1
our CEO is giving away free stuff.

CEO.

Free.

We're fucked.

2 Mary K. Ham tweeted:   Obama: "I'm signing this bill on behalf of my mother."

3
He used the word 'free.' I'm beside myself, here. He said it's free. And NO ONE is batting an eye!

4 It's gonna be a long, bitter struggle.

5 Today's signing ceremony was as classless as the participants.  We're officially a country of commie dumbfucks.

6

We're fucked.

Sorry, no. They are fucked, six ways from Sunday.

7

I'd like to give a shout out to all my fellow partners in crime, here at the pep rally, 'cause it's right! 

 

8

The Democrats have one the day

And DrewM can't use the write word.

9

But signing an unconstitutional bill isn't treason-treason....

10
He just sealed his fate as a one term president.


From Romney:

SALT LAKE CITY — Former presidential hopeful Mitt Romney is the latest Republican to slam the health care reform bill.

"I think it weakens America, I think it's wrong for the country," Romney told reporters Monday at a book signing near his La Jolla, Calif., vacation home. "I think the process is frightening, and as a result of that I think that it's important for us to get things right."

Romney calls the legislation "unconstitutional."

"My belief is this bill, taking an incursion into the commerce of various states, violates the constitution," Romney said.

Romney says the measure will ultimately cost Pres. Barack Obama a second term.

Romney still isn't committing to a 2012 run for the White House, saying he will make a decision after this fall's midterm elections.

11 Let's not forget, Reagan gave out Amnesty and pretty much put border security on the back back burner.

12 No, if the individual mandate stands, then it will be a country founded by Anthony Kenedy.

13
Guys, I implore you, do not shy away from the word revolution.

As Captain Hate astutely points out, we have been taken over by the Bolsheviks. There WAS already a second revolution in the United States -- a long, quiet, subtle, and insidious revolution -- and the Left won it.

14 Perhaps we have chosen as a nation.  Perhaps?

will Republicans finally stand up and try and shrink the size and scope of government or will they simply be content trimming the edges and handing out scraps to their favorite groups?  The question answers itself.  When has the size and scope of government ever shrunk?

Then we will know what path America will select once and for all.  We already know the path.  It took us longer to walk it, but we took the same path Europe took.

15
We must work for the defeat of every Democrat, everywhere - even the ones that side with us from time-to-time - none can be trusted, all must be dismissed.

16 "The Democrats have one the day but we will submit our respective visions for America to the people in the coming elections."

Homophones are a bitch.

17 If the individual mandate stands, either through legislative inaction or by court ruling, America is done.

You are correct, but the future of this nation will be decisively established long before any ruling on this un-Constitutional, un-American travesty comes down.

States will leave, because it is clear that the US is broken.  I know we all want to hold out hope for this or that, but it is broken and will not be repaired.  The question is how ugly it will get.

BTW, you wanted to write "won" in the last paragraph of your post.

18
Colorado Taxers have to come up with $179,000.00 /hour to pay for PelosiCare.


for the next 10 years.... 

19

so now that it is law, can we see what's in the bill?

20 Since Romney instituted Romneycare in Mass, I think he should just STFU.

21 Enjoy it now motherfuckers because November is coming.

22 Won day this will be repealed.

23 Did they start chanting "Yes We Can"?

24 He just sealed his fate as a one term president.

Posted by: Lemon Kitten at March 23, 2010 12:02 PM (0fzsA)

The US won't make it through a whole term of the Indonesian Imbecile, intact.  No way.  No how.

25

I had the radio on and had to turn that crap off when the jugeared fuck said something to the effect that congress took their lumps for this legislation.  Some equally dimwitted shitheel shouted out, "Yes we did!" to the titillation of all.

They have no idea what kind of "lumps" are in their future.

Fuckers.

26 Let's not forget, Reagan gave out Amnesty and pretty much put border security on the back back burner.

Posted by: Barbarian at March 23, 2010 12:02 PM (EL+OC)

He didn't put border security on the back burner.  He traded amnesty for border security, only the border security didn't happen.  Not his fault.

27 I think the question is whether Americans will force the Republicans to shrink the government...

Remember- the governing class IS DESIGNED to oppress the people (via 'regulators' and the IRS.) Only an energized populace, well-armed as a last resort, can effectively do what it is designed to do- RESIST being oppressed. (This is all in Machiavelli's Discourses, BTW. "...Classics are the best.")

28 I think it's cute when the president tries to explain what our country is or should be, since it's obvious he doesn't really understand the character of the people now rejecting him and his agenda.

29

Since Romney instituted Romneycare in Mass, I think he should just STFU.

Mitt should mea culpa on this and note how the Obamunists are making even worse mistakes than he did.

 

30

Hopefully, these criminals will end up in cells with Bubba, who will use them demonstrate what they just did to America...repeatedly, and without lube.

31

We haven't actually chosen this path, we haven't been offered a clear alternative in the form of intelligent conservatives who can convincingly make the argument for a small and weak government.

We've been offered progressives and RINOs. We only voted for them because there wasn't anyone else on the ballot.

That is about to change...

32 Did someone say a time for cruising?

33 Reagan: "No government ever voluntarily reduces itself in size. So governments' programs, once launched, never disappear."

Isn't it a goddamned shame that when Republicans controlled the White House, the Senate and the House of Representatives they actually increased the size of the Federal Government?

Isn't it a goddamned shame that when Republicans controlled the White House, the Senate and the House of Representatives, they actually created a new Medicare entitlement called Part D?

The fact of the matter is that our nation is broken. Neither the Republicans, nor certainly the Democrats, see it as their role to shrink government. Democrats have, in fact, so infiltrated the Repbulican Party that there is little difference between the two. They are working hand-in-hand, in a bi-partisan manner, to turn America into communist Russia.

Both parties believe in the expansion of the Federal Government at all costs - not based on what they say, but based on what they do once they have been given power. If you want smaller government - don't vote Republican. Because Republicans don't believe in smaller government - as revealed by what they actually do when we put them in power.

You aren't going to get smaller government from either party. Both are controlled by a"political elite" that attends certain schools and they all get the exact same education and admission to all the right parties.

You'll get the government they create and you'll like it - bitch. Because you are not a member of their country club.

While we're on the topic, here's a quick quiz. Please name the department of the Federal Government that Ronald Reagan dismantled as President because it is not in the role of the Federal Government:

* Education Department
* Energy Department
* NASA
* Transportation Department

Now, quick quiz:

Which of these departments does any of the current Republican potential candidates favor closing up and eliminating?

Shouldn't be too hard to figure out the correct answer.

34 Thank you, Democrats! I love you! Obama good!

35
The whole "yes we did" mantra is tired, grating and insulting.

Reality:  *Did we fuck you over?!*  *yes we did!*

36 Biden:  "This is a big fucking deal."

There you go, America.

