Time to consider "Worst Administration Ever"?

[NowhereInTime]

The Louisiana Nasality said, “I think the best thing he can do is take a toke on the mayor of Toronto’s crack pipe.”

Surprise, suprise.  Team Clinton already starting to distance themselves from BHO.
Cynical fuckers.

[PB the Deplorable]

Surprise, suprise.  Team Clinton already starting to distance themselves from BHO.
Cynical fuckers.

They wouldn't be if he weren't a complete failure.  If he was seen as a strong leader with great policy ideas, they'd be hitching their wagon to his star.  The way Bush I did with Reagan in the 1988 election.

Mrs Clinton wants to win the election in 2016.  She won't if she is seen as close to Obama.  There are Dem Senators up for election next year, and all House members are.  Watch for them to be 'cynical' and run as far away from Obama and ObamaCare as possible.  He won't be out campaigning in 2014 and probably not 2016 either, except in a few solidly Democrat areas like San Francisco and LA to do a little fundraising. 

He has skipped the Lame Duck stage and is now toxic.


Now we know how long it takes for a well spoken Marxist nobody from a corrupt political machine to be Unmasked and Found Out when they are well protected and strongly supported by their Party and by Big Media.  5 years.

[PB the Deplorable]

"If you like your doctor, you will be able to keep your doctor.  Period.  If you like your healthcare plan, you'll be able to keep your healthcare plan.  Period.  No one will take it away, no matter what"

- President Barack Obama, remarks to the American Medical Association, July 15, 2009


"(The community organizer) does not have a fixed truth - truth to him is relative and changing"

- Saul Alinsky, Rules For Radicals



I think this Alinsky quote goes quite a ways to explain the multiple lies about what happened at Benghazi, about ObamaCare, about the claims he never knows a thing about the various scandals, the promises of 'full investigations' when he finds himself cornered and asked about the various scandals, and all the other lies - large and small.

[West of the Rockies]

As a liberal, I wish I felt more enthusiastic about a Hillary Clinton administration.  Honestly though, I sort of get the feeling that she thinks she's entitled to the job because she's done her time and, darnit, she should just get the job!  I felt the same way about Romney. A lot of politicians (Dole, McCain, Hubert Humphrey -- going waaaay back) seem to think ascending to the presidency is about longevity and not vision really.  I don't have a real sense of just what Hillary would stand for.  Oh, I know she's talk about equal rights for all people; she'd have a slightly more aggressive stance on LGBT issues; she might talk about addressing environmental issues, maybe reigning in out-of-control corporate corruption.  Honestly, I suspect her administration would be fairly centrist.  I don't think we'd see any great reduction of tax loopholes for big business.  Corporations would continue to call the shots.  I think we'd continue our big-nosed policy of jumping into the business of other sovereign countries.  I think we'd continue to largely ignore global warming.  (Yeah, I know a lot of people don't believe global warming is something to worry about, but for those of us who DO, I don't see Hillary really addressing it in any meaningful way.)  I do NOT see any genuinely scary reduction in rights for gun owners.  I see pretty much SOP.

I could be wrong about Hillary.  I have become so tired of politics that I'm not really doing my homework as much as I used to do.

What's your honest assessment, Paperboy, about the potential Republican candidates?  I am guessing you'll tout the benefits of a pretty libertarian/TP-ish fellow, but do you really think -- and please be honest -- that such a person really has a chance to win the general election?  We saw what happened to Bachmann, Santorum, et al.  Surely, you see that Palin has no real chance?  Rick "Ooops" Perry?  Thirsty Marc Rubio?  You can't really imagine that a Rand Paul or Ted Cruz type can appeal to 55% of the country, do you?  Won't the Republicans probably trot out a man who talks big in the primary and then veers slightly more to the center in the general? 

I just don't see the GOP abandoning its establishment base and going with a TP type.

