'I know you are but what am I' game all day long... so I will state that I am officially done... you may have the last jab....
Go ahead... you know you want to...
"Drive By Instigator..."
Neat nickname. I like it. Thanks.
The right yesterday, spent a lot of time pushing the exact same theme: Obama is beign a self-centered childish cry baby about this meeting deal. Even ol' Bawkmann whined about it at some stop in Iowa. Of course, it's all Hannity could talk about on his radio program.
Obama, as usual, had to play the part of the adult, and do a work-around.
Makes all those others look pretty petty and small, doesn't it? Way to pick the battles, Mr President.
C'mon, 2012.
Obama, as usual, looks weak, confused, and ineffective.
Great post Buzz. Keep'm coming.
Smatter, Smiff- truth hurts?
Nice shot at an original thought.
Keep 'em coming.
The truth does hurt, doesn't Buzzy? I mean, your guy can't even schedule a freaking meeting without screwing it up. Obama didn't compromise Buzz, he ran away, just like he always does when Boehner tells him to take a hike. Now Obama has to compete with the NFL game. No doubt who wins that ratings battle. People are tired of Obama showing up for yet another one of his "Big Speeches" Buzz, he has so many of them, each one getting more and more boring with just more and more garbage. Which Plan is this Buzz, "Plan L"? Because "Plans A-K" have certainly failed. I'm sure once Obama gets Patent Reform and gets those pesky taxes on corporate jets he keeps talking about raising, America will once again be the great country it once was.
I know this is a lot of information to process Buzz. So take your time, and get some help if you need it. And you do need it Buzz.
JoAnna - your right, lets go back to the GWB years, they went so well for the country didn't they? All those years of deregulation, deficits, tax cuts and wars - boom years for us all...
With running Perry the bush clone it is like they didn't know what happened the first time.
Let's make all the same mistakes only this time we will starve the people.
Those lazy unemployed and hungry children just need to pull themselves up by their bootstraps. We don't want to hear how you lost them in the flood.
The rich and their tax cuts now that is important to republicans.
Here we go with the same tired mantra of "Obama is the adult". Man that is sooooo old and played out. Everyone involved is a grown azz man.
Mav:
We are in the Obama years now. How is that working out for the country? Oh I forgot, "Everyone around the world doesn't hate us"........ I guess you have climbed the economic ladder since Obama has been the POTUS...Your azz was broke when he was elected and you will be broke when he is gone. You are probably one of those "Obama is going to pay my car note out of his stash" people....lol....You Libturds are a ......
Dude is mighty consistent - cut and run.
So is cut and run the new Hope and Change?
It's got to be dis-heartening right libbies?
Hell at this point even I wish he'd stand up for himself.
Thanks, SMiff, for helping me point out something that is hard not to notice these days. Omama can't do anyting right. See, if he INSISTS on the 7th for the meeting, he's beign a baby. If he MOVES it to another date, he's weak. So to recap: If he says 'hot,' he's wrong, and if he says 'cold' he's wrong. iF he says 'up', he's wrong and if he says 'down' he's wrong. You guys are really showing that there is no pleasing you, no matter what the guy does.
Then, there's always "he's a RADICAL, MARXIT, EXTREMEIST" and yet he's "WEAK, SOFT, INCONSEQUENTIAL". Well, malcontents- which is he?
And then, you all get on here and whine because the rest of us refuse to take you serrious. You're wasting your time, Smiff. You are not convincing anyone with your nonsense, no matter how often you get on here and peddle it.
How is it going to be any differnet come 2012, when the American Public decides to not take this nonsense serriously, either?
BTW- neat (but shopworn) post.
Good night, Gracie.
"It's got to be dis-heartening right libbies?"
Yep. Sure is.
Looks like we might be headed for a repeat of the old 'lesser of two evils' kind of voting. But we still have to ask ourseves come 2012- "Do I vote for the guy that's weak when it comes to dealing with the other party in Washington, or the guy (gal) that's just completely crazy?
Sucks to have to have those choices, but I think I know which one I'd pick. How 'bout you, 'counlelor'?
100% about pocket books.
Better then than now. Fact it's looking like a landslide at this point. But I'm sure we are in for a huge recovery, right? Obama has saiud so already, what like three times?
Obama loses to a mop handle.
If Obama's minions bothered to check with Congress on their schedule, there is no failure or embarrassment to Obama. Yet, they didn't, and there was.
That's not the goal Buzz. The goal is to mock the stupidity of you and your tree house friends. There's no changing small minds like yourself.
Come on Buzz, this isn't that difficult, do try and keep up.
