A nun could never get elected. The "freedom from religon" people would go ape@!$%#.

I dont know any Republican nuns. All the ones I know are very liberal Democrats with a keen sense of social justice.

wonder why he has not tried to vett dick cheney's daughter.. he would have it all :-) LOL

Romney is not choosing his mate...It will be Norquist and Rove who call the shots. When Romney went to Trump for advice on the issue, Trump recommended Gary Bussey. Trump fired him before and Romney likes to fire people, So Gary is the likely choice. Hell he wouldn't even know he was fired so no harm to him.

Ayote and Chris Christie doesn't have any clue on how to run the country or the foreign affairs. It will be a disaster for the country if they are vice presidents. They are Palin 1 and 2. Ayote is in very small homogenous state that nothing goes on and Chris Christie has a lot of attitude and ego, but limited foreign experience. It is a bad combination.

Yes that hard hitting bastion of truth Vanity Fair....God help us no wonder liberals are so lost!

tom111 - are you saying Obama had those experiences in his resume?

I would love to see Fat Boy Christie get picked, just because the first time he blew up and asked Romneycare if he was stupid, it would be worth it.

tom111- are you saying bumbling Biden isn't a complete idiot?

I find it hilarious that the left are chomping at the bit to go after whomever is chosen, but with Romney and Obama running neck and neck, any of those choices would be game over for Obama- one and done! Kick he and Biden to the curb.

New Hampshire Sen. Kelly Ayotteplans to meet with presumptive GOP nominee Romney and march with him at a Fourth of July parade in Wolfeboro, N.H.

It is the culture of the conservative to seek to restrict the rights of others while at the same time claiming to be the "Real American".

Picking a women or a Cuban is just a "attempt to pander' -- after all --(according to Mitt and the GOP) these groups can not think for themselves and will blindly vote for anyone who looks like themselves -- no matter what. That is why they picked Sarah ("plain and simple-minded) back in 2008 -- after all, a lot of folks voted for Hillary -- so they will vote for any female (right?) wrong! Insulting a key voting block is not going to get you elected. As far as selecting NJ Gov Chris "Cripy Cream" Christie -- while on paper might sound like agood idea -- since he has been fairly successful with hisa own agenda in his state and is a "bull dog" on the stump and has a strong "aveage joe" personality -- it could also back fire, big time -- showing up little Mitten -- and only giving the public a real -life symbol of "greed and lack of self control" -- Mitt is a rich guy who is out of touch with working people and only looking out for the richest --while Chrtie is a big, fat, blow hard -- who asks other to tighten their belts -- while he epands his own. Cann ot ask Amercans to "cut back' while you are going back for 4ths @ the all your can eat line everyday. Joe Biden -- for all his "verbal mess ups --still represents the middle class and raising a feeding a family -- not eatting like he is a family of five!

Repubs rejected T Paw as a nominee for president. Repubs elevated Bachmann, Cain, Perry, Gingrich, Santorum and Ron Paul over T Paw. Rejected Timmy and went with lie wacko Bachmann, Gingrich and Cain both who cheated mutiple times on the wife/wives, Perry who can't remember what he is talking about, Santorum who wants to eliminate sex, and Ron Paul who wants a pony. If repubs rejected Timmy over that crowd of misfits why would anyone else want him?

These are some fabulous potential picks!

I would also add Senator John Thune to the list!!!

BrianB: You may not like Obama, but I'd argue an undergrad degree from Columbia, a law degree from Harvard, president of the Harvard Law Review, ten years as a professor of Constitutional Law at a top law school, etc. is not a resume you'd find in a Cracker Jack box.

Secret is out ...VP choice is Gary Bussey.

Personally I hope he does pick Christie, can you imagine the carnage in a VP debate between Biden and Christie. Biden would be in tears before it was over. it would be hilarious.

...... if a VP is supposed to "balance" a Presidential candidate,.........

Hi Amy!

A VP should help to balance out a presidential ticket. All too often many candidates are chosen to shore up a geographic area or another particular area the presidential candidate lacks.

In this case, the area is vast. He is currently trying to show that he would favor a female (Ayotte) and the Hispanic vote with Rubio (even if he is Cuban).

I just wonder why he hasn't tried to go for both by courting Susana Martinez (NM Governor). A female Hispanic would seem to cover both bases he's trying to court. But then again, I seriously doubt that he really wants a female or a Hispanic VP on his ticket. This seems more likely to be a smoke and mirrors ritual than anything else IMHO in his attempt to deceive the public as if he really cares about women or any minority race.

dslsca - Can you prove any of those degrees and credentials? Can you state for certainty that Obama has the high mark credentials of someone filling the office of President? Why did he have all his transcripts and college records sealed in a vault for nobody to look at and examine? Liberals are under the assumption that Obama has this stellar college record... hell, we don't even know for sure what colleges he attended... we are fairly certain he might have attended Columbia... that's it. Harvard Law Review, you say? I've heard this before but have never seen proof of it. Harvard being a liberal university would never step on Obama's toes to admit he wasn't there...

It takes proof for me to believe something and there's no proof to be found... no actual verifiable proof.

Amy,

I too just finished reading the Vanity Fair piece, and although it was obviously not pro-Romney I thought it was a fairly balanced, detailed look at as much of Romney's finances as possible. It is a shame that so-called "journalists" have taken at face-value Romney's answer that his Cayman Island and Swiss bank accounts don't offer any tax advantages.

I think anyone, Republican or Democrat, who reads that article (or does some independent research) would have to conclude that at a minimum Romney receives VERY favorable tax treatment due to these off-shore accounts.

I hope that more details of Romney's finances will be forthcoming over the course of the campaign. I am more concerned about the dubious backgrounds of some of the Bain investors than I am the "slippery" tax accounting.

TNSEVOL - do tell... were you this concerned about Obama's past, investments, personal involvements, background and history during the last presidential election? I mean if you are so concerned about Romney's background and have this high interest, please expound on your findings about Obama in 08. Can you tell me what Obama meant by hope and change? Did you fully understand his statements on fundamental change for the US? In your quest for dynamic information about Obama did you even once come across his explanations for how he was going to govern this nation?

I am truly interested in what you found out about Obama since you are diving this deep into Romney's finances and how his associations with a company he worked for years ago has any play in this election.

@tom111

Ayote and Chris Christie doesn't have any clue on how to run the country or the foreign affairs. It will be a disaster for the country if they are vice presidents.

Well Joe "asleep at the wheel" Biden hasn't caused any disasters even though appearing to occasionally lose touch with reality so I don't see how either of these two could possibly be worse than what we've got for a VP now.

Can you prove any of those degrees and credentials?

Wow, this one is beyond Birther crazy....

Brian, I'll take your bait if you start by answering ONE question that you posed above about Romney:

did you even once come across his explanations for how he was going to govern this nation?

and if you can, I'd really like a source so that I can read it for myself.

Hey, Beverly in Chicago. Are any of those people you list registered voters? I thought not.

Brian -

Harvard Law Review, you say? I've heard this before but have never seen proof of it. Harvard being a liberal university would never step on Obama's toes to admit he wasn't there...

Obama did indeed attend Harvard and was the president of the Harvard Law Review. Here is the transcript from his literary agent promoting his first memoir:

Barack Obama, the first African-American president of the Harvard Law Review, was born in Kenya and raised in Indonesia and Hawaii. The son of an American anthropologist and a Kenyan finance minister, he attended Columbia University and worked as a financial journalist and editor for Business International Corporation. He served as project coordinator in Harlem for the New York Public Interest Research Group, and was Executive Director of the Developing Communities Project in Chicago's South Side. His commitment to social and racial issues will be evident in his first book, Journeys in Black and White.

And from Harvard's website:

Excerpted from the November 2008 Harvard Law Bulletin

It was as a law student that Obama first made history—and national headlines—when he was elected the first black president of the Harvard Law Review in the spring of 1990.

@brianb - Next you'll be saying that President Obama doesn't actually exist: he's a hologram.

The PainfulTruth: "Picking a women or a Cuban is just a "attempt to pander'".

And isn't that what your boy Obummer did? He picked Joe Biden to assure he would look like a Mensa in comparison.

What would Biden be pandering to? Old white men? Biden was chosen because of Obama's lack of experience in foreign policy, where Biden is an expert. It turned out that Obama is extremely adept at handling foreign affairs, but a large part of that could be because he had Biden to turn to as a mentor.

A person cannot be a Mensa. Mensa is an organization to which genius level people can belong. I wouldn't try to guess which of our two leaders are smarter, but they are both clearly very intelligent.

biden is an expert at placing his foot in his mouth.what difference does it make who gets elected, the american people get the leader they deserve, and what does america want? one they will hand them money and false promises, just keep the checks coming, i'm lazy and wont work, so uncle sam send me money. our country is lost , the debt load will one day wake you liberals up when you become a slave to china. its to late to learn, god help this lost country

So Pyrich what part of "Born in Kenya" direcly out of the sales pitch don't you understand?

Just so you know, the birth certificate was drafted based on a phone call.

I think Obama presents himself to whatever is convenient and profitable at the time, don't You?

If he were as bad as you claim, syhcoach, no one would "assure he would look like a Mensa."

Why am I trying to explain this to you, anyway? Since there's no such thing as "a Mensa", only an organization called Mensa with a contingent of members I'm not really sure why I did so.

3togetready

Gets under your skin doesn't it? Liberals support Obama and nothing was revealed about him before the election... and look what we got. $6 trillion more in debt, allegations of a cover up concerning fast and furious, high unemployment, bad economy, businesses shutting down faster than water over a water fall, housing in a shambles, liberals all up in arms because they can't defend Obama... the one they thought was going to save this nation...