37

One last time we will have to chose...will Republicans finally stand up and try and shrink the size and scope of government or will they simply be content trimming the edges and handing out scraps to their favorite groups?

Well, Senator Pete Sessions was on the radio yesterday saying Republicans would be working to repeal some of the more damaging aspects of the healthcare bill, so I guess there's your answer.  If you want to repeal the healthcare bill, Republicans aren't the one's to go to.  Or at least, Sessions isn't your guy.  Sadly, he's mine.  He and Perry will make quite a team.

38

This all goes back to the New Deal.  It's been downhill ever since.

We haven't had a truly limited federal govt with a President that supported that notion since Coolidge.

39 Heh, Rush said that the crowd at this signing looked like the biggest cast of characters in that Star Wars cantina scene.  What an utter disgrace and complete lack of decorum.  The "Fired Up" chant just made my stomach turn.  And the woman that was screaming and beside herself was absolutely painful.  For the umpteenth time in the last year and 4 months, I am not only ashamed of my country, I am deeply troubled by it.

40 Posted by: Barbarian at March 23, 2010 12:02 PM (EL+OC)

You really want to fucking re-litigate the Reagan legacy? Today?

No one ever said the guy has a perfect record as a politician but as a guy with a coherent political philosophy we could do worse. We do worse on a near daily basis.

Way to keep your eye on the ball and focus on what's important.

41

Joe Biden added the dignity and class to this ceremony that only he can bring.

The grinning fool dropping the f  bomb, while mic'd up and on camera.

 

42 Is this what Joe the Biden was referring to when he said gird your loins?

43 No point in bitching about the past. We have to work with what we have, and manufacture what we don't.

44 Perhaps we have chosen as a nation. If so, we have chosen poorly.

I have to say error here on that statement. "WE" haven't done this. The problem is that the progressives have eliminated all of the qualifications for voting over the years.  I didn't vote for ANY of this shit or ANY of those people.

The people who voted the jugeared jackass into office, along with those who voted in Nanny Nan have zero skin in the game. They truly are voting themselves largess from the public coffers because they have nothing to lose and all to gain.  They actually do believe that all this stuff is "free" because it is provided out of Obama's stash.

In short they are too stupid to be allowed on the street but they are not too stupid to vote.

Until we cure that we will never get rid of this crap. As we become more and more socialist/communist the working people will become fewer and fewer until there are none.

That is the way of all communist societies. Historically they always collapse in misery and squalor but not before millions have to suffer.

45 I don't want anything to do with any country founded by Obama, Pelosi, or Reid. If that is what it has come to, I say Texas should secede immediately.

46
Since Romney instituted Romneycare in Mass, I think he should just STFU.

Yeah -but he did it within one state, voters had a choice, and he had to work with all the lefties in the state legislature.  I

RomneyCare is nothing compared to the 2700+ page pile of taxes and regulations in the ObamaCare bill from hell. 

Romney might be our best chance to take back the white house.  But who knows?  I'm no expert.  Is there someone else?
I don't think Patreus is a good idea.  He's awesome, but I don't think this nation is in the mood for the image of a "war" president.

Answers?  I got none.

47 Based on some of the comments above, I guess we'll have to rely on democrats to repeal this abortion.

48 41  Are you serious?

49 Von Bismark called. He said he's never imagined anything like this.

50 I feel sorry for anyone who has employees with 18-26 year-old children.

51

Fuck Obama

freedom just died

52

The grinning fool dropping the f  bomb, while mic'd up and on camera.

Is that what this thing is? I thought it was that new SS lapel pin Obama said he was going to start handing out.

53 The basic problem lies with the founders, though it isn't their fault.

They did not see -- could not see -- that "government" would create a class of power-mad super-leeches who would devote their lives to sitting in taxpayer-supported comfort while issuing orders to, and taking money away from -- the rabble.

They were patriots. They did not foresee that it would be possible for an America-hating thug to make it to the White House.

They saw being in government as service, not as a get-rich-easily scheme.

They did not imagine that agenda-driven totalitarians would screw up what they so beautifully engineered.

Their directions for building and maintaining the nation were built on the integrity of those who serve.

Little did they know.

We know now.

54 #20 Romney didn't force anything upon your state against your will, nor is MA's healthcare regime nearly as burdensome as Obamao's; and apparently, most MA'ians aren't complaining, at least not yet. Fair or unfair, you'll get your chance to STFU Romney in the primaries,

55

freedom just died

Posted by: beedubya at March 23, 2010 12:16 PM (AnTyA)

Don't forget me.

56 Can it be stopped through attrition? Just never letting them fund any element of it properly/ establish all the new agencies it will require?

57 Posted by: laceyunderalls at March 23, 2010 12:16 PM (pLTLS)
I put Biden's quote in comment 36.

58 Can we revive freedom in this country, or do we have to start again from scratch?

59

So how many Joe Biden moments equal one Dan Quayle potato?  Just so I can get the confetti ready.

Also--the next person that gives a "Yes, but" to Ronaldus Magnus gets a big Joe Biden "FUCK YOU" from me.  You have been warned, apostates.

60
Mitt Romney, for all his faults, is probably the one man who can get us out of the mess Obama is creating.

Love him or hate him, Mitt Romney is a brilliant CEO.

Name someone better, please. I'm all ears.

61 What a parade of unprofessional, classless, goons.  "yes we did."  The children are in charge of the show.  Let's see how much damage they can do until the grownups come home.

62 57 Oh my. But somewhere Dan Quayle is still adding the "e" in potato.

63 The only thing missing from the ceremony was the audience doing the wave and a foot stomp.

64
And please don't say Paul Ryan. He doesn't have the resume Romeny has, and there's no way he'd ever win the GOP nomination in 2012.

65

Romney might be our best chance to take back the white house. 

We can do better than Mitt for 2012. Mitt *would* perform well in a Cabinet administrative position, however.

66

The GOP will never "fight" back.  If they did the post author would cry foul.

Something along the lines of:  Moderates do not like it, polarizing, etc.

 

 

67 The basic problem lies with the founders, though it isn't their fault.

Posted by: Ray-man at March 23, 2010 12:17 PM (kMZPk)

The Founders disallowed American dual citizens and put the 'natural born citizen' clause right in the Constitution, which should have served to save America from this.  What more could they have done?

68

I couldn't watch it, I had CNBC on and when they got ready to switch to it I changed to the Military Channel and watched Huey's strafe the NVA.

I can't watch this guy anymore. I'm done.

69 There is no salvation in the Republicans, only a punishment for the Democrats. They'll nominate somebody like Romney, and he'll carry on as usual. Here's a quiz for you morons: There is someone in front of you asking for help, and you have plenty of money. Do you have the moral right to say no? His need is genuine. Do you still have the moral right to say no? It’s not his fault. Do you still have the moral right to say no? It’s a very pressing need. Do you still have the moral right to say no? It’s a child. Do you still have the moral right to say no? If you do not answer “Yes” all the way down the line — if you do not assert your individual moral sovereignty, if you do not assert your right to choose as being morally prior to anyone’s need – – than SHUT UP and get out of the way. You are not morally equipped to partake in this battle, let alone win it, and you are wasting your time.