 

[PB the Deplorable]

You're probably right about Hilary.  Over the years I think she's moved closer to the center of her party and at the same time her party has moved further left towards her views.  Like a lot of politicians, I think she's gotten comfortable in Washington, and pretty much just wants to get along to go along and not make waves.

I don't think there's anything special about her either.  She checked off some boxes for her resume, but I don't think she was especially effective or accomplished as a Senator or as Sec of State.  I'd take her in a heartbeat over McCain or Obama though - her opponents in 2008.

Right now, it seems like she is the likely nominee unless someone comes out of nowhere again.  As of today, I'm not sure the country is ready for another unknown.


As for the R's - their leadership in DC stinks right now.  The people out in the rest of the country they would need support from in the Primaries hate them.   They hate Chris Christy too - for giving Obama all those photo ops in the week before the 2012 election. 

It would not shock me to see Christy change parties and run and a Dem.  Probably not tough.


There is a major fight in the party right now between the energetic insurgent Tea Party types and the old establishment Rino's.  It seems like we have more Rino's than ever - especially in the leadership - and less Conservatives, at least in the Senate.  And they are looking like shit.  Those Rino's are scared of being 'primaried' like Richard Lugar and a few others were so they fight harder against the Tea Party pols than they do against the Dem's right now.  It recently cost the GOP the governorship of Virginia because the Rino's would not support the Tea Party allied candidate there.

Can a Tea Party candidate win the Republican Primaries?  I think we will have a better idea after we see what happens in the 2014 off-year elections.


As far as Sarah Palin - forget about her.  We will never see her in any public office.  Same with Michelle Bachman.  Fget about Rick Santorum or Rick Perry ever being nominated either.  Timing is everything, and their time is past.  It was actually never here.  Even if they were to run, the money does not typically go to second tier types for another run.

I personally think Rubio is done for as well, due to his strong support of an immigration bill the grass roots hated.


People do seem to like Rand Paul and Ted Cruz.  We'll see if either can make friends with establishment Rino's, pull in money to be able to run, and again, see how strong the Tea Party is after 2014. I think both could have a chance after the next 3 years of Obama.

I really think Obama is done s a popular figure.  Once people feel deceived, when it hits them in the pocketbook, when it puts their healthcare insurance at risk, it's over.  He was going to be a lame duck at some point anyway and I didn't see anyone riding into office on his coattails the way Bush I did after Reagan.  I think this is going to be more like Reagan following Carter - a staunch Conservative has a much better chance when following a Liberal people are mad at.

So if not Paul or Cruz, then some governor.  I'm not as familiar with all of them, maybe someone like Mike Pence in Indiana?


I get tired of politics too, it's so scummy and depressing.  And unhealthy.  For some reason though, I'm fascinated by it - like a soap opera I can't seem to stop watching.  Sports are like that too, although I've managed to scale back on that a little.
.

[Ravenna]

Interesting thread.  I'd love to hear what Sardondi thinks about the fact that Obama lied to the entire American nation when he told people, again and again, that "if they liked their policy, they could keep it."

Democrat politicians up for re-election are starting to make excuses now not to be seen with him at events. 

And, with elections coming up in November of 2014, how much you wanna bet that they (the Obama administration) will put back the Employer Mandate by one more year?  That way, the Democrats (the ones up for re-election) won't have to suffer from the fall-out of the fiasco that *that's* going to be (and experts are predicting it's going to be bad), very possibly losing out at the polls as their constituents take their displeasure out on them by not bothering to vote.

[Mind Flayer Monk]

Interesting thread.  I'd love to hear what Sardondi thinks about the fact that Obama lied to the entire American nation when he told people, again and again, that "if they liked their policy, they could keep it."

I think we are 2 weeks away from "leaked" documents showing that insurance companies were intentionally changing policies 6 months before the ACA, to have the the insurance policies not qualify and have subscribers dropped.
That's the kind of games our politicians always play.

[West of the Rockies]

Wait... you're saying that politicians don't have the best interests of the people foremost in their minds?   