So you act like a typical liberal... telling me to shut up because you don't like the message I bring that points out the complete failures of your savior... I can see that telling me to shut up did not bring about your desired effect. You are the one that looks like a gestapo fool!

Blah, blah, blah Brian .... I asked you a question above. If you get a moment do you mind answering it?

Pyrrhic,

Where was Obama born? Your "proof" that he was on the Harvard Law Review is contradictory to the birth certficate he provided recently. Which part of his life is the lie (born in America or President of HLR)?

Layton - Yes I can. He is going to govern this nation nothing like the Marxist in the White House now. Romney has already stated that he plans on reversing course over the Obama administration. Now I realize that liberals find this unfathomable and not much of an answer, but to us conservatives it speaks volumes.

CNN reported earlier today that Michelle Bachmann was being vetted and neither she nor the Holy One would deny it. I would truly love to see her on the ticket and the Mittster is silly enough to do it, thinking that such a pandering move would shore up his support with women and the mentally unstable/insane.

DB- you really need some help,dude.

13en... not every error is a lie or a conspiracy. Also, FYI, Obama had to be persuaded to run for president and the most influential voice to persuade him was none other than Stevie Wonder. This doesn't sound like someone who had a conspiracy going back to his day of birth to con everyone into thinking he was legally qualified to be president. You jack-booted goose-steppers really need to learn when it's time to move on. Birth certificate??? College transcripts??? You guys really don't have a clue. The house is burning down while you poor deluded sycophants argue about what color the flame is. Good grief. It's truly a shame that you poor guys hate blacks and Obama more than you love your country and countrymen. Happy 4th to you, all the same. I wonder if Jesus was black or white...what do you think,DB?

DB and 13 -

I was hoping someone would catch that. Interpret it as you like.....

But bottom line, he did go to Harvard and was the president of the Harvard Law Review.

Sigh, Brian .. .thanks for the fact source. Was kinda hoping there was actually SOMEWHERE I could go and read SOMETHING about his plans. Guess not.

13n: His birth certificate says something about the Harvard Law Review????

@r u wade

Our country really got buried under debt from 2001 to 2009. And the liberals didn't do that. It was your beloved so-called conservatives that broke the bank. Try again,Spanky. It seems odd that debt didn't bother you sycophants until we had a black president. Why is that?

I live in Minnesota. I know of several individuals that were within a stone's throw of being on the I-35 bridge when it fell into the Mississippi River. That event is entirely on Tim ( give you )Paw lenty ( of nothing ).

He rejected a gas tax year after year after year that would have been earmarked for road and bridge repair, make people who use our roads and bridges pay for it, but he rejected it time and time again.

The very next day, he signed the gas tax bill for road and bridge repair.

The guy is an azz clown.

Phyrric Victory - tell me you did not actually post this line:

Barack Obama, the first African-American president of the Harvard Law Review, was born in Kenya and raised in Indonesia and Hawaii.

Tell me if this statement is true, how is Obama qualified to be president?

He's totally phucked if he picks this broad for a running mate!

Thomas,

I really don't care where he was born or where he went to school, just that he was born in the US and did achieve some level of education that would make him worthy of leading this country. This "transparent" organization he promised is proving to be more opaque than Bush's. Can we please just him to speak the truth and stop hiding behind sealed documents (could prove he washed out and dropped out).

Mitt is not a good choice either, but when your back is against the wall and the economy is falling apart, do you want someone that has no experience in business or someone that does (albiet not favorable history, but produced results)?

Brian -

Freudian Slip on my part? LOL

But my point still stands. He did go to Harvard. Period.

Brianb: so, his literary agent made an error in a press release years ago. Has no one ever made an error in writing or speaking about you? When I was a kid in the 1960s, a local minister gave me a Bible in 1965 and in signing the "this is a gift from" space, dated it 1945 instead of 1965. Can I use that as proof I'm old enough for Medicare even though my birth certificate has a much later date on it????????

You ask "if this statement is true." Simple answer: it isn't (and I think you knew that before you posted).

Whomever Mittens is looking for as His veep, you can be sure He's hoping for someone who has a literal accomplished record in the art of "Vice". Doesn't figure He'll have time to teach'em himself.

13en...good response and I'm glad to hear a civil and rational statement from one opposed to Obama. I think his education and intelligence are self-evident. The state of Hawaii has proven to every reasonable person's satisfaction that he has born in Hawaii and is, in fact, American born. There are many things about President Obama that trouble me. Birth certificates and education don't even crack the top 100. Let's move on and have a grown up discussion. And most disturbingly to me is that while I believe that I could have done a better job than Mr. Obama, the alternative at present is terrifying. Bushco very nearly destroyed our nation. He did destroy our economy. And Romney wants to hire his inner circle and return to his proven-to-fail policies. Now I would love to vote for someone other than President Obama but I would move to Sweden before I would vote for Romney or almost any other repugnican. It says a lot about the GOP that their best and most qualified candidate, Huntsman, was the first to drop out. Huntsman or Dean would be viable alternatives. Or Robert Reich. But given a choice between Obama and Romney, that's no choice. Romney is a thief and a scumbag who has gotten rich by ruining other people's lives. It would be fantasy to believe that suddenly he cares about other people. I am convinced that regardless of Mr. Obama's liabilities, he cares for other people. This consideration alone disqualifies Romney. Romney's experience is not at helping all in a win-win situation. It is about preying on those weaker than him. I don't think that's a quality I want in my president. I find it equally disturbing that so many on the right cannot even admit that Obama is their president. He is the legal president of every American. So if he's not "your president", by definition, you're not American. So why is anyone who is not American participating in these discussions? Very troubling how much hate the reich has.

Like I said Layton, it goes right over your head. It's an implied definition. Hope and change is implied... how many different ways? Pretty nonspecific. Everyone I knew had a different definition for hope and change and that was exactly what Obama wanted - complete and total individual opinion where he didn't have to define anything he said... but you voted for him anyway... and look what we got... worst president in the history of this nation.

Like I said Layton, it goes right over your head

Was waiting for that one! I've so noted that when you ask a specific question to GOP'rs and they cannot come up with an answer, then it's time to resort to third grade tactics and call names and hurl insults. I'll be the judge of what's over my head or not, Brian. The rest of your post, nothing but regurgitated drivel like the previous posts.

CNN reported earlier today that Michelle Bachmann was being vetted

As if Bible Spice wasn't enough to scare the @!$%# out of you...

Now their going full blown bat @!$%# crazy with Bachmann!

Phyrric and dsl,

AHHHHHHHHHHHH a literary agent tells the world he was born in Kenya... and you believe in the credibility of this person? My bad.... of course you do... just like you have faith in everything Obama himself says.

Doesn't explain the reason for the lock and vault over his education records and personal information. If this were a republican, you would be screaming from the mountain tops how bad it is and appears...

Stop making up excuses... look at the obvious.

I don't see a lock and vault over his records at all. I've seen his birth certificate all over the web. As a retired college professor, I know the accrediting agencies require all the post-high school transcripts for anyone who teaches at a college (as Obama did at U of Chicago) and I know how picky they are about such things, so I'm good with his education.

I have made no excuses and the truth about Obama's birth and education does seem obvious to me.

BrianB: You may not like Obama, but I'd argue an undergrad degree from Columbia, a law degree from Harvard, president of the Harvard Law Review, ten years as a professor of Constitutional Law at a top law school, etc. is not a resume you'd find in a Cracker Jack box.

dslsca

best check your facts as Obama was never a professor of Constitutional Law

rocky: learn to use Newsvine's quotation feature when you quote others.

I think I'll take the U of Chicago's word for it that he taught there for a decade.

Layton, I gave you an answer. I can't help it if you don't grasp it. That's not my problem. I don't speak Obama... so that really creates a communication problem since you only seem to understand his ambiguities. Stop being so friggen sensitive. I didn't hurl any insult at you... to feign being hurt over anything said, makes you look pretty childish.

Brianb - there you go making up lies again. Plus, you really should keep up. Valerie Jarred left the White House some time ago. The idiotcy of the birth certificate - yet again? Do you not just feel dumber than a box of rocks when you post that nonsense? And, Harvard Law Review - yep! Not only has Harvard declared this to be true - there are photos announcing his heading Harvard Review. You just are beneath contempt.

What other lies are you basing your hatred on? See, when you have to lie about someone in order to hate them, it says everything about you - nothing about them. It says you're stupid, lack integrity, lack honor - you just are really nothing!

Obama/Biden 2012

Interesting stuff. While doing a search on Obama's educational records I came across these articles...

http://www.wnd.com/2009/06/100613/

http://wiki.answers.com/Q/Where_can_i_view_obama's_education_records

http://theulstermanreport.com/2012/05/29/why-is-barack-obama-hiding-his-college-records/

If Romney thinks Bachmann would deliver Minnesota into his column, lolololololololololol, he needs to pull his head out of his azzzzzzzzzzzzz, lololololololoolol.

SeekingSanity- you'll never find that sanity as long as you're exchanging words with the likes of Brianb. He made my ignore list a long time ago. It's amazing how much less annoying this blog is when you liberally use the "ignore this author" feature. I think the mental and emotional illnesses of most of those on the hard right is self-evident enough that once they establish that all they want to do is make up $h!t and roll around in the mud, it's time to not be bothered by them any more.

Feisty - Oh I soooooo hope he picks Michelle Bachmann - what fun will that be? The lost in the headlights look daily and her continued stupidity every time she opens her mouth. And, debating Joe Biden - OMG - he'd make her look even stupider than she usually does.

Please! Please! Please! Make it Bachmann!!!!