70 "You really want to fucking re-litigate the Reagan legacy? Today?"

Yes.

We need to re-litigate it so that the we can compare the current batch of Republicans to Reagan, who talked a good game about reducing government, but never actually did it, did he?

Which department did he eliminate?

Which budget did he cut?

When Reagan left office, was the federal government bigger or smaller? Were their more federal government employees, or less? More taxes collected, or less? More spending, or less?

The current batch of Republicans do not even claim to want to reduce the size and scope of the Federal Governement. They're not even talking the Reagan talk ... much less walking the Reagan walk.

Look, if you want to jack off to a memory that never occurred ... close your eyes and enjoy yourself. But don't make out like you just fucked a supermodel. You didn't.

The rest of us prefer to live in the real world.

We'll only get small government when we field candidates who have actually done it and have a track record of cutting budgets (not slowing their growth, actually cutting them).

We'll get smaller government when we field candidates who have laid off government hack employees.

We'll get smaller government when we field candidates who want to cut public employee union pensions.

We'll get smaller government when we field candidates who have eliminated entire departments of government.

But not until then.

71

So how many Joe Biden moments equal one Dan Quayle potato?  Just so I can get the confetti ready.

You forgot the Laws Of Liberal Media: Demunist "moments" are ignored. Republican "moments" are amplified.

72 Name someone better, please. I'm all ears.

ANY current non-RINO Republican is better than him.

73 For the first time, though, they didn't take a nibble, they took a full bite.  They passed this unpopular, unsustainable bill in the most thuggish manner possible with fullscale corruption besides.

We are focused now.  Except for that insane piece of crap Lindsay Graham.

74 Sessions is a senator?  When did this happen?

75
Yeah - lets just tell anyone who might be able to help us- to take a flying leap - and then we can scratch our heads when the communists continue to control our lives.

Perfection isn't on the menu.

76
Can it be stopped through attrition?

LauraW, I was wondering the exact same thing. Why can't these social programs simply be sunsetted gradually by accepting no new participants?

For instance, end Social Security for people born after 1960. They're not gonna get it, anyway, so...

77 I don't believe in karma myself but if there is such a thing an old Soviet satellite will fall on the White House right about now!

78

Didnt they take down one Chicago crime boss because of tax issues?

I see history might be repeating itself, again.

79 We'll only get small government when we field candidates who have actually done it and have a track record of cutting budgets (not slowing their growth, actually cutting them).

We'll get smaller government when we field candidates who have laid off government hack employees.

We'll get smaller government when we field candidates who want to cut public employee union pensions.

We'll get smaller government when we field candidates who have eliminated entire departments of government.

But not until then.

Posted by: someguy at March 23, 2010 12:21 PM (VRJIW)

Those candidates don't exist.  And if they did, they still wouldn't do as they said once they got to Washington.

80

The GOP wants to be part of the same taxpayer-funded gravytrain that the left does, and remain a part of the media/politician intelligenista apart from the unwashed hoi polloi that elected them.

We need to repeal some amendments (16 & 17) and pass some new ones.  Will never happen.

81 I too fear too many in our country want this type of government intrusion in everyday life.  Think about it...if you're here from Mexico, Latin America, Africa, etc, even legally, the life you can get off the teet likely seems a dream compared to the conditions where you left.

In the extreme, I fear our populace is no longer capable of coexisting.  There will be blood at some point.  When, how much, and for how long are the X factors.

82

The Democrats have won the day but we will submit our respective visions for America to the people in the coming elections. Then we will know what path America will select once and for all.

1. Posted by: DrewM

WeÂ’d better make our "respective visions" crystal clear. As Thomas Sowell pointed out in his column today http://preview.tinyurl.com/ygmdd7j , November may be the last chance current American citizens will have to chose our path. Take a deep breath and get ready for the next assault: Cramnesty.

@31 That is about to change...  Posted by: BackwardsBoy

I hope you are right.

83

 I feel sorry for anyone who has employees with 18-26 year-old children.

For me it would be a delicious irony if all my moonbat bosses' moonbat employees demanded to have their "adult" children put on the insurance - he would blow a gasket.  There are several who have adults kids that have moved home, ha, ha ha.  My boss is all in favor of this crap but not if it has any negative impact on him.  He should be in Congress - what's good for "the people" shouldn't have to apply to him.

84 Funny how things change but really they stay the same.

The Revolution has been causing upheavals in almost every
country on earth, for a hundred years. Now the counter-revolutionists
come out of Germany, determined to end it.
New tyrants, defending the ancient tyranny, intend to destroy
utterly this new idea that men are free. They do not
believe it. As firmly as Lycurgus or Nebuchadnezzar, they believe
that all men are naturally subject to Authority (all but
themselves.) Government, they believe, is Authority; they are
Government. They accept that responsibility. They believe that
they should, and that they do, control the inferior masses. And
by the use of the real power, force (permitted by the false beliefs
of their wretched subjects) they intend to make their
imaginary static world orderly, as it was before the Revolution
began.

Rose Wilder Lane

85

" I will eliminate 10% of government spending per year, until the end of my term of office, or a rope is provided for me, whichever comes first."

Now that would be a campaign worth supporting.

86

13There WAS already a second revolution in the United States

You are banned from Hot Air.  Now, wouldn't the rest of you enjoy some nice links to a trig truther site?

87 tweeted by Slublog: Audio: "This is a big f**king deal" http://is.gd/aUt16

88 We need to re-litigate it so that the we can compare the current batch of Republicans to Reagan, who talked a good game about reducing government, but never actually did it, did he?

Look, I use that argument a lot myself; but he didn't have an unfettered hand to play with the donks in control of both Houses and the MSM preaching impending doom.  In fact it's remarkable what he was able to accomplish.

89 We are now open for business! Welcome Comrades!

90

I think it's about time for us to draft an Okie for president.

91

If you do not answer “Yes” all the way down the line — if you do not assert your individual moral sovereignty, if you do not assert your right to choose as being morally prior to anyone’s need –

Fuck you, Jeffrey Dick, and I'll tell you why. You don't get to decide who needs what. If YOU want to help someone for whatever reason, you can. And I'll help whoever I want to help.

You don't decide for all of us, you commie piece of shit.

92 "... but he did it within one state, voters had a choice, and he had to work with all the lefties in the state legislature. RomneyCare is nothing compared to the 2700+ page pile of taxes and regulations in the ObamaCare bill from hell.  Romney might be our best chance to take back the white house."

What a bunch of fucking claptrap. I live in Massachusetts and I can tell you with no uncertainty that RomneyCare is exactly like ObamaCare.