You're hook, line and sinker in love with Obama Drive-Thru. No mystery who you'll pick. If you want to pick the current guy in charge whose only defense of his record is to blame the last guy in charge, well good luck with that.
You must be so disappointed in Obama, after all the hype, after all the promises, and he's just so smart. Now he's the "lesser of two evils to you". Disappointed indeed.
You still back in that treehouse?
Neat.
Spanky too bad the republicans aren't running a mop handle. It would be smarter than any three republican tea party candidates put together.
For the love of America Obama 2012
"You must be so disappointed in Obama, after all the hype, after all the promises, and he's just so smart. Now he's the "lesser of two evils to you". Disappointed indeed."
Until he realizes he's gong to have to kick some asses, yes- disappointed. But not to the point I'd pick full-tilt crazy to take over the job. But- which one did you say you picked- Doesn't play well with others in DC, or full-tilt crazy?
C'mon, you can share with us.
Too funny. Obama isn't the kicker, he's the kickee.
I'll take the mob handle Spanky has entered into the contest. It certainly could out debate Obama. Out perform him too.
I do not trust Obama's decisions - enough said.
That statement is false. The country wants jobs. Jobs. Jobs. Jobs. Anyone that delivers will win. Obama has delivered some but not enough and if he pins the party of "no" with blocking jobs bills he and many Democrats around him will coast to victory 2012. Forget the deficit. That is a Republican talking point. Forget shared sacrifice. The poor and middle class have given up enough. It is now all on the shoulders of the wealthy. No more shared sacrifice. Revenues need to go up. Loopholes need to close. Give companies an incentive to hire. Raise taxes on liquid assets. Give tax breaks only for hiring the long term unemployed to fill a "new" position not a vacated one. That is the only tax break I am in agreement with. Nothing more. The time for "shared sacrifice" is over. The rich need to contribute going forward.
"JoAnna" would call you a socialist...
These days a socialist is anybody who is not into killing America like the republicans with their pledge to Norquist.
Don't worry about that we republicans are planning to selling our country off to rich corporations that could give a crap about America. We have scary propaganda words for you to worry about.
I like the broad brush AF.
Now tell us the new definition of racist. Anybody who does not fully support Obama.
Cause he's black and all.
Wait, actually anyone who does not fully support the progressive agenda in a member of a lynch mob.
So Navy, is that a neo-nazi lynch mob?
Yep, it is awesome how you all can so readily and easily address the merits of these issues.
Just change the subject Spanky.
Attack, attack that will show the liberals how smart we are as we defend the rich dismantling our country.
Are you defending your own over $500,000 a year tax cut or are you just a patsy for the republican party for the rich?
And according to Maxine Waters (Political Feather Weight - CA), anyone not supporting the liberal agenda can go "Straight to h*ll". The media doesn't even bother to pursue and follow up on these ugly statements from these idiotic congress men and women. Why bother, no one cares what they say, no one takes them seriously.
The thing I love is that President Obama is smarter than any of the Republican-Tea Potty folks and he will know how to beat them.
Yessiree, he's certainly been "out witting" them at every turn...
(I love) More unintentional Pom-Pom humor from the cheer-leading section.
Job1:
If he is so damn smart, why didn't he lead his party to victory in 2010? .....That's what I thought.....go back to sleep.
Dismissed......
It has been interesting to watch him playing chess while the republicans are playing tiddly-winks. The fact that they are so unaware..... priceless.
Great comment Americans First...
It demonstrates who is TRULY unaware. (Thanks)
By putting President Obama off for a day proved to everyone that jobs are not a republican priority.
I'll bet you thought the republicans were really going to do something for America.
America is watching and day 1 jobs not a priority for the republicans. I expect the republicans to keep saying no. All of America will see that jobs are never a priority with republicans.
America is sick of the tax cuts for the rich and that is the republican tea party only plan other than bashing Obama. If either created jobs, we would be flush.
You keep pretending that you are the aware one.
Gov. Huntsman is not providing substance. He may as well be another version of the Manchurian candidate. He was appointed to jobs in different administrations (Reagan, Bush I and Bush II), worked as CEO for the Huntsman Corp. when a Democrat occupied the White House and then ran for Gov. of Utah (a state of 2.8 million people, with a large percentage of Mormon voters and a huge shadow cast by his father). This is the substance I want to hear:
1) why, after spending time in different administrations doing diplomatic work, did he choose to leave the George W. Bush administration and run for Governor of Utah? Was it because he didn't get along with some of the President's decisions or advisers? Was it because he suddenly thought that as a politician he could achieve something a diplomat and CEO could not do? Was it because people were urging him to "serve," and if so, who were those people?