[West of the Rockies]

I see Ruteger's latest race-baiting thread has been deleted en toto (it was pretty ridiculous).  Man, there really is a virus of some type being passed back and forth on this forum.  Any chance Peter Petrelli or Hiro* can go back in time and make sure Art does not sign of NCA to help us avoid infection?

*A not-terribly-enlightening reference on my part to the TV show Heroes for those not in the know. 

[Yorkshire pud]

I see Ruteger's latest race-baiting thread has been deleted en toto (it was pretty ridiculous).  .

Some say it might have been helped in it's demise....  :

[West of the Rockies]

Well done, Sir. 

[Ravenna]

A one month delay for open enrollment, so the furor that may be caused, when the insurance companies report their data from that, will now occur AFTER the November 2014 elections.  Clever.  Some might even say, "crafty."

http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/post-politics/wp/2013/11/22/obamacare-2015-open-enrollment-set-to-be-delayed-one-month/

[jan78]

Some might even say, "crafty."

Perhaps not crafty enough? Insurees' cancellation notices will likely precede the election.

[Ravenna]

The one month delay will "reportedly" give insurance companies more time, "enough time," to evaluate the 2015 premiums.  If that evaluation came out BEFORE the November 2014 elections, and it reflects how much health care premiums are going to rise in 2015 (as it is expected by the experts that they *will* be rising, and probably dramatically), a lot of people might take out their displeasure with the Affordable Care Act on their Democrat representatives in Congress.

So, the one month delay is clever.  Even crafty.  (Clever if you like the Obama Administration, crafty if you don't).

[onan]

The one month delay will "reportedly" give insurance companies more time, "enough time," to evaluate the 2015 premiums.  If that evaluation came out BEFORE the November 2014 elections, and it reflects how much health care premiums are going to rise in 2015 (as it is expected by the experts that they *will* be rising, and probably dramatically), a lot of people might take out their displeasure with the Affordable Care Act on their Democrat representatives in Congress.

So, the one month delay is clever.  Even crafty.  (Clever if you like the Obama Administration, crafty if you don't).

This is such spin, it is beyond annoying. NC doesn't have the ACA at this point. And my insurance through BCBS is almost doubling. My portion is going from $268.00 to over $550.00. If I could sign up with the ACA it would be about $220.00. And most likely I make more than most here.

Just to add I am so fucking sick of people talking about costs. Private insurance runs almost 30% higher for every dollar spent for medical care than Medicaid and Medicare.

And not keeping your doctor... I have had the same doctor for almost 20 years. And the first 4 years with him were great. But the following 16 years I see other staff as often as I see him due to patient overload, time off, and no longer needing an office visit to get a referral.

[Mind Flayer Monk]

I see Ruteger's latest race-baiting thread has been deleted en toto (it was pretty ridiculous). 

The thing that mystifies me about the guy is he goes and chooses to live (buy a condo no less) in a city where everyone is either black, Cambodian, or gay.

[West of the Rockies]

I have no idea where the guy lives (nor do I care to know).  He's a bomb thrower.  Look, I know that I am the annoying uncle (or bother-in-law or whatever) who keeps wringing his hands and encouraging everybody to just get along.  I believe our tone, diction, and general rhetoric matter in particular when we're debating politics.  And I am sure I have crossed the line a time or two with my own posts.  We all wear our big boy/big girl pants on these threads, but tossing around the "N" bomb is pretty damn stupid. 

It's possible to dislike Obama without being a racist.  Charges of racism and facism are so frequent as to be meaningless now.  But sometimes racism does rear its ugly head as it did in R's post.

[jan78]

The one month delay will "reportedly" give insurance companies more time, "enough time," to evaluate the 2015 premiums.  If that evaluation came out BEFORE the November 2014 elections, and it reflects how much health care premiums are going to rise in 2015 (as it is expected by the experts that they *will* be rising, and probably dramatically), a lot of people might take out their displeasure with the Affordable Care Act on their Democrat representatives in Congress.

So, the one month delay is clever.  Even crafty.  (Clever if you like the Obama Administration, crafty if you don't).