RomneyCare is ObamaCare ... just that it only includes Massachusetts because Mitt Romney has held exactly one elective office for 4 years and couldn't get re-elected. It's the only government he's ever controlled, and he instituted mandatory insurance purchases with IRS (MassDOR) threats and fines.

It is ObamaCare in all but name. Mitt Romney is the white Barack Obama. People in Massachusetts call him Mitt "Hussein" Romney. Ask Scott Brown.

If he's the last, best hope for Republicans then fuck it, I'm joining the Democrat Party.

93

We need to get our collective heads screwed on straight. We've got to become just as adamant as our enemies. We cannot back down and we absolutely must not compromise with those who want to expand the size and scope of government for any reason.

Many eeyores say we'll never reach the level of idealogical purity needed to right the ship of state. I say bullshit. We've got to become more ruthless and unforgiving when it comes to principles, but do it in the nicest way possible. With a smile, we can say "no, you won't ". You won't increase my taxes. you won't reduce my freedom, you won't be making my life more difficult by creating any more rules or regulations that diminish my standard of living.

94 delicious irony if all my moonbat bosses' moonbat employees demanded to have their "adult" children put on the insurance - he would blow a gasket.

Oooh.  I change my statement:  I feel sorry for good right-thinking people who have employees with children aged 18-26.  I laugh my ass off at your moonbat boss and his ideological brethren.

95

tweeted by Slublog: Audio: "This is a big f**king deal" http://is.gd/aUt16

forgot to mention that this was Biden caught on tape today at the signing ceremony.

96 You don't decide for all of us, you commie piece of shit.

I think you misread.

97 This nation elected Obama in the first place despite adequate evidence that he is what he is, an arrogant, self-absorbed communist.  I have little faith that we will regain our liberty.  I will vote the right way, but the rubes that put this jackass in office in the first place will probably get distracted by shiny objects and do it again.

98 What more could they have done?

Posted by: progressoverpeace at March 23, 2010 12:20 PM (A46hP)

Have to scratch my head over that, because I simply don't know.

Limitations on dealing with paid pressure groups? There were no lobbyists then. Term limits? Maybe. Further limits on enumerated powers? The Dems have ignored what's there.

That's why I didn't blame the founders. As I said, they could not foresee what would happen, because they were honorable themselves.

It may be that a -- pardon me, Allahpundit -- new revolution is inevitable and necessary, one that doesn't change the Constitution, but leads back to it.

99

It's going to take self-sacrifice to do what's right.

Anybody remember what happened to Tom DeLay and his associates when they forced Texas to redraw Congressional boundaries more in line with Texas' partisan makeup? That cost DeLay his job, and all of them are still under indictment.

It's a beaches-of-Normandy thing. No matter how well-executed, some of the advocates, activists, and candidates will have to take bullets to enable others to continue toward the objective.

Resistance may come in the form of direct attack (DeLay) or something like a major business donor warning a candidate he'd better not deregulate his super-special industry. There are a million scenarios. Expect a compliant media to be marshaled in support. We'll need people willing to take hits, and a deep bench to replace them.

I'll say this for the Democrat Congressmen who voted yea knowing it will probably cost them their job: They were willing.

Are we?

100

Look, if you want to jack off to a memory that never occurred ... close your eyes and enjoy yourself.

1.  FUCK YOU.  (I warned you.)

2.  Yes, let's be clear about Reagan--HE SAVED THE WHOLE GODDAMNED PLANET FROM THE SOVIETS.  Period.  Be a revisionist shitheel all you want--that fundamental truth will not go away.  If you want a history lesson, I can go into painful detail over this point up to an including the litany of offenses committed by that Georgia incompetent than made me into the conservative that I am.

3.  Let's picture a federal government and US economy today without the Reagan tax cuts or better yet a second Jimmah term.  FAIL.

4.  I did not imagine the vitriol, hatred and lies of the left when it came to Reagan.  They still do it.  That, in and of itself, should tell you that his influence over the American polity were a gigantic, blotting out the sun, unqualified positive.

NEXT.

 

101
I think you misread.

Did I?

oops. Wouldn't be the first time.

102

Perfection isn't on the menu.

Exactly. When I hear the "someguys" of the world carp, I wonder, "hey, what *would* you have us do, then?"

Did Uncle Ron grow the government? Yah. The military grew massively. And thank God. That's what it took to defeat the Soviet Empire.

Did Bush The Younger blow it, like his father? Yes. Because both bought into the "Compassionate Conservative, we can't be mean spirited, we can't piss off the new rising ethnics" memo. But were his intentions good, namely, the creating of new voting coalitions that would cement the Commiecrats out of office forever? Yes, I think they were.

But they were unrealistic.

I think the GOP will have to have the courage to be "mean-spirited". We will be smeared by the Commiecrats for it, but heck, they always do that anyway.

103 Reducing the size/scope of government is going to happen eventually - either by the legislative route or when the whole global economic ponzi we've been building up since about the mid-60's comes down on top of us. So it's not so much a choice of whether we'll do it, it's much more a choice of how we get there. One way (the legislative route) leads to a fair amount of pain and misery, a long slog - pretty much what Ireland is going through right now. The other way leads Beyond Thunderdome. I'm not optimistic that we'll chose wisely, and am - ahem - preparing myself accordingly.

104 33 Oh, absolutely. The Rs are just a communistic as the Ds. That's why all of them voted against this bill.
/

Maybe Ron Paul would be a better candidate, because he's a fiscal conservative. Oh, wait--look at his record on earmarks. He's just as guilty as the rest of them. What a surprise.

Seems you're also forgetting about the attempts to reform Social Security & the failure of the Rs in Congress to vote for any kind of tort reform. President Bush tried to get them to do both, but the spineless cowards said no.

105 How popular is a "free" "healthcare" bill when it includes a mandate for 16,500 additional IRS agents and auditors to enforce compliance?

The latest estimate for the additional agents/auditors is $10,000,000,000

That $10bill alone would provide a $2,500 health care voucher for 4,000,000 Americans.

Instead of the war cry "Repeal!"  I think the better campaign strategy is to "Replace!"

Replace the Obamacare monstrosity with the Republican's common-sense, market-based health care solutions.  The "Repeal!" call will soon be twisted by the Socialists as a Scrooge-like take-away-the lollipop.  That's fighting the war on Obama's ground and giving the Dems the political intiative.  "Replace" is better because it compels a debate on the facts and the philosophies of the two parties.

106 Strange that it's the anniversary of Patrick Henry's "Liberty or Death" speech...

107

I seriously need some talking down...I am ready to fucking explode

....kidding...

108 80...exactly...why would you go to Washington if you think Washington is the problem?

109

I seriously need some talking down...I am ready to fucking explode

....not kidding...

110 The Democrats have won the day

NO! The Progressive Totalitarian Statists have won the day.

