It's funny how nearly everything Libs hated about Bush that Obama promised to change he has continued.

Continuing Wars? Check.
Guantanamo Bay? Check.
Evoking executive privilege to CYOA? Check.
Corporate Cronyism and gifts to big banks? Check.

I'm not anticipating much change either when Romney is sworn in in another 7 months.

Charkoth - 2012-06-20 18:41:31

---

bush was bad obama was worse.....now obama is bad romney will be worse. Time to change the bird cage lining and tell the suckers "change" again. I really want obama out tho his controllers have pushed their evil more down the isle using obama being black more than anything. Just watch 5 minutes of msnbc to see what i mean. "you dont like gitmo being open still now that obama wants it open you must be a racist because obama is black" "you dont like secret arrests and warrantless spying you must be a racist"

at least with romney they cant pull the race scam when he starts exposing himself to be a criminal. Romney is the poster face for a movie lying politician. straight out of central casting. its good when even conservatives can see thru him as a fake and hes not even in office yet. It took about 4 years but democrats can see obummer is no democrat.

RowdyRoddyPiper - 2012-06-21 06:17:52

Republicans gave in too much? What else is new.

When the news bashes Republicans all day for being "difficult" and the president gets on Twitter and breaks in on TV to say the same, they really don't have a choice. People are stupid enough to believe the news, and the Democrats own every network save Fox News.

Obama's approval rating is shit right now, but just want until the media machine kicks in and slings mud at whoever the Republican candidate will be next election.

hjparcins - 2011-08-01 05:12:15

---

you're on crack. here we have someone taking what has been a rubber-stamp topic and turning it into a referendum, and at least partially getting away with it.

i think the tea partiers are also on crack but they certainly exerted more influence than they should have (again based on history) so good for them, i guess.

nate_orenstam - 2011-08-01 09:04:24

Sadly it more means two things:

#1.) Other people with a stronger higher moral compass need to run for offices and we need to support them!

#2.) We need to be more vigilant watching our politicians are take stronger stances when they do stuff we don`t like.

Neither has been happening for a good 20 years in the vast US =(.

Hammer - 2011-06-27 21:44:39

Over the last 10 years:

Those who have resigned or not sought re-election over "sex" scandals:
D-Anthony Weiner
R-Chris Lee
R-Mark Souder
D-Eric Massa
R-Chip Pickering
R-John Ensign
R-Vito Fossella
R-Randall L. Tobias
R-Larry Craig
R-Mark Foley

Those who have NOT resigned and did seek re-election despite "sex" scandals:
D-Tim Mahoney
R-Don Sherwood
D-Gary Condit
R-David Vitter

Your selective memory is working admirably.

Smokin Joe - 2011-06-16 14:19:21

---

Having a big ego, abusing power, and shamelessly thinking you can get away with it all is something you find in equal proportions on each side of the political aisle.

I will say this though, this Weiner dude's offense was probably closest to that of Chris Lee. At least Lee had the decency to admit his transgression quickly and immediately resign. Weiner was out of his mind to allow himself to keep twisting in the wind so long. Even the top Democrats weren't shy about publicly telling him to GTFO.

BlueFalcon - 2011-06-16 20:53:09

---

All of em are shady anyway. They all have their scandals, it is either women, money, or power.

cobsteele02 - 2011-06-16 14:32:05

I share the same first name as my Dad and he is in a Union so I always get these union assholes calling me wanting me to vote on stuff or listen to their bs or write my state senator. Been lots of calls going on since that labor cluster f**k in Wisconsin.

cobsteele02 - 2011-03-29 06:57:32

Yeah, safe to say his political career is KAPUT.

Then again, Democrats routinely elect morally bankrupt people like Al Franken and would totally re-elect BJ Bill Clinton again in a heartbeat if given the option, so maybe he still could pull something off one day.

hjparcins - 2010-12-07 17:12:49

---

I know that most politcians are phony, but Edwards took it to a whole new level. He makes Obama look downright authentic.

bomberman - 2010-12-07 19:13:51

Nothing ever changes, but its fun to see the libs lose. They are born crybaby`s typically.

Plus all the Hollywood idiots realize they are not in touch with the American public.

redgeopower - 2010-11-02 20:16:49

Bwahaha is right.

Obama is throwing the gays and lesbians under the bus. It isn't that he wants too, they are one of the most solidy blue constituencies around, it is because he has too to continue his liberal agenda.

It is quite simple really. People on both sides cry about activist judges. The funny thing here is that this judge is on the liberal side, striking down a fairly conservative law. The problem is that the judge is in a district court striking down a federal law. If this sits, it sets a precedent for future cases where non-federal judges can strike down federal laws. That is the LAST thing that Obama's administration wants. It threatens the core of much of what he as done while he has been in office.

Of course the gays are taking this personally. They are now promising to sit home during the election to punish Obama. But for them to fight obama on this is retarded as well, as the republicans are NOT going to be pushing any pro-gay legislation when elected. They take everything personally, and cry 'hate' loudly when people express interest (by voting) for agendas that don't match the pro-gay legislation. It has nothing to do with hate but the gays don't see that.

So the pro-gays are going to make a HUGE fuss about this instead of let it get resolved further down the road in a way that would be in the progressives favor(bigger government). People who think that Obama is trying to reach out to the middle are clueless: He is doing this to preserve federal power. I for one welcome reduced federal power, but I doubt this case was a good way to go about it, as states being able to ignore federal mandates is a definite step towards civil rebellion. Of course, depending on how this is resolved, it is going to have a HUGE effect on how the challenges to obamacare go. If Obama can reduce the number of ways for states to challenge obamacare, he is going to go for it... even if that means abandoning 'less' important supporting groups, like the gay friendly liberals.

Wootah - 2010-10-13 19:04:19

Both sides have been boning us silly for the last 20, 25 years. The only difference is who`s happy about it because their "team" won.

Ykant - 2010-09-04 22:12:44