Thomas - seeking sanity in the GOP - never to be found. You're right about Brianb - he seems to have totally gone over the edge!

Obama/Biden 2012 for some sanity in politics!

BrianB: the answers.com link is just to a form--no information there. wnd.com is "WorldNetDaily (WND) is an American web site that publishes news and associated content from the perspective of U.S. conservatives and the political right" and thus is hardly unbiased.

You seem to think it odd that college records are, by law, kept private. I've never seen ANY presidential candidate's college transcript. Have you??

I was a college professor and Dean for 29 years. I can assure you that the U of Chicago's accrediting agency had all of Obama's transcripts or he'd never have been allowed in front of the classroom for even a minute.

Condi Rice...

ABO 2012!

Chris Christie reminds me of the line from Mr. Saturdaynight

Look it's New Jersey in pants.

Brianb...WorldNetDaily? Really?

Well, it does explain a lot...

By the way, find a job yet? Or are you holding out for a "management position"...

Romney just hired Guatemalan illegal alien for VP job. Pepe Gonzalez was announced as Vice President pick of Romney. His job will be to trim bushes and mow and water the lawns. Good plan , kills two job openings with one choice. Romney can really squeeze a penny.

Ok now for real story on Romney hiring illegals. When caught Romney does not call ICE to have them deported, he just turns them loose.

Romney...the job provider...to Illegal aliens.

From Politico.com dec 4 2007 ROMNEY HIRES ILLEGALS!

The morning after last week's debate "immigrants from Central America who say they are here illegally were in plain view on the lawn in front of Romney’s salmon-colored mansion in Belmont. Chatting in Spanish, they hustled to rake massive clumps of leaves, dump them in barrels, and clear debris from his tennis court.

Their boss, Ricardo Saenz of Chelsea, was the same man who for a decade brought illegal immigrants and others to work for Romney, whom he had met through their shared Mormon faith. A year ago, the Globe broke the news that illegal immigrants landscaped Romney’s 2.5-acre property.

In the past two months, the Globe observed Saenz and his crew at Romney's estate once a week, except during the week of Thanksgiving. The lawn work at Romney's usually took place around noon, then the crew drove a few houses down the street to the home owned by Taggart Romney, one of Mitt Romney's sons, where they worked for about an hour. The work was sandwiched in between other jobs elsewhere, on workdays that sometimes lasted 10 to 12 hours.

Last Thursday, the Globe interviewed two of the three workers who were at Romney's house. Both said they were illegal immigrants from Guatemala; one of the immigrants said the third worker was also here illegally. After the first snow, one of the workers said he went on to another job for another employer after Saenz said they would not return to Romney's house until next spring.

All those millions, and he can't hire Americans to work on the properties.....How cheap and unAmerican can one man be?

Romney/Christie: Beacon Hill meets Jersey Shore

Saturday Night Live will have a field day with this pair up......

Pyrrhic

Glad not to disappoint. And yeah, one of a few dozen things we can actually prove without question.

@Rod_Father

I live in Minnesota. I know of several individuals that were within a stone's throw of being on the I-35 bridge when it fell into the Mississippi River. That event is entirely on Tim ( give you )Paw lenty ( of nothing ).

Really?? It's the fault of a state Governor for not raising the money required to repair a Federal highway? Did you fall out of your chair reaching for that one?

What's the reach? The Federal government paid 90% of the original construction cost of the interstate highway system and SOMETIMES kicks some assistance for improvements. Otherwise maintenance is 100% on the states.

Michelle Bachmann had a ride in a corvette, now she is claiming she was being Vetted for the VP job!

13en -- You might want to lay off the Kool-Aid, or you'll OD. Wow!

There is no VP pick that could ever compensate for such a flawed front runner.

According to David Cay Johnston, Romney's refusal to release his tax returns indicates that Romney has "been thinking about this since before Bain" but the American people deserve to learn:

Did Romney buy illegal, gray-market tax shelters?

Was Romney audited in a way that the government found serious problems?

Did Romney make use of offshore vehicles in order to defer or not pay taxes?

Did Romney take advantage of things that were not caught in audits by the IRS?

If Romney's returns are clean, if there's nothing to worry about, then why not just provide them?

Even rightwingers are starting to wonder about the date Romney claims he stopped working for Bain Capital -- Because of the large amount of money Romney appears to have made from Stericyle, a medical waste company that disposes of fetuses from abortions. That's not my personal concern, but to the Churchy people out there, you can find out IF we ever get a gander at Romney's tax returns.

What we do know, with or without his tax returns, Romney only cares about money. Romney -- He's not in it for you.

[Otherwise maintenance is 100% on the states.]

You are correct...states can ask for Federal dollars to help with the more costly or critical repairs, something Pawlenty didn't do...seems he was "too proud" to ask the Feds for a "handout". It is the individual states that are responsible for regular maintenance and costs, also something T-Paw failed to do.

Of the 9 'Battleground' states, Romney only has to win 4 of them (Wisconsin, Iowa, Ohio and Florida) to get to the magic 270 electoral votes. According to Rasmussen, the most accurate pollster in the Presidential race in both 2004 and 2008 (less than 1% error), Romney is ahead in Wisconsin, Iowa and Ohio and about even in Florida. He doesn't need New Hampshire, Virginia, Pennsylvania, Nevada or Colorado, although he's 'neck and neck in most of them as well). Overall, Rasmussen has Romney ahead by 3% nationally (47% to 44%), and since most 'undecided' usually go for the challenger, it's not looking very good for Obama at this point.

Perhaps the 'smart move' would be to pick Marco Rubio to help ensure Florida and take Hispanic votes from Obama in many other states, putting them in play.

Don't be fooled by polls of 'Registered Voters' because they typically overstate the Democratic candidate by about 4% - for example, polls of 'Registered Voters' just before the 2004 election had Kerry ahead by 2%, while polls of 'Likely Voters' had Bush ahead by 2% - the final tally was Bush won by 2.4%. The reality is that Republicans are just more likely to vote.

By the way - the 'trend line' is definitely up for Romney and down for Obama, so anybody that thinks Obama is a 'shoo-in' is smoking something that's probably illegal.

The only reason Obama picked Joe Biden to be VP was to prove he didn't need one....He could rule over the country all by hisself.....

http://countdowntoobamaslastday.com/

Ah geez, Roy's back here pedaling the lie that Foxmussen is "the most accurate pollster" again.

Then again he admitted on another thread that he deliberately used growth in GDP in a comment when the topic was growth in health care costs.

There's a word for someone who deliberately repeats something he knows to be untrue, but the word escapes me at the moment...

Why does Willard Romney hide part of his assets in foreign investment accounts ? Is he in reality a modern day Nazi hiding the gold his family stole from the teeth of Jews ?

John B, Des Moines, IA "Ah geez, Roy's back here pedaling the lie that Foxmussen is "the most accurate pollster" again."

Apparently the liberal media has convinced some people that Rasmussen is not an accurate pollster and that he tends to overstate Republicans in Presidential polls, so what does the record REALLY show;

In 2004, Rasmussen was #1 in accuracy – getting it almost exactly correct, as even the very liberal Slate.com was forced to admit – see link;

http://www.slate.com/articles/health_and_science/human_nature/2004/12/lets_go_to_the_audiotape.single.html

In 2008, who was most accurate? Again, it was Rasmussen, who got it almost exactly correct, as confirmed by an independent study at Fordham University. In fact, not only was Rasmussen exactly correct, but 83% of the other polls showed a bias in favor of the Democrats in their polls – see link;

http://www.politisite.com/2010/08/06/poll-accuracy-in-the-2008-presidential-election-rasmussen-pew/

Now people who want to 'spin' their story will cite an 'analysis' by some biased source (like the NY Times), but it's hard to argue with actual SUCCESS. The claim that Rasmussen is biased towards Republicans is bogus, because Rasmussen got the last two Presidential elections almost perfectly right, while 83% of the other major pollsters had a distinct Democratic bias when compared with actual results in 2008. Polling bias seems to be a distinctly Democratic problem.

I guess the TRUTH hurts, huh John B, Des Moines, IA.

Roy, you get more and more funny by the day as you twist yourself into rhetorical pretzels attempting to sell the same snake oil. Since I've debunked you REPEATEDLY on your claim that Rasmussen is accurate using the same source (and numbers you've never even tried to refute) you immediately declare that the New York Times can't possibly be a reliable source. So let's go to a Conservative stalwart, the National Review;

Rasmussen's role in the public debate is problematic for several reasons. It's not altogether clear what causes him to consistently project results so much at odds with those of the rest of the polling community. But if there is something problematic about his methods, he has little incentive to correct it, because Rasmussen's business model increasingly relies upon maintaining the loyalty of staunch Republicans.

Now, to be perfectly clear about this, it's possible that Rasmussen is right and everybody else is wrong. The safest approach to using polling data is to include all results. The trouble is that Rasmussen can have such large outliers, and it polls so often, that the very inclusion of Rasmussen changes the results. The graph near the top of this item, showing level public approval for Obama, would show a steep dip if it included Rasmussen's findings, the latest of which has Obama sporting a disastrous 42/56 approval rating.

http://www.tnr.com/blog/jonathan-chait/75161/the-rasmussen-problem

Moreover there's evidence to suggest that Rasmussen KNOWS he's attempting to push poll the nation. You've only cited FINAL election polling in your claims of accuracy. It's been well documented that Rasmussen only becomes reliable and accurate just before the election. The reason is obvious--it helps maintain his tenuous claim to accuracy.

The Conservative "Free Republic" thought the conclusions and data of Nate Silver were compelling enough to repeat to their Conservative readers;

Every election cycle has its winners and losers: not just the among the candidates, but also the pollsters.