2) if he believes that climate change is real, why wouldn't he do something about it? Does business always trump the environment? Why, after spending time in China, with all its pollution and damage from environmental hazards, would he choose to dismantle the EPA?
3) What makes Gov. Huntsman believe that what worked in Utah (2.8 million people) can be reproduced on a large scale in places that are very unlike Utah?
4) Which advisers will he turn to? Is this going to be another version of the Bush dynasty or does he have a separate pool of people to trust?
5) In terms of a civil campaign, which Democrats does Gov. Huntsman think he could work with (in Congress or otherwise) and does he talk to any on any regular basis (as a Governor in a conservative state, he might not have to)?
The bottom line is that he is considered a liberal in a party that is so far to the right you have to wonder. He is basically your typical republican with the same supply-side economic tactics but they seem more palatable because he is rational and thoughtful in his delivery, albeit using the same flawed GOP mantras. Lastly, as a Mormon he has no chance of getting the republican nomination, the evangelicals in the party will never let that happen, same reason Romney is toast - he was done the day Rick Perry announced his candidacy.
These words from the movie, "The American President" are so true today:
They don't have a choice! Bob Rumson is the only one doing the talking! People want leadership, Mr. President, and in the absence of genuine leadership, they'll listen to anyone who steps up to the microphone. They want leadership. They're so thirsty for it they'll crawl through the desert toward a mirage, and when they discover there's no water, they'll drink the sand.
President Andrew Shepherd: Lewis, we've had presidents who were beloved, who couldn't find a coherent sentence with two hands and a flashlight. People don't drink the sand because they're thirsty. They drink the sand because they don't know the difference.
Dude - it was just a movie
And in end they got the blue aliens and everybody lived happily ever after.
Funny that they are now pointing to mildly passable fiction to make a real world point.
Seems like what you'd do as a last resort.
Nah Spanky, even movies have meaningful and relevant dialogue...
he would be a viable canidate if not for his pandering to the tea party, whatever corpoation that is, and standing for what he knows is right!
"KR" it wouldn't matter, the evangelicals will never support him. Viability isn't the issue, electability is - as far as the GOP is concerned. "Red meat" base pandering sells in primaries - not common sense or civility. He is way too liberal for that party.
I do not trust Obama's decisions - enough said.
And you trust the GOP's? As least the president is rational, not always right but I think he at least factors in humanity in his decisions - more than you can say for the GOPers - it corporations first for them...
Wow, Don, did you come up with that all by yourself? Such a well thought out post with such a good argument. Enought said, that is what did it for me.
You may not trust President Obama, but a majority of us do and elected him. I am proud that he has not signed the Norquist pledge to kill America like the repulbicans you so trust.
Ah, but Obama did the pledge one better.
He actually loewred taxes.
You applaud that decision by the guy you elected, right?
And bush and the republicans didn't while starting two wars. The first time in history and was done by the fiscal conservative party.
OMG President Obama lowered taxes for the working poor and middle class in the time of a recession, what awful thing will he think of next.
Spanky, what do you think of the republicans to be the one to raise taxes on you, but not the rich? The never raise taxes on the rich party is more than happy to raise the working poor and the middle class taxes.
Come on defend your parties choice to raise taxes on you but not the rich who can actually afford it.
Dumbaggers hate Huntsman cause he's intelligent. - enough said.
This country is in extreme need of capable leadership. Obama's could not have mishandled this any worse. The way in which he invited himself is beyond petty it reeks of DOUCHEBAGGYNESS.
I've been saying it for weeks the man is a laughingstock. It's no wonder why his poll numbers are in complete collapse.
The dems only hope is for Hillary to jump in.
Dude, relax it's just a time slot for a speech...
You mean it is the only hope republicans have left is for Hillary to jump in.
Nothing at all funny about Perry being chosen to lead us to the rapture. I think the whole republican party is the laughingstock. Lead us to the rapture, how dumb are you folks?
"Lead us to the rapture, how dumb are you folks?"
'Rupture". I bet he meant to say 'Rupture'.
For Perry to lead us to the rapture is not my plan. It is the Army of God's plan. We are going to elect Perry as President and Perry will be taking over the government for the church.
After getting a few more ducks in a row, such as killing social security and education he will lead us to the rapture. Don't believe in the rapture, then you shouldn't vote for Perry.
Religious liberties and human rights in China. He should worry more about America's liberties as republicans have been denying health care to women in their fight to end abortions.Â
I am sure unions have nothing to do with human rights. Republicans want to kill unions in America.