America is marching full-speed toward destruction.

111 Circa's comment-fu is strong.

112
oops, sorry Jeffrey Quick

you're right -- agree 100%

113 We're fucked.

I will respectfully disagree. I am more hopeful and energized than ever. I see this legislation as proof that the end is near for the social democrats. Socialism is in its death throes. This legislation is like the death rallying of a dying patient. The family takes hope in the short term "improvement" but the doctors and nurses have seen it many times before and they know that death is inevitable.

114 This man also has some great ideas:
Paul Ryan Is Not Ready to Give up on Health Care

115

Look, if you want to jack off to a memory that never occurred ... close your eyes and enjoy yourself.

1.  FUCK YOU.  (I warned you.)

2.  You know what occurred?  He save the whole planet from the Soviets.  Try that.  And no amount of shitheel revisionim will change that.  Care to go into excrutiating detail here?  (I can.)

3.  Here's a mental exercise--let's picture the last thirty years of American history and specifically tax and budgetary policy without him.  Starting with a second Jimmah term.

4.  The vitriol, hatred and lies of the left when it comes to Reagan were and are  exemplars of his influence on the American polity being an unqualified POSITIVE.

Next.

 

116

This is the land of freedom.

Unfortunately most people think it's the land of free.

117

All is not lost!  Here are my 5 easy steps to reversing socialism in the US:

1) donate immediately to the NRCC;

2) donate immediately to the NRC;

3) donate immediately to the NRSC;

4) buy my book, A Mormon in the White House

5) vote for Mittens Romneycare, after we nominate him

See there?  Don't worry your pretty little heads.

118
beedubya:

We Have Not Yet Begun To Fight.

119 That's the speech that started a revolution. I wish some group would put that on DVD and start mailing out copies of it together with the Constitution to anybody who wanted one.

120 "HE SAVED THE WHOLE GODDAMNED PLANET FROM THE SOVIETS.  Period. "

Nobody is arguing that point.

I believe that Reagan was a great President and probably one of the four or five best President's that ever was. He secured our freedom for 20 or 30 years.

But he did not reduce the size and scope of government.

He expanded it. He enlarged it. Deliberately.

I'm sorry that the facts of the matter piss you off - but there they are. They're facts.

121 Shit--I thought the first one did not go through--sorry for the double up.  But this is AOSHQ, so I'm only mimicking.

122 I blame the media. The bias is stifling and monolithic.

Apparently the NBC-owned Weather Channel interrupted programming for this signing.

123 "He said how lucky we are...we had someplace to escape to..." (GULP) Where is that "someplace" in 5-10 years?

124 RomneyCare is exactly like ObamaCare.

114 new federal bureaucracies to cater to racial and ethnic groups?

125

They did not see -- could not see -- that "government" would create a class of power-mad super-leeches who would devote their lives to sitting in taxpayer-supported comfort while issuing orders to, and taking money away from -- the rabble.

Yes they did. It's called the Second Amendment!

126 This man also has some great ideas:
Paul Ryan Is Not Ready to Give up on Health Care

Posted by: Miss'80sBaby at March 23, 2010 12:33 PM (yfJ6g)

We can always dream.  But I think Morpheus said it best: I have dreamed a dream, but now that dream is gone from me.

127 Reagan greatly expanded the size and role of federal government, you stupid cunts.

128 125 RomneyCare is exactly like ObamaCare.

114 new federal bureaucracies to cater to racial and ethnic groups?

Posted by: HeatherRadish at March 23, 2010 12:38 PM (mR7mk)

Yeah, Romneycare didn't work, but was nowhere nearly as bad as this corrupt mess.  Still, Romney has to realize what his problem is and has to deal with it.  And yes, he may have to admit he made a mistake.

129 "That's the speech that started a revolution. I wish some group would put that on DVD and start mailing out copies of it together with the Constitution ..."

I wish some group would expound those principals today and actually, you know, implement them.

Boy wouldn't that be some hope and change!

Romney will not cut government. He doesn't even propose to.
Palin will not cut government. She doesn't even propose to.

No Republican is proposing to cut government. Not one of them.

It creates an opening for a true conservative candidate to emerge and differentiate themselves from the pack of Democrat-Lites that are currently in control of the Republican Party.

If you want your party back, I'd suggest you rid yourselves of Lindsay Graham, Mitt Romney and all the rest of those Ivy Leagers and millionaires and billionaires and instead nominate a candidate who is at the very minimum promising to do that which the people demand.

130 Guys, let's just ignore the cranks like 'someguy'.

They can demand God like perfection all they want but we are talking about human beings here and none is going to be perfect or agree with us 100% of the time or accomplish 100% of what we want.

One way the liberals get what they want is that they aren't bound by the past. Every day is a new day and they aren't worried about past fuck ups or consistency.

Today is DAY 0. Anyone from this point on who is willing to fight to undo this crap is okay by me. We can settle scores later but right now, everyone has a clean slate. Well, everyone but Romney. He's fucked but that's only because his plan is too on point to overlook.

131 someguy - Reagan didn't expand the government - he let Tip do it, so he could get other things done. A Faustian bargain in the long run. If Bush Sr. had held to his taxes pledge we might be ok.

132

That's why I didn't blame the founders. As I said, they could not foresee what would happen, because they were honorable themselves.

I understand and agree, Ray-man, except that they did see what would happen. We had the law - the Supreme Law - in writing that would have stopped this national suicide.  Everyone with a brain knew that the idea of a dual citizen being a natural born citizen would have been laughed out of any room just 5 years ago.  It was the prospect of riots in the cities that turned people into quivering masses - though the riots are coming, anyway. The Founders understood, full well, that a cowardly population would not be able to hold onto our Republic. 

It may be that a -- pardon me, Allahpundit -- new revolution is inevitable and necessary, one that doesn't change the Constitution, but leads back to it.

Posted by: Ray-man at March 23, 2010 12:29 PM (kMZPk)

Yep. But that will only be possible through states leaving and re-establishing the importance of our Constitutional Republic with a new nation. The US is too far gone.

133 131 Guys, let's just ignore the cranks like 'someguy'.

Amen.  If he really wants to make a statement, self-immolation works for Buddhist monks.

134 Politicians look to please those who financed their campaigns. I think a politician funded and put in office by the Teaparty might have different priorities than those who were financed by lawyers with vested interest in no tort reform. The NRA does quite well with the candidates they choose to support. So it can by done.

135 Anyone from this point on who is willing to fight to undo this crap is okay by me.

How do you tell the people who are actually willing to fight from the people who are full of shit and just want to get elected?

136 127 We can always dream.  But I think Morpheus said it best: I have dreamed a dream, but now that dream is gone from me.

I didn't say he should run for president just yet; what I am inferring is that he has great ideas for pushing back this evil. Maybe you should read both pp of the article & see why I hold that opinion. He's not a naive idealist.