On Tuesday, polls conducted by the firm Rasmussen Reports — which released more than 100 surveys in the final three weeks of the campaign, including some commissioned under a subsidiary on behalf of Fox News — badly missed the margin in many states, and also exhibited a considerable bias toward Republican candidates.

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/2622176/posts

Looking at Pollster.com will find Rasmussen to consistently be an outlier to the Conservative side. The fact that they suddenly come into line with reality just before an election speaks eloquently to their intent to decieve. Here's their latest on Affordable Care;

Rasmussen isn't trying to inform, they're trying to actually change the story to one that benefits Republicans. They're blatant, they're shameless, and they're wrong

http://crooksandliars.com/karoli/rasmussen-polls-lies-damn-lies-and-statisti

But none of this will keep you from peddling the same blatant, shameless lies again tomorrow, will it?

John B, Des Moines, IA "Roy, you get more and more funny by the day as you twist yourself into rhetorical pretzels attempting to sell the same snake oil. Since I've debunked you REPEATEDLY on your claim that Rasmussen is accurate"

Nice try to confuse people, but I still have not seen any evidence to refute the acknowledged accuracy of Rasmussen over the last 2 presidential elections - rated the #1 in accuracy by independent analysts.

Giving links to acknowledged left-wing sites is hardly impressive - one of the nice things about the Internet is that you can find a link that agrees with virtually any position you might have - As you demonstrate each time you try to 'refute' the truth.

As for your NY Times baloney, their analysis is based on the assumption that Rasmussen was wrong and biased towards the Republicans because they didn't agree with most of the other pollsters, but that's clearly a bogus argument since Rasmussen actually got it right in both 2004 and 2008 and the others missed with a bias towards Democrats. So what they say is a 'bias towards Republicans' is actually a 'bias toward Democrats' from the vast majority of pollsters - for example, while Rasmussen got it almost exactly right in 2008, 83% of the other pollsters had an error that was biased towards Obama when compared with the actual results - per the Fordham University study - link below.

http://www.politisite.com/2010/08/06/poll-accuracy-in-the-2008-presidential-election-rasmussen-pew/

No matter how you try to 'twist the facts', Rasmussen's accuracy over the last 2 presidential elections (#1 in both) is unmatched.

Thanks for the laugh though about how you supposedly 'Refuted' my post.

RoyW:

the acknowledged accuracy of Rasmussen over the last 2 presidential elections - rated the #1 in accuracy by independent analysts

I don't know where you're getting your information or who your "independent analysts" are, but politicaloddsmaker of Campaigns and Elections magazine is widely acknowledged by statisticians as the best predictor of election results. It currently shows Obama ahead at the very outside edge of the margin of error.

dslsca "RoyW:I don't know where you're getting your information or who your "independent analysts" are"

I linked the studies, but just to refresh;

For 2004, it was the left-leaning Slate.com.

For 2008, it was Fordham University.

Here are the links again;

http://www.slate.com/articles/health_and_science/human_nature/2004/12/lets_go_to_the_audiotape.single.html

http://www.politisite.com/2010/08/06/poll-accuracy-in-the-2008-presidential-election-rasmussen-pew/

What's humorous about John B, Des Moines, IA claiming that he 'refuted' the accuracy of Rasmussen by quoting studies that claimed that Rasmussen was 'biased toward the Republicans' merely because his poll didn't agree with most of the others, but the reality is that Rasmussen got it right, and the vast majority of the others showed a distinct bias in favor of Obama when compared with the actual results. That's like saying "yes, he got it right, but he was biased because he didn't agree with the other pollsters who got it wrong".

The other thing to be cautious about with many polls is that they usually use polls of 'Registered Voters' which skews the results towards the Democrats by about 4% because history shows that Republicans are much more likely to vote - for example, polls of Registered Voters in 2004 showed Kerry ahead by 2%, but polls of 'Likely Voters' showed Bush ahead by 2% - the actual result was Bush won by 2.4%. A good 'rule of thumb' is to take any 'Registered Voter' poll and deduct about 4% from the Democrat's poll numbers.

Don't worry about it. Roy is an admitted liar. On another thread he admitted that he understood he was countering numbers referring to slowing increase in health care costs with numbers referring to growth in GDP.

It's worth noting that he's spent MONTHS finding links to back up his spurious claims. He ignores that even Conservative sites like the National Review acknowledge the notorious unreliability of Rasmussen. Even then his links apply only to the final polling before two very specific elections, not the wildly outlying numbers they routinely post for vast numbers of races over their entire history.

He doesn't like the facts so he looks for the exceptions.

John B, Des Moines, IA "Don't worry about it. Roy is an admitted liar."

I must have missed that dream of yours. Could you be specific.

As for 'links', they are easy to find - the government posts all of the official information needed by me - unlike the biased sites that you are gullible enough to believe, and since we're talking about the election for President, I'll go with the one who's has consistently gotten it right over the last several election cycles.

And, look who we have as VP now? The buffoon Joe Biden. When he doesn't speak, he appears to be somewhat intelligent.

I'd be happy to be specific, Roy. It was here http://firstread.msnbc.msn.com/_news/2012/06/29/12483319-mission-impossible-romneys-ambitious-first-term-agenda#c67596860 where you responded to my posting of health care increase data with GDP increase data. I questioned whether you understood that they were two different things and you made it quite clear that you did.

Therefore you admitted to deliberately posting misleading information. Have fun making a pretzel out of that one.

Roy and his rose colored glasses.

If Romney does not win Florida you can kiss his white azz bye, bye. Obama has multiple ways of winning, if Romney does not get Florida he loses.

Yes billybob - we sure do remember how important the vp pick is, all anyone has to do is utter the word: Sarah. Now that is funny, I don't care who you are.

John Edwards pushed the issue of healthcare onto the national stage, for which we should all be grateful.

Mitt Romney represents exactly what is wrong with America - our system of murky financial games played by the 1%er's who just keep getting richer, even during the recession.

Edwards - lousy husband, champion of the uninsured. Mitt Romney - stellar husband, poster boy for the need for financial reform.

MITTY is a chicken and a coward and so are his sons.. not one of the ever served the military ..instead he got FOUR college deferments and then ran to France, he was on a mission there, him and his magic underwear.. hope he didn't stain them hehehehe

Max...I dont recall Obama's service in the military or Joey Biden's? Can you tell which branch they served in?

dev: Obama was too young to serve in Vietman. Romney evaded such service. There's a difference.

The party that unleashed Sarah Palin on the populace as its nominee for Vice President now wants to lecture on the importance of a VP candidate???

It is to laugh!!!

Edwards champion of the uninsured?! He is a freaking bottom feeder lawyer that loves the "lottery" lawsuits that have driven up our insurance costs.

Dsl....didn't ask about "Vietnam" (correct spelling). I wanted to know how he served in the military since it is such a big deal to liberals about Romney.

I think Joey Biden is old enough and he didn't serve either.....interesting??????

And of course we had Sarah Palin who thought she could see Russia from her front porch and that Paul Rever waa the leader of a brass band who was blowing off horns and whistlers for the NRA when the Red Coats were coming.. Please! I will take Joe Biden over any one of the crop of 3rd rate characters on Mitten "short-list.

Janine: didn't you hear? By the time of Desert Storm we had an ALL VOLUNTEER army! Mitt is like Dick Cheney, a war monger who "had better things to do" during the wartime draft than to serve his nation.

These are some fabulous potential picks!

I would also add Senator John Thune to the list!!!

Janine, at least we know Obama wasn't dodging the draft, since there wasn't one. As opposed to Vietnam, for which there was a draft, for which Mr. Romney applied for and received four deferments, despite his pronounced support for the war.

http://www.timesunion.com/news/article/Romney-faces-scrutiny-over-Vietnam-3611899.php

Janine,

There was no draft during Desert Storm. Obama didn't have to actively, evade serving his country. Apples should be compared to apples, not oranges. No one is critical of Romney for not signing up, he took active steps to ellude what other's were conscripted to do.

Sarah,

Not only did Romney evade the draft, he hypocritically spoke out in favor of the Vietnam War and against those protesting it.

Chicken Hawkling?

interesting -- so evading the draft through regularly granted and legal deferments. nothing wrong with that

Obama did not actively, apparently, pursue volunteering to serve in the military. nothing wrong with that either.

or maybe he did try to volunteer and was turned down because of his history as a druggie?

@Amy B. Portland, ME

John Edwards pushed the issue of healthcare onto the national stage, for which we should all be grateful.

I've got to say that's the first time I've ever heard anyone express gratitude for something that turned out to be a cluster @!$%# of epic proportion.

Not only did Romney evade the draft, he hypocritically spoke out in favor of the Vietnam War and against those protesting it.

The GOP loves war, so long as they don't have to be personally involved. They make billions off it!

BB - Romney was doing drugs too- thats why he wanted deferrments.

Typical GNOPer....support a war - avoid serving - let someone else fight it for you....

so everyone that fights in any war for America is a democrat or independent or anyone but a republican? you can actually make such a statement with a straight face??

billybob-

My complaint against the former and current batch of Republican leaders is that as quick as they are to "rattle their sabers" and send our sons and daughters off to war, they were just as quick to avoid the draft by using deferments or their political connections.

I also despise that Gore and Kerry both served, but Republicans used it against them.

Those who fight are neither Republican or Democrat - just Americans. It just seems the leaders of the GOP are more likely to pick a fight and less likely to be personally involved.