Thank you! I did understand but that spells it out better. 

[PB the Deplorable]

Obama earlier declared he is going to rule by decree - using Executive Orders, using the bureaucracy to issue new regulations that go far beyond what the underlying law says.  Many times he's already just decided to re-write the law (as when he hands out waivers and deferrals to ObamaCare to his cronies), or chooses to ignore parts of laws he doesn't like (such as parts of he immigration law).  He despises our form of government - the Congress is 'in the way' he's going to do whatever he wants without them..

That's what a dictatorship looks like.


Now he's in the process of purging the upper ranks of our armed forces.  He's retired literally hundreds of them over the past year or two.  It's unprecedented. The military is supposed to be non-partisan.  When the people who have been the leaders, the decision makers, who have advanced due to merit, are just eliminated and replaced by lesser people more in line with Obama politically, it hurts the military significantly.

Many of the best leaders are gone.  Morale among those who remain is low, wondering if they are next to be axed.  Imagine how this affects decision making and preparedness.  Obama has already hamstrung the military with his changes to the rules of engagement.  There is no doubt this has increased US casualties.


Now with Harry Reid changing the Senate rules on confirmations of judges, Obama will be able to push through wholly unacceptable far left radicals into the Federal judgeship.  These specific Senate rule changes are also unprecedented.  These are lifetime appointments.  And it's another area that is supposed to be non-partisan - that's why judges basically had to get 60 votes before, so they would be more moderate and acceptable to a super majority.  Not only is Obama lawless and cares nothing about our form of government, we can add Harry Reid and the rest of the Senate D's to that.  They should be removed from office.


So just because Obama's popularity is in the 30's, his policies have been failures - foreign, economic, and domestic - even though he's going to lose the Senate (unless the establishment Rs manage to screw that up) in the next election cycle, he's still going to leave us with a politicized military and a politicized Left wing judiciary.  He will leave us with our relations with our friends and allies in tatters, with our relations with countries like Russia and China worse than when he came into office, with the Middle East in an uproar.  Our economic recovery will start 8 years later than it would have had someone else been elected in 2008 - except we will be 10 Trillion deeper in debt.


Even though he's a failed President, he doesn't look at it that way.  He sees his destructiveness as success.  It's what he planned.  This is how demented the American Left is. 

But the Left hasn't done this by themselves.  They had a huge assist from the people voting for 'Hope and Change" and "Yes We Can".  Great.

[Ravenna]

Obama earlier declared he is going to rule by decree - using Executive Orders, using the bureaucracy to issue new regulations that go far beyond what the underlying law says.  Many times he's already just decided to re-write the law (as when he hands out waivers and deferrals to ObamaCare to his cronies), or chooses to ignore parts of laws he doesn't like (such as parts of he immigration law).  He despises our form of government - the Congress is 'in the way' he's going to do whatever he wants without them..

That's what a dictatorship looks like.


Now he's in the process of purging the upper ranks of our armed forces.  He's retired literally hundreds of them over the past year or two.  It's unprecedented. The military is supposed to be non-partisan.  When the people who have been the leaders, the decision makers, who have advanced due to merit, are just eliminated and replaced by lesser people more in line with Obama politically, it hurts the military significantly.

Many of the best leaders are gone.  Morale among those who remain is low, wondering if they are next to be axed.  Imagine how this affects decision making and preparedness.  Obama has already hamstrung the military with his changes to the rules of engagement.  There is no doubt this has increased US casualties.


Now with Harry Reid changing the Senate rules on confirmations of judges, Obama will be able to push through wholly unacceptable far left radicals into the Federal judgeship.  These specific Senate rule changes are also unprecedented.  These are lifetime appointments.  And it's another area that is supposed to be non-partisan - that's why judges basically had to get 60 votes before, so they would be more moderate and acceptable to a super majority.  Not only is Obama lawless and cares nothing about our form of government, we can add Harry Reid and the rest of the Senate D's to that.  They should be removed from office.