Let fight for things in other countries that we are trying to kill here in America, makes just about as much sense as the rest of the tea BS.Â
I forgot, he is the sane one.
substance's exactly one of what GOP field is lacking and might not have an answer to.
Which it will NEVER Get--as Long As Racism (B versus W) Exist!
The Name America will be soon be changed by those Immigrants who are taking OVER, while we're fighting against one another (and they LAUGH us to SCORN)--they are MOVING On UP--and tickled all the way to their BANKS!
Time for both sides to grow up and quit acting like spoiled children. We need to vote all elected politicans out in the next election. Maybe then our new elected officials will go to work and do the job they were hired to do. They all need to be paying into Social Security and enjoying the same health care as the rest of US citizens. The same laws that apply to us should apply to them. The golden retirement, and all the crap they voted for themselves needs to go. This needs to go on the ballot. What makes them better than anyother US citizen? Pay them according to job performance and attendance, maybe then we will see some real change.
Since there has been no recent substance regarding Governor Perry today. I thought I would take the opportunity to cheer that the GOP's plan to force sonograms on women has been stalled for now...
Austin Chronicle
Sparks Grants Temporary Injunction in Ultrasound Case
By Jordan Smith, 4:21 PM. Tue. Aug. 30
Judge Sam Sparks
Federal Judge Sam Sparks today issued an order, granting a temporary injunction against the state's new ultrasound-before-abortion law, set to take effect Sept. 1.
The two-page order order bars the state from giving full effect to the law until the larger case brought by the Center for Reproductive Rights, on behalf of a group of Texas doctors, can be decided. The doctors argue that the law is unconstitutional.
Sparks' larger opinion in the case concludes, in part, that the new law does "not compel physicians to apprise women of the risks inherent in abortion, inform the women of available alternatives, and facilitate access to additional information if the women wish to review it before making their decisions," he wrote, because Texas law already provides for such informed consent. "Instead, the Act compels physicians to advance an ideological agenda with which they may not agree, regardless of any medical necessity, and irrespective of whether the pregnant women wish to listen."
Dangerfield
Care to elaborate and more clearly define what you mean by "phony Independent?" One needs a constituency to be able to post on this site? Who knew?
No...but if you really are "independent" and voice your opinions here, you will soon have all the "elaboration" and "definition" you'll need...:)
Didn't say you needed a constituency, but that one wasn't extant...
Dangerfield
You say "if you really are independent" as if you don't believe such a voter can exist. I really have not made up my mind regarding the upcoming election. I want to hear more from Rep candidates before I decide. And, strange as it may seem, I come to this site to read what other Americans (on all sides of an issue) think and have to say. I thought that was the purpose of this site, but I may be mistaken.
Nah, stick around some of us leave ideology at the door...
Mav-3674058
Nah, stick around some of us leave ideology at the door...
____________________________________________________________________________________
I agree that there certainly are some who do, are you claiming to be ONE?
IiI- what dangerfield is trying to warn you about, (without going into specifics), is that there is an element on this board who will verbally crucify you for not being properly worshipful of Obama. Any criticism, no matter how well meant, is met with vitriolic abuse.
dangerfield knows whereof he speaks- he has been its subject on many occasions.
Please, do, continue to post. Please, do, bring an independent perspective, (which, I admit, I do not claim for myself). Just be prepared for what you will face.
It will not be pretty. You'll need a very thick skin.
,
Indy in IL - I'm not sure how long you've been reading this board BUT the last person who can claim to be independent would be dangerfield...
Even though he is feverishly attempting to re-invent himself you won't find ANYONE more partisan then him.
Actually, he once threatened to knock a liberals teeth down his throat!
A leopard cannot change his spots!
As for the NJ nut job... well she's about as bat @!$%# crazy has Michelle Bachmann!
Please stay tuned and you will see what I'm referring to! ;o)
I am just waiting for the elections to be over and the GOP/TEA party wins the White House(with any one of the nuts they have campaigning). Then in a couple months, they (GOP/TEA) will tell the American public that WE need to raise taxes, not just on the rich and wealthy, but everyone, including the poor. WHY? To off set the terrible mess when Obama left office. And guess what? No one will be able to stop them, because they will control just about everything. Then they will do away SSI and tell everyone fend for your self, put some money in a bank for a rainy day and your retirement. Then do away with Medicare, and tell everyone don't get sick or hurt any more, if you do, you will have to pay for care out of your owe pockets.
Gadhafi - 'Let Libya burn'
Tea Party Member???