Since the liberals are up in arms about Romney supposedly evading service, does that mean that serving in the military is now a good thing? I always thought that the liberals hated the Military and all those who served. Now, when a man applies for deferrments and is granted them he is the scum of the earth. I wonder if it is because he evaded the service or because he is a Republican.

ABO '12

I wonder how the require ID to vote would seem if the card check legislation that Nancy Pelosi supports was enacted.

benram: they're very different things.

My state passed a law requiring that voters have a photo ID in order to vote and the reason for this that they gave was to keep felons from voting. I don't know about your driver's license, but mine doesn't say whether I'm a felon or not.

Card Check merely would allow people to join unions and authorize unions to deduct dues from their paychecks more easily. I don't know why those on the Right who argue that Unions ought not be able to do this don't have a problem with Corporations taking propaganda money out of their shareholders' dividends that easily.

Actually card check would force people to join a union to get a job. Then regardless of how you felt the union would use the dues to work oto elect the candidate that they could buy. What about those of us who feel that Unions are just a form of organize crime and do not help those who want to work?

benram: you've evidently been misinformed. Card check would absolutely NOT force people to join a union to get a job (that's quite illegal and card check would not change it).

What about those of us who feel that Unions are just a form of organize [sic] crime and do not help those who want to work?

Those of you who feel that way are simply wrong, IMO.

I always thought that the liberals hated the Military and all those who served.

That's a caricature...merely a picture that the Conservative Chickenhawks love to paint...that we are unpatriotic and hate the military. It's simply not the truth, however.

Romney actively demonstrated in support of sending troops to Viet Nam while he evaded the draft.

Republicans/Tea Bangers is the segment of society who are so bigoted that they will gladly endure hardship for the opportunity to spew their hate and ignorance on those they need to feel superior to. The GOP understands this and are masters of manipulating their hate into votes for GOP candidates. Hate clouds human reasoning and no one hates like a person jazzed up on fear.

The GOP sells fear like a carnival barker sells ticket to see the circus.

Not a damn one of those Faux Noize, Beckerhead, Fatbo, Boortz. Lush and host of other right-wing-hate mediums ... actually believes the crap they spew, but they know there are those who will love it.

Sadly, that seems to be about 48% of Americans. We are locked in a battle of cultures and there is no end in sight. I often envy the UK and AUS and NZ for their lack of Evangelical zealots in huge numbers.

benramz2 - you're an ignorant buffoon. "liberals" don't hate those who serve in the military - just the opposite. We believe these are great men and women and should be treated as such. We also believe they deserve much more than the US gives them when they return home. We believe their benefits are way too low and their medical support should be better. As President Obama has shown over and over again, we appreciate our military and believe we should not put them in harms way for business purposes (can you say Iraq) but only for the actual protection of our country.

I'm not sure what Republicans believe since they seem to have no problem sending our men and women to fight - on a whim.

Obama/Biden 2012

The republicans have no problem sending our men and women to fight on a whim but like the Ryan budget proves they would cut benefits for our wounded veterans to give more tax cuts to Romney and his rich friends.

Romney thinks that is marvelous. Voting for a republican means you do too.

Seeking,

So that is why then that there have been more lives lost in Afghnistan under Obama in the time he's been in office than all the time Bush was in office?? And as usual you seem to forget that Congress voted to invade Iraq...

Romney hid out in France as a draft dodger....Ok........but then recently he was pandering to the military side of rt wingers and said he wished he could have been a part of it........Now that is lying.......all he had to do at anytime was not to continue the deferments........So yes...a liar..he wanted no part of it........and now a chicken hawk. Had he said he was against the war...I can accept that. The nation healed and had an amnesty on those who didn't want to die for whatever the numerous reasons.

There used to be a guy in the neighborhood who was chicken to fight someone and always looked around at us and said " Somebody hold me back"...hoping we would........Same as Romney......saying I wish I could have been a part of it....

@benramz2

Speaking as the liberal granddaughter of a liberal soldier who was a highly decorated WWII veteran, I can tell you that in my liberal leaning family (There are a few conservatives too) that we FULLY support the military. The military does not choose where to fight, they simply go where they are told to go. They fight for those of us at home who either cannot or will not fight. For this, they have my support. Always have and always will. What I do NOT support is sending our military off to foreign lands to fight half-assed wars or "Police Actions" that tie their hands and tell them to be "good boys and girls" on one hand while telling them to "Go, Fight, Kill" on the other.

The "military" in general is not to blame for this. Government leadership and possibly military leadership make the decisions that get the average soldier sent into a war zone. My grandfather was part of Patton's spearhead division. He occasionally punched a superior officer for being stupid...and was busted down on a few occasions for it, but he believed in the men that served with him and respected Patton even though he personally did NOT like him.

I think generalizations such as:

I always thought that the liberals hated the Military and all those who served.

are part of the problem with this country. I am a liberal who supports the military, is NOT against RESPONSIBLE gun ownership , is FOR same sex marriage even though I am not gay, has been known to vote for a Republican candidate when they were the RIGHT person for the job and believes there needs to be a MAJOR overhaul to the Wellfare system as it is too easy to stay on it forever. Believe it or not, there are thousands out there just like me who can see benefits on both sides.

Let's put it this way Romney ran away from the draft the draft was in effect then. Desert Shield and desert Storm had no draft in effect and we were going to down size the military when Desert Shield happened. The two events couldn't have been timed to happen more perfectly. At that point in time ALL ETSs were stopped until further notice. Romney should have been drafted of volunteeredd for the Guard at least. The SOB is as old as me. I served in Vietnam and Desert Sheild/Storm and a couple bull$hit places in between. I had a break in service for personel reasons and went back to finish what I started.

JK1963 - yes, congress voted to invade Iraq (Obama voted against it) based on fraudulent information provided by the Bush administration. Unfortunately the Afghanistan war was already in force when Obama got into office. He has pledged to get our troops out - something the GOP is against. So, stupid, your point?

@Tea Hobbit

Republicans/Tea Bangers is the segment of society who are so bigoted that they will gladly endure hardship for the opportunity to spew their hate and ignorance on those they need to feel superior to.

Sums up your entire post pretty well so are you criticizing them for being just like you or praising them? I'm honestly not sure, it seems odd you'd praise someone for those qualities but equally odd that you'd criticize someone for doing exactly what you are doing.

@TNSEVOL

Al Gore's VN status is questionable. He may have been in VN but he wasn't a combat vet. He was a supply clerk. In fact, I had a college professor a while back who was a very easy-going fellow, never talked about politics or flamed anyone. But when the subject of Gore came up, you could see a switch flip. Turns out, this man was a VN combat vet himself who was there at that time and said he passionately hated Al Gore because when he went to VN as part of being groomed to be a future president, he threw a fit about his assignment which would have been slugging it out with Charlie, and his Senator daddy got him assigned as a supply clerk instead. The supply clerk who was there before him took Gore's place in combat and was dead a week later. This man absolutely hated Al Gore. I believe he was telling hte truth. I think much of Al Gore is about image, not substance.

All Gore hasn't been VP since January 2001. Why do you Conservatives always insist on living in the past? He's irrelevant now. The issue is Romney.

Thomas: Gore was not a supply clerk. He was an army journalist.

@JohnB...I'm neither conservative nor repugnican. I despise the GOP. But I also despise arrogance. Gore earned my contempt all by himself, and not just for the story I related. I trust the professor who told me that. He wasn't inclined to talk trash. Is it true? I don't know and can't prove. There are plenty of reasons for the non-GOPers to dislike Gore.

@dslsca...

I've read that too. It doesn't seem impossible that both can be true. As I stated, I don't know this to be true, but I believe it. A reliable source. He was there. I wasn't.The fact that Gore was there makes it all the more inexcusable that he tried to block overseas military votes from being counted in 2000. I never liked him much but that was the back-breaker to me. I think he has no character or backbone.

Cheney's for Chinny.

My cheeks swell with pride at the thought of an O-Beast, the facial of Merka, grazing around the White House buffet:o)))

Seeking,

Here we go again with that myth about fraudulent information...but go ahead anyways and believe the myth. As for the troop drawdown, that original plan was initiated under Bush, again, Obama was just following through something already started. As for Afghnistan, it was OBAMA that committed more troops to that area and bears the responsibility of those soliders losing their lives. Try growing up and taking some responsbility for a change, Seeking... Your savior isn't what he's cracked up to be...

just imagine what an easter egg hunt would be like with christie rolling around the east lawn.. I want pictures

Rubio is very viable, I mean a Debate between Rubio and Crazy Uncle Joe would be Hilarious!!!!!

Palin won the debate with crazy Joe, how ironic is that?!

Palin won the debate with crazy Joe, how ironic is that?!

Crystal - That's a real stretch.....

Palin "won" her debate with Joe Biden? Funny -- I watched that debate and don't recall her brilliant victory at all! Do you mean she did not piss her panties and managed not to totally embarrass herself. Or that after getting his personal OK to call Mr. Biden "Joe" -- she badly delivered a pre-written line: "Say it's not so, Joe?" Which, by the way, went over like a lead ballon. Or her claiming that Biden knew nothing about family or raising children -- since all he was was a single father who raising his kids alone for several years. I will admit that she did not poop on the stage that night-- but do you really want to claim that as" winning"???

painful -- a reasonable response till you felt it necessary to again denigrate someone with whom you clearly you disagree.

why did you feel it necessary to insult the Governor?

Simple, billybob -- Because I can and am soo damn good @ it!! The truth is the truth and if the truth hurts -- so be it!

why did you feel it necessary to insult the Governor?

Why not? Her ignorance of everythig is epic.