So just because Obama's popularity is in the 30's, his policies have been failures - foreign, economic, and domestic - even though he's going to lose the Senate (unless the establishment Rs manage to screw that up) in the next election cycle, he's still going to leave us with a politicized military and a politicized Left wing judiciary.  He will leave us with our relations with our friends and allies in tatters, with our relations with countries like Russia and China worse than when he came into office, with the Middle East in an uproar.  Our economic recovery will start 8 years later than it would have had someone else been elected in 2008 - except we will be 10 Trillion deeper in debt.


Even though he's a failed President, he doesn't look at it that way.  He sees his destructiveness as success.  It's what he planned.  This is how demented the American Left is. 

But the Left hasn't done this by themselves.  They had a huge assist from the people voting for 'Hope and Change" and "Yes We Can".  Great.

Very well said.  I completely agree with this.  Pity the poor President that's going to inherit the mess he leaves behind.  And his legacy?  I think history will show he was one of the worst Presidents ever. 

[PB the Deplorable]

... I think history will show he was one of the worst Presidents ever.

Worst, most destructive, most dangerous, just plain un-American.  Fundamental Change indeed. 

He's had years to study government alongside his Marxist America hating cronies - pack the courts, purge the military, operate as a dictator, undermine and go around the Constitution at it's weakest points, use the media to his advantage, the lie constantly then lie about the lies.  He's learned his lessons well.  There are a lot greasy narcissistic power hungry third world dictators around, I'm not familiar with all of them but the one he reminds me of most is Robert Mugabe in Zimbabwe.

It's ironic that these 'Progressive' D's in Washington want us have more of a Parliamentary system like in most of the other Western nations - no fundamental rights under a Constitution, the Prime Minister and Cabinet formed from the leading party in the Legislature rather than elected separately, the upper chamber largely ceremonial.  No separation of powers, no checks and balances - no limits on government.

Where the irony comes in is that if we had a Parliamentary system right now, we would be long past Obama having lost a vote of 'No Confidence' and having submitted his resignation.

[onan]

Worst, most destructive, most dangerous, just plain un-American.  Fundamental Change indeed. 

He's had years to study government alongside his Marxist America hating cronies - pack the courts, purge the military, operate as a dictator, undermine and go around the Constitution at it's weakest points, use the media to his advantage, the lie constantly then lie about the lies.  He's learned his lessons well.  There are a lot greasy narcissistic power hungry third world dictators around, I'm not familiar with all of them but the one he reminds me of most is Robert Mugabe in Zimbabwe.

It's ironic that these 'Progressive' D's in Washington want us have more of a Parliamentary system like in most of the other Western nations - no fundamental rights under a Constitution, the Prime Minister and Cabinet formed from the leading party in the Legislature rather than elected separately, the upper chamber largely ceremonial.  No separation of powers, no checks and balances - no limits on government.

Where the irony comes in is that if we had a Parliamentary system right now, we would be long past Obama having lost a vote of 'No Confidence' and having submitted his resignation.

Ravenna, PaperBoy... I want to yell and curse at both of you.

I think Obama has turned into a poor president. But he didn't lie us into a war that killed over 100,000 civilians. That alone takes him out of the worst administration. And PaperBoy your hypocrisy over deaths due to administrations is appalling. You posted that minimizing the small number of deaths in Benghazi was in and of itself reprehensible. Yet it seems bush now gets a pass.

I don't really care to continue to argue over this. You both just seem to display a very short memory.

[Yorkshire pud]

It's ironic that these 'Progressive' D's in Washington want us have more of a Parliamentary system like in most of the other Western nations - no fundamental rights under a Constitution, the Prime Minister and Cabinet formed from the leading party in the Legislature rather than elected separately, the upper chamber largely ceremonial.  No separation of powers, no checks and balances - no limits on government.

Oh dear; Once again showing your total and absolute insular and ill informed knowledge of exactly how parliament works. Show me how our system is fundamentally inferior to yours...