137

You never "propose to cut government." That galvanizes the establishment against you. They neutralized Reagan on that, which is why he was unable to reduce domestic spending and government growth.

I'm beginning to wonder if somehow, to be successful, you have to get your opponents to do at least some of it for you. Carter signed off on deregulation. Clinton signed off on welfare reform.

What does the floor think of this notion?

138 Did Uncle Ron grow the government? Yah. The military grew massively. And thank God. That's what it took to defeat the Soviet Empire.

Actually that is a myth promulgated by the Dems and the MSM. That history book I just finished looked at that and they said it was social spending by congress that grew the deficit. Military spending didn't actually increase.

139

But he did not reduce the size and scope of government.

He expanded it. He enlarged it. Deliberately.

Relative to what?

In *absolute* terms, yep, Uncle Ron certainly did increase the size of government.

However, because the private sector economy grew so well, the size of Government as % of GDP actually did *decrease*. Yep. No kidding. Check it out.

Moreover, the important question to ask yourself is *why* government was increased? For Uncle Ron, it was to defeat the Soviet Empire. And to hand out enough pork and entitlements to keep the Boll Weevil and Blue Dog non-commie Democrats on board (think the late Charlie Wilson for example).

I certainly wouldn't have objected to expanding government from 1942-1945, would you?

 

140 Yeah, Romneycare didn't work, but was nowhere nearly as bad as this corrupt mess.

It's worse.

Massachusetts taxpayers pay the highest health insurance premiums in the nation ... averaging over $13,000 a year. It could not be any worse.

Additionally, RomneyCare is bankrupting the state of Massachusetts. We're facing billion-dollar shortfalls and they are already rationing care and removing people from being able to receive care. Massive tax increases are planned to cover the state budget deficit. They raised sales taxes by 20% in one year and it's still not enough.

It is a horrible disaster. Watch in horror because what you are seeing is precisely what is going to happen to America.

Mitt Romney is Barack Obama in whiteface.

141 I didn't say he should run for president just yet; what I am inferring is that he has great ideas for pushing back this evil. Maybe you should read both pp of the article & see why I hold that opinion. He's not a naive idealist.

Posted by: Miss'80sBaby at March 23, 2010 12:42 PM (yfJ6g)

I was just trying to work "dream" into a response.

142

Check Table 1.

Then tell me how Reagan didn't cut budgets.

 

143 So if governments don't reduce their size voluntarily, how do we get ours to reduce its size "involuntarily?" Was Reagan saying we need to wait for the whole system to crash in on itself for a reduction in size? Cause it sure sounds like that's what he said.

144 The only way to reduce the size of Government is to stop the witholding practice. Call it an economic stimulus, whatever, take back the House and do not authorize the IRS to spend money administering the system. Let some future administration try an take 30%+ of our paychecks - after we have the money in our fingers. Cause the crisis that brings it down.

145 This legislation is like the death rallying of a dying patient.

Posted by: Big Daddy1964 at March 23, 2010 12:33 PM (pOcKt)

Sadly, it's more like Hussein intentionally dumping 40,000,000 barrels of oil into the gulf and lighting just about every oil well in Kuwait on fire, all as he was being allowed to retreat in one of the most humiliating military defeats in history.  The Indonesian Imbecile and his Washington junta are scorching the earth in their wake.  There will be nothing left.

146 Former presidential hopeful Mitt Romney is the latest Republican to slam the health care reform bill.

Once again jumping out in front of the already moving crowd to pretend to lead.

147 This short clip from the same Reagan speech splices in some modern-day leftists at the appropriate spot: http://tinyurl.com/ya429na

148 I'm seeing a circular firing squad here. Way to go, guys! Let's just stay home this yr, it worked so well in '06 & '08. After all, an even greater Dem majority would be so beneficial for the country. But, yeah, who needs government, anyway? Our candidates have to be perfect on every issue & they can't be hypocrites. I mean, we ourselves are never guilty of hypocrisy, are we?

_{/extreme sarc}

149

Military spending didn't actually increase.

That is simply not true.

150 Posted by: someguy at March 23, 2010 12:43 PM (VRJIW)

Self-immolation.  Look into it.

151 How do you tell the people who are actually willing to fight from the people who are full of shit and just want to get elected?
Posted by: FUBAR at March 23, 2010 12:41 PM (1fanL)

That's always a problem. You can get them on record as much as possible and keep hounding them when they get in.

One thing we should be better at is positive feedback. It's great to threaten people or barrage them when they screw up but we should do a better job of holding people up when they do stuff right.

It's human nature to react well to praise but more importantly, you remind them of their duty and more importantly, it locks them in each time you do it. It's harder to flip when you accept the accolades of doing the opposite.

Ultimately, it's the system we have so we just have to deal with it.

152 I'm beginning to wonder if somehow, to be successful, you have to get your opponents to do at least some of it for you.

Bush signed NCLB, Reagan signed amnesty...you might be onto something.

153 All you people arguing about Reagan.  Could we at least acknowledge that Presidents don't cut budgets?  Congresses do.  Or don't.  There are letters in my local rag all the time talking about how much spending increased under Republican Presidents more than under Democrat Presidents.  It misses the point.  The point is, which party controlled Congress?

154 Moreover, the important question to ask yourself is *why* government was increased?

Not arguing that point. I'm sure the money was well-spent. I'm sure it would have been worse under Democrats.

But let's dispense with the notion that Republicans want to cut government. They do not. They do not want to reduce the size and scope of the Federal Government.

They are not even proposing that we do that.

And it's a goddamned shame.

155

Military spending didn't actually increase.

That is simply not true.

That is what that history book said.

156 149 I'm seeing a circular firing squad here.

Posted by: Miss'80sBaby at March 23, 2010 12:45 PM (yfJ6g)

No, you're seeing the usual Paultards and unappeasables putting a turd in the punchbowl.

157 People don't go into government to make it smaller. They go into government to gain power, and they rationalize this desire for power by believing that government can "do good."

158

Actually that is a myth promulgated by the Dems and the MSM. That history book I just finished looked at that and they said it was social spending by congress that grew the deficit. Military spending didn't actually increase.

I would count the social spending required to keep Democrats on board with Uncle Ron's foreign policy as a part of the "military spending".

I am reminded of the story of then Congressman John Breaux of Louisiana. He was (and is) a porker extraordinaire. When confronted by some peace-niks who asked if his vote on Contra aid and on military programs was "bought" by defense spending in his home state, he quipped, "No, but it was rented." The metaphor and the ethic were appreciated in Louisiana. Congressman Breaux went on to become Senator Breaux.

159 RomneyCare is exactly like ObamaCare.

I like Mitt, though I'm not a big political fan of his, but there is no comparison between a state doing nutty health insurance and the federal government doing it.  RomneyCare is crap, but it's legal and appropriate for a state to do, if they are dumb enough.  People can just move to another state.  The federal government has no business in dictating individuals' health insurance.