I will stop calling out Ms. Palin's many short coming -- when she stopped displaying them in public, for the world too see. Her insulting the intelligence of the "educated" American people (and misinforming and mis-represneing the truth to the lesser educated) should not be a "for-profit' job for her @ the expense of the rest of the country!

why did you feel it necessary to insult the Governor?

You mean Half-Term Palin? There are so many, many reasons....

@The Painful Truth-2712888

Palin "won" her debate with Joe Biden? Funny -- I watched that debate and don't recall her brilliant victory at all!

I suspect that if Joe Biden had dropped dead from a stroke at minute one you'd still "recall" the debate being won by him.

Christ, Joe Biden actually made Palin seem like a reasonable choice just by the virtue of appearing to be awake. How any liberals can bash on Palin as a choice while they've got Joe Biden falling asleep behind the President is beyond me. Not sure which one scares me more at the thought of becoming President.

Liberals don't bash on Palin. EVERYONE bashes on Palin. She's a nitwit.

Crystal - I believe, after reading several of your posts, you are describing yourself - not Nancy Pelosi. You can't articulate anything. Pity!

As for Sarah Palin beating Joe Biden - clearly you have to be a low information voter to even begin to believe that drivel. Sarah Palin made a laughingstock of herself during the debates - as well as every time she is in public. What a pity a party had to sink so low to choose her as a candidate for anything!

Obama/Biden 2012

@SeekingSanity

Sarah Palin made a laughingstock of herself during the debates - as well as every time she is in public.

And that differs from Biden how exactly?

The people chose....BIDEN!

@starsailing

The people chose....BIDEN!

NO, Obama chose Biden and certainly not because he was the best man for the job. No Presidential candidate does that anymore. Biden, on his own, had about as much of a chance of getting elected as Palin did.

The people of the United States CHOSE Obama/BIDEN over Mac and mama griz......

Romney insists it's a penalty, you tell me.

David, who cares, tax or penalty at this point we are all affected either way. Just wait and see.

concern citizen

does it really matter tax penalty.. mittens could help with that since in MA he called it as penalty.. but none the less 30 million people will be helped with medical insurance.. and CHILDREN will no longer have to suffer... so call it what you want I shall be forced to call it GOD SENT

maxgiver.

At firs site ACA sounds like a nobel idea, please, please go to the Gov link and read that ACA law and tell me if you can explain to anyone what it says. Please look and see how many times they will increase taxes or penalties.

I pay 500 a check for PPO insurance in the Company that I work for. The Company pays 500 in addition and that makes it a Cadillac Insurance, which means I will have to pay additional taxes.

I had a daughter with a congenital heart disorder and I have a teenager that was diagnosed with Autism at 3 years of age. I have never had an issue with Pre-existing conditions even though I switch companies.

who cares what it is called? I sure don't '

What I care about is that the uninsured will be able to buy heath insurance through the exchanges and if you do not then IN LEIU OF GETTING INSURANCE YOU PAY.... no freeloaders allowed.

Liberals don't care what you call it..All they know is some one is purchasing insurance for them.

75% of the cost of Obamacare will be paid by those who make less thank $120,000 a year.

If you are talking about the ACA, that would be a penalty tax. If you are talking about Romneycare, the mandate is a wonderful chewey caramel center, with chocolate and a thin candy shell.

Tax or penalty. Call it what you like. In the end we will be paying for it.

It doesn't matter who Romney picks as his VP becaise whoever it is will be the next VP. Obama and Biden are going to start packing for their trip home in January. But this great country better watch out because I wouldn't put anything past this crooked administration during their lame duck time. They already shown a complete disregard for anything and anybody who doesn't agree with them.

Good-bye President Obama, I wish I could say you have done a good job but that would be a big lie. This country will be a long time digging out from the second Carter administration. Sorry Jimmy, I know the truth hurts.

Starderup, now THAT was funny!

Concerned, this insurance plan you're paying for--is this an individual plan? Because that's the only way the premium described falls under the "cadillac plan" provision. Since you've already alluded to your teen-age daugher I suspect you're on a family plan. In that case the total premium amount is $2292/mo. http://www.kaiserhealthnews.org/stories/2009/september/22/cadillac-health-explainer-npr.aspx

The general public already knows this penalty exists. That the GOPTP thinks it's going to matter that the penalty falls under the government's authority to levy taxes is ludicrous. Your need to buy a fishing license also falls under the government's authority to levy taxes, and people understand the difference.

Whatever word the court wants to use -- Interesting that the Court is above reproach if they side with the right -- but has no value if they don't! BothMitt and the US Congress used the word "penalty" -- Call it a tax if you like -- the thing is you don't have to pay it if you just get your own insurance --which benefits yourself. Being responsible for yourself -- look into it!

I pay 500 a check for PPO insurance in the Company that I work for. The Company pays 500 in addition and that makes it a Cadillac Insurance, which means I will have to pay additional taxes.

This doesn't pass the BS smell test. Generally, a family cadilliac plan is one costing 27,500 per year for a family. So tell us again, self-proclaimed reader of the entire ACA plan, what makes you think you have cadilliac coverage - is it something the Miami nightclub crowd told you, or was it foretold to you by Madam Zorba and her amazing crystal ball - AKA Faux News?

@maxgiver

but none the less 30 million people will be helped with medical insurance..

LOL! Helped? It has NOTHING to do with "helping" people who are uninsured. It's about forcing those uninsured people, most of whom are young, healthy and don't really need it, into paying for those who are old and not so healthy. This idea that we're rescuing those poor unfortunates who CHOOSE not to buy insurance is beyond laughable! Would you force your car insurance company to give car insurance to someone like Lindsy Lohan and then force your insurance company to charge her no more than they charge you? Of course not, that would be every bit as asinine as "A"CA.

and CHILDREN will no longer have to suffer...

Until they grow up and realize they're the ones who have to pay for it all. That's assuming they can find a job of course.

@The Painful Truth-2712888

Whatever word the court wants to use -- Interesting that the Court is above reproach if they side with the right -- but has no value if they don't!

Sort of like the liberal pundits were blasting John Roberts right up to the very second the decision was announce when suddenly he became a voice of reason in their eyes?

Interesting how you call out the right for the very same things the left does.

Backcountry:

It's about forcing those uninsured people, most of whom are young, healthy and don't really need it

No young people get cancer? No young people get shot? No young people are in car or motorcycle accidents? Gimme a break.

Hell, I almost shot my thumb off and had a car accident, all within one week. True story.

John B, Des Moines, IA You did not read my post correctly. Nothing new with you LIBS

Go back, it reads,

I had a daughter with a congenital heart disorder and I have a teenager that was diagnosed with Autism at 3 years of age. I have never had an issue with Pre-existing conditions even though I switch companies.

I had is the key word she past away at the age of 4 you moron. I now have two sons and one the youngest is Autistic. My health care consist of Family coverage and because I want to keep choosing my doctors I pay more for dental and Vision. My Husband is included in my Policy. That makes 4 in the family.

You folks are pathetic and think you know it all. I don't have to prove anything to you, I'm living it!!!! As far as Redevs, you are not worth it. My vote is as good as yours.

Sarah -

Hell, I almost shot my thumb off and had a car accident, all within one week. True story

Hopefully not at the same time! You can't just tease us with a sentence like that then not tell the whole story, that's not fair.

No, they were seprate incidents, lol.

Watch the slide and your thumb placement on a .44. I learned that one the hard way. Also, teenagers should NOT be allowed to drive. Bahhh!!! Old lady Sarah, was NOT happy when the 16 year old bashed her so hard his car set on fire.

Whip lash and a cast on your hand is really sexy, let me tell you. First name, Crash. Last name, Dummy.

Very well, Concerned...you're on family coverage, therefore your total combined premium (yours and your employer) are less than half the cost of a "cadillac plan." The penalty/fee/tax doesn't even apply to you.

Somehow in your rush to call me a moron you missed the most important bit of information in my post. I'll let others take from that what they will.

RedDevPS -

I was trying so hard today to not post on any of Concern's comments today, but this ...

So tell us again, self-proclaimed reader of the entire ACA plan, what makes you think you have cadilliac coverage - is it something the Miami nightclub crowd told you, or was it foretold to you by Madam Zorba and her amazing crystal ball - AKA Faux News?

Just about made me fall off my chair! Ka-Ching!!!!!!!!

Ok Sarah, I gotta nibble on that bait...Oh wait... that was in one week not one day...dang and it sounded really interesting too..

Concerned Citizen,

You do not have a cadillac insurance plan. From Kaiser Health News "cadillac plan is over $27,500 a year for a family plan not including stand-alone vision and dental".

If you pay 500 and your employer pays 500 per check (assuming biweekly) you pay $26,000 a year....

The ACA is actually the largest-ever middle class health care tax cut. Only free riders who can afford a plan will have to pay a penalty...

So, what's it gonna be?

EVERYONE now has the personal responsibility to cover themselves...this is EXACTLY what you wanted, isn't it?

Sure it is...

Concern ...

Just a thought. Rand Paul wants to introduce legislation that would give the House 1 day for each 20 pages of a bill to read it. You might want to contact him as you read the entire ACA and understood it over one weekend. He really might appreciate your help.

@dslsca

No young people get cancer? No young people get shot? No young people are in car or motorcycle accidents? Gimme a break.

So every young person has to be forced to buy insurance because a very few of them will need it? Why shouldn't these people be allowed to take the risk? We allow people to jump out of planes even though their insurance probably won't cover any accident so how is that any different? The FACT is, whether you like it or not, the ONLY purpose of the mandate is so low risk people will cover the extra expense created by all the little perks your type likes so much in this bill.