[PB the Deplorable]

Oh dear; Once again showing your total and absolute insular and ill informed knowledge of exactly how parliament works. Show me how our system is fundamentally inferior to yours...

I'm happy to admit to not really following all the ins and outs of your history or politics.  There are dozens of European countries, I would not be able to keep up.  Frankly, I'm more interested in other parts of the world than what's been referred to recently as 'Old' Europe.

So in reply I'll give you my perspective and some general observations.  Feel free to shoot them down. 

Some of the drawbacks I see are, as I mentioned, you don't have a Constitution to protect your basic human rights.  You even brag about being disarmed by your government and unable to protect yourself.  They have you convinced that's the smart thing.  In your system the Party that wins the Parliamentary elections forms the next government, which includes the equivalent of our Executive Branch.  There is no separation of powers, no checks and balances, just near free reign to do whatever they want.  And what politicians want is to grow government and grow their power.  That affects everything, including the economy.  It's no wonder the growth of government in this system outpaces even our own.

It's not my role to tell anyone else how to govern themselves, but I would point out we in America consider ourselves sovereign citizens.  We are not subjects.  We are not a Democracy, we are a Republic.  I'm not going to try to explain the difference between the two to you yet again, since you didn't accept it the other times I tried, except to say a Republic  protects the rights of those in the political minority, and Democracy is the equivalent of mob rule, with the minority having no rights.

Here in the US we don't want a government-centric society.  We see ourselves as individuals.  We want a small limited government that does the basics, and little more.  As mentioned above, that's not what happens with a Parliamentary system.  I should add that our 'Progressives' DO want a huge bloated government encroaching into every aspect of society, and empowering them.  They see the Constitution as an impediment, and do everything in their power to undermine it.  It gets in the way of their Big Plans for us.  That's why I say they want to drag us towards a more Parliamentary type system.

A Parliament is a throwback to the time of hereditary kings.  In those days, European countries had an Executive (king) and a Legislative body (Parliament), just was we in the US do now.  When the powers of the European kings were curtailed, the Legislative Branch (Parliament) took on that role too, and performed both functions.  No checks and balances.  No separation of power.  Which is great for politicians, not so great for the people.

Look how quickly government then grew, how much more Socialist Western Europe is than the US.  For a free people, that's a Bad Thing.  For decades your economy dragged behind ours.  Your unemployment rate was higher than ours.  Your inflation rate was higher than ours.  Your interest rates were higher than ours.  Your living standard was lower.  There was less opportunity.  There have always been more Europeans leaving their homes in Europe for opportunity here than the other way around. 

Since the rise of Big Government here, and ever more Socialist policies, that gap has closed somewhat.  Our economy  since 2008 is closer to what has been normal in Old Europe for decades.  We finally have a 'leader' who operates more like a feckless European Prime Minister than an American President.


And if that weren't enough, it appears there is something in the European system that somehow gives rise to the worst ideologies.  The rise of Communism and Karl Marx originated in Europe.  As did Nazism and Hitler.  And Fascism.  And the various strain of Socialism.  Those are all foreign ideas to the US.  They did not originate here.  Somehow they keep popping up in Europe.

So I'll keep our system, thank you very much.  And do my part to try to roll back the forces that have been quite successful in eroding our Freedoms and our Constitution.  Things have not improved here during the past 50 years that the Left has had increasing success in changing our country.

[Ben Shockley]

[addressing P*B] Oh dear; Once again showing your total and absolute insular and ill informed  knowledge of exactly how parliament works...

No, no, no, no, Pud!!!  YOU are the one in the "echo chamber!"  It's all those echoes that produce the audio illusion of "countervailing data!"  If you were out there with P*B in the "real world" -- you know: hearing stuff other than the "Lefty echo chamber" -- you would believe the top-down right-wing orthodoxy!   See: the rightist orthodoxy comes from being outside any "echo chamber!"

Y'all got that ?!?