160 Posted by: progressoverpeace at March 23, 2010 12:41 PM (A46hP)

Sadly, even conservatives who claim to revere the Constitution rise up in self-righteous wrath when anyone dares suggest that Papa Doc Obama, the President-for-Life, is unqualified to hold that office because of the circumstances of his birth, which he has resisted all efforts to clarify.

It's worth noting that the vilified John McCain provided evidence of his legal right to be president when the issue first came up.

The Chicago Jesus is the ultimate proof that the "natural-born" wording, which went a long way toward eliminating divided loyalties, was necessary.

But bring this up on most "conservative" sites -- as has been shown many times at Tepid Air and you are a "birfer" crank. People say "stick to the important stuff" (which is Ed Morrissey's incessant drivel about tiny polling, process and procedure political crap, I guess) while consciously ignoring a pretty basic faultline in the Osama Obama story. Why? Because it would upset the friggin' lefties and "moderates" who, in the end, want to all just "get along." Using their rules.

As for secession: if it happens, and I hope it does, I'm off to a free state (you listening, Texas?) to live under the Constitution.

161 But let's dispense with the notion that Republicans want to cut government. They do not. They do not want to reduce the size and scope of the Federal Government.

They are not even proposing that we do that.

And it's a goddamned shame.

Posted by: someguy at March 23, 2010 12:47 PM (VRJIW)

Yeah, and it's insanity to keep electing Republicans and expecting a different outcome.  Let's face it, if the libs haven't won, they're winning.  They control education, for crying out loud.  It has taken its toll.  

What should we do?  I don't know.  But keeping our faith in Republicans is starting to look willfully blind.

162 One thing we should be better at is positive feedback. It's great to threaten people or barrage them when they screw up but we should do a better job of holding people up when they do stuff right.

Oh, thanks for the reminder.  That was my other idea in the shower this morning--a thank you note to Joseph Cao, since he went against the wishes of his [colorful terms here] district because the bill that just became law will fund abortions with federal funds.

163 How do you tell the people who are actually willing to fight from the people who are full of shit and just want to get elected?

You closely look at their record. If they have no record they should NOT be running for any office higher than local representative.

The problem I see with Republicans running for office are two-fold. Too many people are lazy and will not look up the record and too many people still believe the media and allow them to define the candidate. ergo Teh Fred had no fire in the belly even though he was campaigning like mad everywhere.

164 How do you tell the people who are actually willing to fight from the people who are full of shit and just want to get elected?
Posted by: FUBAR at March 23, 2010 12:41 PM (1fanL)

That's always a problem. You can get them on record as much as possible and keep hounding them when they get in.

You can also elect huge swaths of them.   They are pressured by who surrounds them.  The more Republicans you have, the more conservatives you have.  Moreover, people will be running very narrowly this time.

165 "I'm seeing a circular firing squad here. Way to go, guys! Let's just stay home this yr, it worked so well in '06 & '08."

I think that will stop when Mitt Romney and other Democrats are not being advanced as candidates in my fucking political party. That's right ... it's my party.

I'm not going to allow Democrats-Lite to take over my party and if that means depressing turnout for Republicrats - so be it. The alternative is to abandon my principles and I'm just not going to do that.

When we have some conservative candidates to talk about, I'll stop shooting at these guys. Mitt Romney signed ObamaCare into law in Massachusetts. He could have vetoed it and forced the legislature to override his veto. But instead, he joined them and worked with them and signed it.

Our party is infested and I am going to do whatever possible to ensure that it doesn't advance until it deals with these issues head on.

Otherwise, a third party is inevitable and Democrats will control everything for good.

We have two choices:

1) We can clean house of the losers who got us here (Romney included).
2) We can create a new house.

Pick one.

They don't want to go, and they're not going to go without a fight.

But they're going to fucking go - one way or the other.

I am rabidly anti-Democrat anti-Socialist. I'll do anything to stop them.

Except abandon my principles.

166 "Too many people are lazy and will not look up the record and too many people still believe the media and allow them to define the candidate. ergo Teh Fred had no fire in the belly even though he was campaigning like mad everywhere." Did you ever meet Teh Fred in person? I did. That dude had NO fire in the belly, I assure you.

167 That dude had NO fire in the belly, I assure you.

Bullshit; I attended a speech live and did not depend on the media version.

168

But bring this up on most "conservative" sites -- as has been shown many times at Tepid Air and you are a "birfer" crank.

OK, who was his mommy? And where was Baracky born? If you can't acknowledge that she was an American and he was born in Hawaii, then yes, you are a birfer crank.

As much as I loathe the Obamunist, birtherism is just pointless.

169 " RomneyCare is crap, but it's legal and appropriate for a state to do, if they are dumb enough.  People can just move to another state.  The federal government has no business in dictating individuals' health insurance."

Why does the federal government have no business dictating individuals health insurance - but state governments do?

Please explain this, because it sounds like something Mitt Romney pays people to say.

170 Please don't bring up Comatose Fred.

171 157 149 No, you're seeing the usual Paultards and unappeasables putting a turd in the punchbowl.

Point taken.

Even the Founders admitted that government wasn't perfect, & they made many mistakes in their presidencies. Not sure they lived up to everything they said during the fight for independence & during the Constitutional Conventions, either. People are imperfect by their very nature.

172

Vic,

Check Table 2 (Page 5 in the .pdf file).

Real spending went up 81-85 and then went down in real terms.

173 Mitt Romney is Barack Obama in whiteface.

Posted by: someguy at March 23, 2010 12:43 PM (VRJIW)

When you lose the ability to rise above hyperbole, you're as worthless to us as a commie in Berkeley.  We need people who can use reason and truth, not those that see two things as equal that clearly are not.

174 Reagan greatly expanded the size and role of federal government, you stupid cunts.

Posted by: Endles rightwing revisionism at March 23, 2010 12:39 PM (vsoRI)

Hi, erg! How's the telecom business? Betcha not that salty with the paying customers, are ya, dude?

175

too many people still believe the media and allow them to define the candidate. ergo Teh Fred had no fire in the belly even though he was campaigning like mad everywhere.

Fred never came out west, politically that is. Other than to act on TV, of course.

Mitt did, before Iowa even.

176

OK, who was his mommy? And where was Baracky born? If you can't acknowledge that she was an American and he was born in Hawaii, then yes, you are a birfer crank.

As much as I loathe the Obamunist, birtherism is just pointless.

Posted by: Curmudgeon at March 23, 2010 12:56 PM (ujg0T)

The Indonesian Imbecile was a dual citizen (by his own admission) and that, by itself, obviated any claims to natural born citizen status - regardless of the circumstances of his birth.

But, thanks for demonstrating exactly the sort of problem we were talking about.

177

Bullshit; I attended a speech live and did not depend on the media version.