Imagine 6 people sat down at a table and 4 of them ordering and eating a pizza but then forcing the other 2 to chip in an equal share to pay for it. That's what this amounts to and of course what isn't taken into consideration is the fact that if you're going to make someone pay for something they are obviously going to use it. If you're going to force me to pay for the pizza I'm going to eat some of it and if you're going to force me to buy insurance I'm going to doctor with every sore throat or sniffle since the insurance I'm forced to buy will pay for it instead of me. NOTHING has raised the cost of healthcare more than insurance. Doubt that? Well just look at lasik eye surgery or cosmetic surgery, neither are covered by insurance and as a result the costs fall even as the procedures improve. When lasik surgery first came on the market it cost an average of $5,000 now you can get it done for as little as $500. Find me ANY procdure covered by insurance that costs 10% of what it did 25 years ago.

I don't know about your insurance, but when I worked mine covered Lasik surgery.

I agree with you about insurance increasing medical costs; that's why I want socialized medicine.

dslsca

I don't know about your insurance, but when I worked mine covered Lasik surgery.

No insurance covers 100% of lasik surgery unless there is a medical necessity for the surgery.

I agree with you about insurance increasing medical costs; that's why I want socialized medicine.

Right because every time the government gets involved with anything costs just fall through the floor. /sarcasm

You must be crazy if you think socialized medicine will reduce costs. Or is it that you don't give a rat's ass what the cost is as long as someone else is paying the bill? Government would just add to the bureaucracy and the costs will skyrocket. Competition and free market is what has driven down the cost of elective surgeries; that is what we should be pushing for with ALL health care.

If the free market is automatically super efficient please explain why the United States has higher health care costs by HALF as compared to anyplace else in the world.

Rand Paul needing one day to read and understand 20 pages of a bill kind of makes sense. Isn't One Fish, Two Fish, Red Fish, Blue Fish, by Dr. Seuss, about 20 pages long ?

While the ACA does not eliminate the ever escalating costs from medical care, it is a step in the right direction. The only way the country will ever truly control the out of control increases is to remove the profits from the not for profits by nationalizing medicine. People who actually do the work in the health care industries in the rest of the world (with nationalized medicine) do very well. Only the extreme salaries and bonuses of the boards and administrators is eliminated.

The ACA is supposed to reduce the disparity between spending on health and spending elsewhere by insurance companies. Those who are receiving a certain amount now will not reduce their incomes, only more will be spent on actual health care. Premiums will not go down, spending on actual health care will go up, requiring additional income. Its as if the constitution required that defense spending be no more than 40% of the federal budget, you simply spend more in the other other areas so that you can spend more on defense. Eventually you have to pay for it, by increasing income.

@John B, Des Moines, IA

If the free market is automatically super efficient please explain why the United States has higher health care costs by HALF as compared to anyplace else in the world.

Where did I say it was super efficient? Do you always make up a bunch of garbage to supprt your argument?

What does the free market have to do with our current health care system? If my doctor wanted to charge less for anyone who didn't have insurance and was willing to pay cash he can't. The law forbids him from charging anyone less than they would someone who is on Medicaid. So how exactly is that free market? Our health care is so much more expensive because A- It's better, duh and B- because the free market has been entirely left out of the equation in favor of massive government regulation. You want to know how the free market works with health care look at my examples of lasik and cosmetic surgeries.

If my doctor wanted to charge less for anyone who didn't have insurance and was willing to pay cash he can't. The law forbids him from charging anyone less than they would someone who is on Medicaid.

That is not free market - that is scamming the system. If a doctor can afford to charge an uninsured patient $5 for a consultation, then he should be able to charge an insured patient the same amount. You have illustrated the perfect point that all need medical insurance. Why should the insured subsidize uninsured? Groceries aren't priced according to ones ability to pay, they are priced the same for everyone. That should be the same for medical care.

First of all, we aren't first in the world in health care...we're 37th. Duh. http://www.nejm.org/doi/full/10.1056/NEJMp0910064

Well, actually you CAN get the best health care in the world here, but only if you're among the very fortunate. The unwashed masses get considerably worse.

Secondly, if there's no free market in health care the Affordable Care Act isn't "a socialist take over of 1/6 of the economy", is it? By your own definition government ALREADY RUNS the health care market, we're just trying to figure out how to do it better.

Although claiming a nation where vast swaths of the population get their health care from privately owned clinics and hospitals and manage payment through an enormous private health insurance industry has no free market is insanely ludicrous.

Which is why I threw the bait out there at 5.29. Thanks for responding as expected.

@John B, Des Moines, IA

First of all, we aren't first in the world in health care...we're 37th. Duh. http://www.nejm.org/doi/full/10.1056/NEJMp0910064

You libs sure do like to change what someone has said to suit your argument. I didn't say we were first just that we had the best. Why don't you look at what makes those rankings, things like cost to consumer plays a big role. When the government pays a big chunk of a countries health care expenses the NEJM will give that country a better ranking but it doesn't mean those people have access to better quality care.

Although claiming a nation where vast swaths of the population get their health care from privately owned clinics and hospitals and manage payment through an enormous private health insurance industry has no free market is insanely ludicrous.

And all of those privately owned clinics and health insurance industry are heavily regulated by the government. I live 1 mile from the border of my state but I can't drive the ten miles to a neighboring town and buy an insurance policy from someone there because it's not in the same state as I am. You think that's an example of the free market?? LOL!! Really?!?! Doctors are told what they can and can't charge their customers and again, you think that is the free market at work? Give me a break!

Sure, our 37th ranking has NOTHING to do with the fact that we trail the pack in countless ways ranging from infant mortality to average life span. The New England Journal of Medicine is all about politics, not medicine.

Keep telling yourself that.

Meanwhile your solution is to apply the same deregulatory philosophy that allowed the financial sector to collapse in 2007/08. The same model of bottom feeder, multistate competition that brought 30% interest rates and almost nonexistent consumer protection to the credit card industry.

Yeah, I'd trust the credit card industry over my doctor any day.

Meanwhile, it's INSURERS who decide what to pay the doctors. Private industry. Giant financial conglomerates dictating to individual practitioners. The failed ideology of deregulation would only make that worse.

@John B, Des Moines, IA

Sure, our 37th ranking has NOTHING to do with the fact that we trail the pack in countless ways ranging from infant mortality to average life span. The New England Journal of Medicine is all about politics, not medicine.

So you honestly believe that the very best health care in the world is not available right here? Lets say you're in Columbia for whatever reason and you twist your knee damaging your ligaments. Are you going to stay in Columbia to have the surgery done since they are ranked higher than us by the WHO (22nd)? Or are you going to hold off on the surgery until you get back here to the States? Yeah, that's what I thought.

Meanwhile, it's INSURERS who decide what to pay the doctors. Private industry. Giant financial conglomerates dictating to individual practitioners. The failed ideology of deregulation would only make that worse.

LOL! When my daughter was young we had to take her to the emergency room and they gave her a dose of children's Tylenol. When the bill came I saw that they had charged 12 bucks for that one dose. Almost double what I could buy the whole bottle for. You think an insurer is telling the hospital that they have to charge 12 bucks? If insurers are dictating what the costs are why are they so high? In reality nothing has driven up the cost of health care more than insurance and you can bet those insurers aren't demanding that the cost keep going up and up. The very notion is literally laughable.

I build custom furniture for a living, if I want to charge you 100 bucks less for a piece because you're a loyal customer I can do that. Why can't my doctor do that? Why can't my doctor give someone without insurance a break on their bill? Well because it would be considered discrimination against those on Medicaid according to the regulations. That makes sense to you? I can't buy insurance from another state which limits competition and increases cost. That makes sense to you? At least you've given up trying to claim it's a free market.

No one is suggesting there should be zero regulation but what people like you refuse to see is that there are a TON of @!$%# regulations that make the problem every bit as bad as it would be if we had no regulation at all. Someone just says the word "regulation" and a whole hoard of people automatically agree without any thought to what the unintended consequences will be. Half of regulation serves special interest groups and is practically bought and paid for by lobbyists. You can damn well bet there are a ton of regulations on the books that were basically written by the insurance industry and they weren't writing those regs for your or my benefit.

Of course you CAN get the best care here in America...but only if you have enough money to get it done, either through having VERY deep pockets or the sort of insurance plan only available to the CEO class. I said that way up above. Our rating is as poor as it is because that care isn't available to many, many people. As morally repugnant as that is it could at least be justified if our health care were cheap...but it isn't. It's by far the most expensive in the world.

As for your example of providers giving people lower prices than Medicare, the flaw in that plan is obvious. If you make a habit of doing that then you're obviously defrauding Medicare. Medicare is subsidizing your ability to give lower prices to others. Do your "free market" aspirations really entail defrauding the government?

As far as regulation is concerned, I've no doubt some of it isn't needed and there is confusion and duplication. That's an argument for examining and refining regulation, not getting rid of it. Every rule, regulation, and law was put in place because a sufficient number of people saw a need. The result might not be perfect, but the ideological devotion to deregulation for its own sake is a fatal flaw in modern Conservatism. We've already effectively established Usery as a smart business model, much to the detriment of our middle class and the economic stability of our nation. It's past time to return to the great American tradition of Capitalism combined with smart, effective, reasonable regulation.

Backcountry: sorry to be so delayed in responding to you, but my internet's been down after a storm. Before I took early retirement, I was in a union and our medical did cover Lasik (except for the $50 fee we paid for any "surgical procedure"--no additional co-pay or deductible whatsoever). I didn't have it done, but I had colleagues who underwent Lasik and I assure you that's exactly how it worked.

i think the rnc is catching on, absolutely none of the early spenders in any republican race in Tennessee ever mention, not once romney. Now they are all over the ACA and Obamacare (Diane Black, sure glad I don't live in her district, she is about as uncompromising as they get and almost as ugly). Guess everyone finally realizes what i've been saying all along, Romney is a Morman, the Bubba's, members of the SBC, and evangelicals will never vote for him - they may stay home, but they will not support him or vote for him. Game over, sorry mit, you lose. Yippiee for me!