[PB the Deplorable]

Obama continues to destroy as much as he can, as fast as he can.  Approval rate in the 30's?  Over 50% now disapprove?  No matter.

Last week John Kerry (who in my opinion should have been hung as a traitor for lying about our troops activities in Viet Nam, and for illegally advising the North Vietnamese in advance of the Paris Talks) repudiated the Monroe Doctrine.  The Monroe Doctrine!

President James Monroe in the 1820's declared the US would not allow nations from outside the Americas to meddle in the affairs of nations in North or South America.  The doctrine also stated the US would not interfere with existing European colonies in the Americas, nor would we interfere in the internal affairs of European countries.  It came at a time when colonies were gaining freedom from Spain and other nations.  It was meant to protect their sovereignty, and thus our own security.  It has worked extremely well for nearly 200 years, for the most part.


John Kerry, in addressing the Organization of American States last week mischaracterized it as an American declaration of how and when we will intervene in our neighbors affairs.  While we have been guilty of that, that is not what the Monroe Doctrine is.  He lied, not that that is new or a surprise.

What this is is a further weakening of our ties with our allies. 


Obama and his toadies, these Democrats, these 'Progressives' continue their destructive ways.

[Ben Shockley]

Obama continues to destroy as much as he can, as fast as he can...
...John Kerry (who in my opinion should have been hung as a traitor...)
Obama and his toadies, these Democrats, these 'Progressives' continue their destructive ways.

Impotent punks like P*B spout this stuff without doing anything about it.

If they are this exercised about traitors and country-killers in their midst, then BY THEIR GOD, why don't they do something about it ?!?
The ballot obviously doesn't work for their side, as was proved by the intricate but inexplicable Lefty plot to put G.W. Bush into office twice.
Only violence is left.
I will only consider people like P*B or Sardondi or Ruteger to be credible after we find out that they have been arrested or killed for an assassination plot or attempt.   That's all that's left, right?
If this administration is as hellish and apocalyptic as they claim, then extraordinary measures  are in order, right?
WHAT THE HELL ARE Y'ALL WAITING FOR, BOYS???  DO IT!

I want to see y'all mentioned on TV as dead attempted assassins.
The rest of the country -- 99.999999999999%, right? Right? --will see y'all as HOLY PATRIOTS!!!!!!
BECOME MARTYRS NOW, BOYS!!!

[Yorkshire pud]

I'm happy to admit to not really following all the ins and outs of your history or politics.  There are dozens of European countries, I would not be able to keep up.  Frankly, I'm more interested in other parts of the world than what's been referred to recently as 'Old' Europe.

So in reply I'll give you my perspective and some general observations.  Feel free to shoot them down. 

Some of the drawbacks I see are, as I mentioned, you don't have a Constitution to protect your basic human rights.  You even brag about being disarmed by your government and unable to protect yourself. 

Yeah well, I guess we feel we have enough in prison without adding more because some dipshit has a firearm that their six year old picks up and kills a sibling; or some teenager helps himself to his mothers armoury and destroys the lives of several families in a school, and all because it's seen the right of someone to have a firearm, irrespective of their aptitude, is seen as more valuable than life..

But that's us.. Even the police don't want to be routinely armed with firearms. And if you went in a pub and asked the assembled if they'd like the same 'rights' as you with firearms, I can gaurantee the vast majority would say your system is batshit crazy. I have never ever been in a position where I have to defend myself with a firearm, ever. And as I've said ad infinitum, the notion that any bozo should have a gun is ludicrous. You're required to pass an exam to drive a car, or be a pilot. Jeeze you need qualifications to opperate the simplest of machinery, yet having a thing that can blast organs through rib cages is seen as needing no skills, psychological testing or aptitude? Yep...batshit crazy.

They have you convinced that's the smart thing.  In your system the Party that wins the Parliamentary elections forms the next government, which includes the equivalent of our Executive Branch.  There is no separation of powers, no checks and balances, just near free reign to do whatever they want.  And what politicians want is to grow government and grow their power.  That affects everything, including the economy.  It's no wonder the growth of government in this system outpaces even our own.