This crux of the issue is, when democrats lose, there is only one possible winner: Republicans
Most polls have Obama ahead, but it is a pretty close race everywhere. Only one or two points, with Obama's approval in the high-30's and low 40's. It's not that the republicans will beat the democrats, it's just that the democrats look to be gearing up to lose to the republicans.
Even Ron Paul, the candidate the the Republican establishment itself hates – is within one or two points. These numbers do not show Republican strength, instead they show Democrat weakness – and that has just as much weight in a two-party race.
And since Martha's Vineyard, Possible Recession + Crippling Unemployment = 55% of Americans disapproving of Obama's performance compared to 38% who approve.
Economic conditions are THE deciding factor in an election.
If the dems can't fix their stuff, it could mean Rick Perry becoming the 45th president of the US. Seemingly "no hope" candidates have certainly won before due to their opponent's poor performance.
Bill Clinton. The obscure Arkansas governor, with sex scandals to his name even back then, emerged from a mis-shapen field of Democrats in 1992 to take on George HW Bush, the incumbent and military victor. Bush ran a dreadful campaign, got hit by an economic downturn and then lost some big votes to Ross Perot. Clinton won with just 43% of the vote.
2000. Vice President Al Gore vs. the 'rube' George W Bush. Bush did not run a good campaign. Gore ran such a bad campaign, he lost his home state. Never should've been that close. Ever. Should've been a cake walk for Gore. Instead it narrowed it down to a judicial decision over Florida.
It's not that the Repubs are setting up to 'beat' anyone. It's the dems are setting up to lose to anyone.
I agree with part of your post- and disagree with other parts.
I did not vote for Bush 41 because of Clinton's "sex scandals"- I could not possibly care less about any politician's private life. That is between the politician and his or her spouse, and, no, I do not buy the "if he/she lies to his/ her spouse, how can the voter trust him/her? Very simply, we do not have the same relationship.
I voted for Bush 41 because we were on the threshold of an historic peace in the Middle East, and I dis not want that process disrupted.
That lunatic Ross Perot put the kibosh on that- without him, Bush 41 would have won reelection handily.
That said, I voted to reelect Clinton.
AlGore was another story entirely- a story about a lack of character that had nothing whatsoever to do with his fidelity to his marriage vows. He refused to stand by Clinton- and refused to denounce him.
Had he done either of those things, I believe he might have won. That said, he could not be someone he was not- and that someone was too clever by half. Who can forget his "sighs" during the debate? His insistence, in the post debate interview, that the interviewer tell him that he had won?
I did not want that fool anywhere near the levers of power. Say what you will about many aspects of his term of office, when faced with the greatest crisis this country faced since World War II, Bush 43 rose to the occasion. No amount of fringe rewrite will change that.
I'm leaning to Perry- based on his economic record. That is what most people are seeking- an economic turnaround, and not one that turns a crisis into a tailspin. Obama is unsuited to the office he holds.
Due to the rules of my state, I will, actually, have to reregister as a republican, as the last primary in which I voted was as a democrat. I will do that, but I am not yet ready to declare, decisively, for whom I will vote in the primary, other than to say it will be either Perry or Romney. Why? Simply because New Jersey is so late; they will be the last candidates standing.
Oh, and this: study the history of third party candidates. If Huntsman runs under the "No Labels" banner, he will do for Obama what Anderson did for Carter, what Perot did for Buah41, what Dagget did for Corzine,
He'll just give democrats who would never vote republican someone to vote for other than Obama. That will be good for America, which cannot, under any circumstances, survive another four years of this disaster.
I hear it all the time MORE TAX CUTS FOR THE RICH I am not rich , I do run My own business and yes it is paid for
BUT
The rich or wealthy already pay over %40 of the taxes in this country , People with extra cash including the rich invest it in business which creates jobs ,and yes they as I do expect to make a profit ,That is not always the case sometimes we lose . that's the risk ,
WELL people including the rich are not investing in this country , NOT A GOOD RISK , and part of that is the taxes
WHILE THOSE THAT CONDEMN THOSE THAT ARE SUCCESSFUL , and want to take even more of their money from them , I would really like to know what your goals are ,if you have any , Maybe you are satisfied with government assistance all your life ,I really don't know
BUT
America and Americans are about Goals ,dreams and accomplishment , AMERICANS as a whole don't like second best , It's not who we are ,
SO I would say this to the Class war fair crusaders , GO OUT AND MAKE YOUR OWN SUCCESS , then talk
I put in 16 plus hours a day sometimes seven days a week ,I pay %25 of every dollar I make out in taxes , Hourly often My people make more than I do ,
AND AND you want more tell ME HOW MUCH DO CONTRIBUTE ??