Obama has tried the Religion thing against Romney it failed, they tried the rich man thing it failed. The only ones who care about the dribble you both just posted are Obama lovers who would vote for him no matter what the state of the country is.

But please keep wasting every ones time.

You can't call Romneycare a tax cheat until he releases his tax returns, and, just like his secret plans to fix all the worlds problems on his first day in office, he can't tell you about them.

"I'm not telling you, and it is for your own protection."

Could be because we know what a snake in the grass Obama is, and he would take the solutions as his own, like he did with Rubio's dream act.

union -- so religious bigotry is alive and well in Tennessee?

billybob-

I lived in Tennessee for several years, my son was born there, and (obviously) I love the state and the people. Most of the people in TN take their religion very seriously and are decent "God-fearing" people who would give you the shirt off their back, and alter it so it fit you better!

Unfortunately, there are still areas where both religous and racial bigotry still exist. As proof that the protestant religion has tremendous power, I believe there are still at least ten "dry" counties in Tennessee where you cannot buy alcohol, and several others where you can only buy it by the glass.

one could only hope that Ron Paul woiuld never STOOP that low to be mittens VP

Ron Paul is an absolute loon. Any votes picked up selecting him would be more than offset by the droves who would stay home rather than vote THAT ticket.

Bigitry in the Deep South?!I am shocked! Who would have thunk it!

These little slanted negatives do not matter. What matters is the economy and unemployment. Yeah, Odumbo is cooking the books on unemployment but Americans know there are no real jobs being created. That is what matters to the majority.

I don't know, the whole, "a fetus is a baby and abortion is murder" thing seemed to matter a whole lot when the GOP was trying to allow the government to mandate vagingal probes.

Larry, please provide some actual proof of your claim. If the books were in fact being "cooked" don't you think the reported unemployment numbers would be lower? I'd like you to make your case to two of my friends that just started new jobs that no jobs are being created!

But, to you righties, everything is a conspiracy.

How can anyone who resorts to childish, school yard, name call be taken seriously?

Larry doesn't need any proof. He heard it from Hannity or King Rush, and that's enough for him.

Job1-

I read that same article, and the thing that disturbed me the most is the fact that Romney lied about how long he was running things at Bain Capital.

On February 12, 1999, the Boston Herald reported, "Romney said he will stay on as a part-timer with Bain, providing input on investment and key personnel decisions." And a Bain press release issued on July 19, 1999, noted that Romney was "currently on a part-time leave of absence"—and quoted Romney speaking for Bain Capital. In 2001 and 2002, Romney filed Massachusetts state disclosure forms noting he was the 100 percent owner of Bain Capital NY, Inc.—a Bain outfit that was incorporated in Delaware on April 13, 1999—two months after Romney's supposed retirement from the firm. A May 2001 filing with the SEC identified Romney as "a member of the Management Committee" of two Bain entities. And in 2007, the Washington Post reported that R. Bradford Malt, a Bain lawyer, said Romney took a "leave of absence" when he assumed the Olympics post and retained sole ownership of the firm for two more years.

All of this undermines Bain's contention that Romney, though he maintained an ownership interest in the firm and its funds, had nothing to do with the firm's activities after February 1999. The Stericycle deal may raise red flags for anti-abortion activists. But it also raises questions about the true timing of Romney's departure from Bain and casts doubt on claims by the company and the Romney campaign that he had nothing to do with Bain business after February 1999.

www.motherjones.com/politics/2012/07/romney-bain-abortion-stericycle-sec

The newspaper articles, the press release from Bain, MA state disclosure forms, and several SEC documents all contradict the official account of when Romney exited from Bain. How can Romney say he left the firm in February 1999 in the face of all of this evidence?

So which is it - did Romney falsify SEC documents or did he lie as to when he left Bain? Did Romney claim that he left Bain in early 1999 to hide his involvement in Stericycle and other politically unpopular decisions and actions? How much did Romney personally profit from the disposal of aborted fetuses? How many jobs were outsourced during this “missing” time period of February 1999 through 2001?

King Rush

I prefer the term "Drug Lord." "King" is way too noble.

FLBiker,

I prefer a simple, douchebag.

Please! Some respect here -- You are talking about the true hero of the right! Rash Limpballs!

He's got more money and a hotter chick than you'll EVER have; jealous much?

fred the puppy - oh you are truly sick. Hotter chick? Really - do you think anyone would even look at Limbaugh if he didn't have money? Not a chance - and even with it most women would just keep walking. Yuck!

His wife is a babe. No arguing that.

Yeah. She's his 3rd or 4th babe. I wonder why they don't stick around? Money may get a money-driven woman into your bed but it won't keep her there. In fact, after you sign the marriga license, she really doesn't need you anymore. Divorce lawyer anyone?

He's got more money and a hotter chick than you'll EVER have; jealous much?

Gold diggers come in all shapes and sizes. Point being, who respects anyone whose only prospect is a gold digger.

lol, I think Rubio is smart enough not to tie his political future to a anchor like Mittens...he wants to run in 2016, not vanish into the political wastelands

Half is being quite generous

Tim Paw is an extremely vindictive person. Here in Mn whenever Timmy did not get his way he was always snotty mean spirited and put out never ending snide comments. He borrowed and spent kicking the finances down the road. Borrowing against education funds and not raising any taxes to cover his spending. He signed the Norquist pledge to be a traitor to the constitution. He was moderate in religion until he wanted the president office. Then went to the right, then futher right, then all the way extreme right. He talks jovial to women in interviews but when forced to talk issues he falls apart and shows the mean spirited real personality. If he became vice pres, he would be hoping something terrible would happen to Romney just to become the president. Yeah, that type of guy!

I wish Romney would pick our Tea Party governor for VP. Anything to get that loudmouth buffoon out of our state. LePage would make a great "attack dog." Lousy governor, but he is entertainig.

Extremely vindictive person??

starsailing,

As a fellow Minnesotan, you are stop on!

T Paw was a disaster for MN. Left his office with a hugh deficit. Lots of smoke and mirrors, and talking out of both sides of his mouth.

It wont matter who is VP when against Biden....It will be a slaughter....Oh and the clips they can get when Biden steps in it will be priceless.

Devdoc...

"It wont matter who is VP..."

Tell that to John McCain. LOL

Actually, the vote was as close as it was BECAUSE of Palin. The country in 2 wars, the lib media having made 'monsters' of Bush and Cheney, and their gullets full of Obama goo. McCain not really much to the right of Obama on many things, so socially and militarily, it'd have been a wash. Obama should have won the popular vote in a landslide.

I agree that Joe Biden sometimes s"shoots from the hip" and engages his moth before his brain -- but he is still vastly more qualiifed than any of the 'want to be's" on Mitt's "short list -- Rubio (being the smartest of the bunch) would be committing "political suide' to hook his wagan to Mitt's slow moving train crash! And he know it!

Biden - in spite of his occasional gaffe - is well respected by both Republicans and Democrats in Washington. He has a great deal of foreign policy experience and can easily wipe the floor with anyone the GOP selects - much like he did with Palin. If anyone doubted the joke she was before the "debates" they knew full well she was beyond pitiful after even the first question.

Rubio is not all that and, when faced with someone who knows their stuff, like Biden, he often begins his rambling. Not gonna impress at all.

I still want Bachmann- OMG - Joe Biden would have her for lunch!

Obama/Biden 2012

"Reeper"???? Try spellcheck, Wally.

Reaper, Reaper!

lol great ..the Grim Veeper lol, We can all suffer not only the economic death due to the rethuglicant obstructionism, we can also enjoy literal death do to "let them die quickly" healthcare reform, perfect plan. First eliminate anyone who makes under a million a year from the voter rolls, then kill them off, because after all, it costs the rethuglicants millions in tax breaks to keep us all alive

hope some one asks rubio about his parents status when they came to this country and for MANY years there after.. they were illegals next.. Rubio left the fl state gov't in complete disarray.. as he nevewr knew what he was doing.. just being a puppet of the republicans in the state.. he would make a great puppet for mittens

living in florida.. yea and we have an idiot for GOV also

Hey maxgiver, don't say you are form Florida. Even if your are a liberal, feisty insult you and your sister. feisty thinks that all they do in Miami is take drugs.

Max...Your post about Rubio is completely false about when he was in the state legislature.

If you want to ask about immigration status and family members, maybe you should start with Obama and his illegal immigrant Aunt and uncle

Are you saying Obama is using his position to protect his aunt and uncle? I DARE you to prove it - otherwise STFU.

Is Rubio eligible to be elected President? If he was born before his parents became US citizens would he be a "natural born" citizen?

feisty thinks that all they do in Miami is take drugs.

Hey, Governor Scott has to have someone to test. Otherwise, his lab won't make money....

Can you prove otherwise? just asking.........otherwise STFU

@Devdoc12able

Umm..what does the immigration status of Obama's Aunt and Uncle have to do with this? I was born in this country but my Aunt and uncle are immigrants, that doesn't mean I can't run or be president of the US. You realize that right? Got proven wrong too many times when you all were saying he was not born in the US you have to go after relatives of his?

I see what you mean, JackMack, but had Gore picked then NH Governor Jean Shaheen (who was on his short list), he'd have carried NH and been elected president regarelss of FL, so I think those 4 electoral votes do matter.