Yeah, well, that's what happens with majority rule. however the moment we have a coalition because no party had an overall majority.

It's not my role to tell anyone else how to govern themselves, but I would point out we in America consider ourselves sovereign citizens.  We are not subjects.  We are not a Democracy, we are a Republic.  I'm not going to try to explain the difference between the two to you yet again, since you didn't accept it the other times I tried, except to say a Republic  protects the rights of those in the political minority, and Democracy is the equivalent of mob rule, with the minority having no rights.

Democracy is mob rule? You really do need to have a word with political academics..They'll have more patience than I have. Suffice to say, you're so wrong.

Here in the US we don't want a government-centric society.  We see ourselves as individuals.  We want a small limited government that does the basics, and little more.  As mentioned above, that's not what happens with a Parliamentary system.  I should add that our 'Progressives' DO want a huge bloated government encroaching into every aspect of society, and empowering them.  They see the Constitution as an impediment, and do everything in their power to undermine it.  It gets in the way of their Big Plans for us.  That's why I say they want to drag us towards a more Parliamentary type system.

A Parliament is a throwback to the time of hereditary kings.  In those days, European countries had an Executive (king) and a Legislative body (Parliament), just was we in the US do now.  When the powers of the European kings were curtailed, the Legislative Branch (Parliament) took on that role too, and performed both functions.  No checks and balances.  No separation of power.  Which is great for politicians, not so great for the people.

Look how quickly government then grew, how much more Socialist Western Europe is than the US.  For a free people, that's a Bad Thing.  For decades your economy dragged behind ours.  Your unemployment rate was higher than ours.  Your inflation rate was higher than ours.  Your interest rates were higher than ours.  Your living standard was lower.  There was less opportunity.  There have always been more Europeans leaving their homes in Europe for opportunity here than the other way around. 

Since the rise of Big Government here, and ever more Socialist policies, that gap has closed somewhat.  Our economy  since 2008 is closer to what has been normal in Old Europe for decades.  We finally have a 'leader' who operates more like a feckless European Prime Minister than an American President.


And if that weren't enough, it appears there is something in the European system that somehow gives rise to the worst ideologies.  The rise of Communism and Karl Marx originated in Europe.  As did Nazism and Hitler.  And Fascism.  And the various strain of Socialism.  Those are all foreign ideas to the US.  They did not originate here.  Somehow they keep popping up in Europe.

So I'll keep our system, thank you very much.  And do my part to try to roll back the forces that have been quite successful in eroding our Freedoms and our Constitution.  Things have not improved here during the past 50 years that the Left has had increasing success in changing our country.

Yeah...Okay... Hmmm

[Ben Shockley]

Pud, their first and foremost addiction to guns has to do with dick size.   I'm no Freudian psychologist, but I'm convinced of that.  They think that if they keep enough iron in the house, the fat wife won't leave them for a Black guy nor their teenage daughter (their second sexual target) leave them for a younger manly man.
The second gun rationalization has to do with keeping muskets in homes in order to constitute a militia --you know: before we had an ARMY in this country --  so that, some day, they can rise up to try to keep y'all Englishters from burning the White House like y'all did in 1814... see how effective that "militia" thang wuz back then???

[PB the Deplorable]

Impotent punks like P*B spout this stuff without doing anything about it...

I know this is going to be beyond the comprehension of the American Left, but we Conservatives believe in the Rule of Law - flawed as it is.

That's why it's always the Left out taking over our parks and open spaces, blocking our streets and bridges, burning and looting places of business along their 'demonstration' routes, burning our flag and denouncing our country at their 'protests' - all in the name of 'free speech' and their twisted ideas about politics of course.  Jut to let us know how righteously angry they are.


If a dog like John Kerry is not prosecuted for his actions and is instead rewarded with a political career, then so be it. It's not like Obama doesn't have any number of similar toadies lined up to replace existing cabinet heads.