Fred! would not formally declare himself a candidate, for months on end. That did not help.

178 "Bullshit; I attended a speech live and did not depend on the media version." Did you personally talk to him? When you talked to him, did you get an impression that he wanted to be President? I'm not saying it's a good thing that to be elected President you have to really want to be President, but it's an unfortunate necessity in this day and age.

179

The Indonesian Imbecile was a dual citizen (by his own admission) and that, by itself, obviated any claims to natural born citizen status - regardless of the circumstances of his birth.

No it does not.  There are hundreds of thousands, if not millions of Americans who can claim dual citzenship through the laws of another country and STILL be natural born.

 

180 The Indonesian Imbecile was a dual citizen (by his own admission) and that, by itself, obviated any claims to natural born citizen status - regardless of the circumstances of his birth.

This is wacky.  Born in the USA = Natural born citizen.

181 Why does the federal government have no business dictating individuals health insurance - but state governments do?

The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.

Quaint, I know.

182

Thompson and Giuliani ran two of the worst campiagns in modern political history.  I like them both and they just could not suck enough in 2008.

183

Guess who's exempted from ObamaCare?

 http://tinyurl.com/ydwb3mp

I said this before: The Democrats donÂ’t even care whatÂ’s in this train wreck, they just want to pass it as another step toward government-controlled health care; a system to which they will never subject themselves. You can bet your ass members of Senate and Congress will never tolerate the lengthy wait and deteriorated state of medical care they want to inflict on their constituents.
If ObamaCare is so fucking wonderful, how come Obama and the rest of the socialist dickweeds who voted for it, won't be subjected to the consequences?

184 Posted by: Curmudgeon at March 23, 2010 12:56 PM (ujg0T)

But, maybe you just don't understand the difference between a dual citizen and a pure American?  Maybe you think they are about the same and have the same view of the US?  Well, when the shit hits the fan and some people might want to go elsewhere, you'll quickly come to understand the difference, as dual citizens are not totally dependent on the future of the US (as they have elsewhere to go, whenever they want) while pure Americans will have no choice.

185 "We need people who can use reason and truth, not those that see two things as equal that clearly are not."

Grade: C-

Explain your work.

Please tell us how RomneyCare differs from ObamaCare (and remember, I live in Massachusetts and am intimately familiar with RomneyCare having lived under it since 2006).

186 "Pure American?" Dude, what is wrong with you? Do you think this is Germany or something?

187 Posted by: Curmudgeon at March 23, 2010 12:56 PM (ujg0T)

Since I don't know what his status was for sure -- except that he had a Kenyan father and admitted to being a dual citizen at birth -- my primary concern is not whether I think his father's citizenship is controlling legally, but that Osama Obama went to considerable lengths (and spent lots of campaign money) to obfuscate the truth.

I don't want to argue the point, but when someone hides facts, that is solid evidence that something unsavory is concealed within.

It needs to be proven that he is eligible, one way or the other.

When the Traitor-in-Chief stands up, says "here is my long-form birth certificate" and releases it, and it proves he is Constitutionally eligible, I'll never say another word about it, and neither will the vast majority of "birfers."

188 Why does the federal government have no business dictating individuals health insurance - but state governments do?

Please explain this, because it sounds like something Mitt Romney pays people to say.

Posted by: someguy at March 23, 2010 12:56 PM (VRJIW)

Is this a serious question?  Read the Constitution.  Social issues and interactions with the individual fall within the purview of the states.  If people don't like what one state does, they can move to another state.

The federal government's basic domestic job is dealing with the states, themselves, not the individuals - except for those few areas specifically defined for it in the Constitution.

189

I'm not saying it's a good thing that to be elected President you have to really want to be President, but it's an unfortunate necessity in this day and age.

Oedipal. He can't be president if he doesn't yearn for power all his life, because you won't vote for him unless he does, because you think he can't win unless he does and you won't vote for him unless he can win, and you win by getting the most votes.

Talk about circular firing squads... dude just shot himself.

At any rate - can we now demonstrate that John McCain showed any more desire to win in the general than Thompson did in the primary?

Teh Fred wanted to beat up democrats.

The maverick just wanted to beat up republicans.

'I'm nominated? My work here is done. I endorse my opponent.'

You got exactly what you feared, brought about only by your actions taken in trying to avoid it.

Those who'll take security over liberty shall have neither.

190 You don't need to go back to Reagan, you can just pull a few quotes from Jim DeMint.

191 Real spending went up 81-85 and then went down in real terms.

The history book said that the deficit spending was caused by congressional social spending and not military spending. From that it looks like yes military spending went up initially then went back down with some net increase. But when you compare that net increase to the growth of the deficit and social spending I would say the history book was right, or at least, mostly right.

192 When the Traitor-in-Chief stands up, says "here is my long-form birth certificate" and releases it, and it proves he is Constitutionally eligible, I'll never say another word about it, and neither will the vast majority of "birfers."

Posted by: Ray-man at March 23, 2010 01:07 PM (kMZPk)

Was he born in Hawaii?  If so, he is a citizen.  Natural born.

193 "The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people."

Explain where it says in any State Constitution that a state can force me to buy shit from Democrat political donors.

Neither the federal government, nor state governments, have the right to force people to purchase products from the very same people filling campaign coffers.

194

No it does not.  There are hundreds of thousands, if not millions of Americans who can claim dual citzenship through the laws of another country and STILL be natural born.

Thank you for that sanity, although it won't stop the distinction-without-a-difference birther crowd.

Yes, we all loathe the Obamunist. But the fact is that there are enough dupes, traitors, ignoramusses (yah, that is misspelled), communist leftovers, and the like to vote for him. I know we all wish he won by a clever ruse, but he didn't, unless of course you count LameSM media manipulation as a clever ruse.

195 185: Dude, I know plenty of people (myself included) who's parents were immigrants and thus potentially have dual citizenship and have ZERO divided loyalty. My family came from the eastern bloc to be Americans, and i'm sure as fuck a natural born citizen. Obama's divided loyalty comes from the fact that he's a communist dickhole not the fact that his dad was from kenya.

196

To #157's point....People, Ron Paul is NOT the damn answer! Will all the Paulbots STFU and get over it, Ron will NEVER be president....EVER!!! I've read of other 'attacks' on Reagan from the Paulbots but am starting to sense a patterns of astro turfing to them. I think there's a certain number of Paul nut supporters that are really doing the bidding of Progressive campaigns.

Remember, perfect is the enemy of good.....Guys, we only need to be good enough to make a huge difference. Perfection is never attainable, at least in the political sense. That said,  Car-salesman Mitt is NOT the answer either.

 

197 I have no faith in the courts.  It's going to be an uprising of the people at the ballot box (which is rare, and so the most unlikely); or its going to be some civil disobedience and even some violence.

198 Dude, what is wrong with you? Do you think this is Germany or something?

Posted by: Huge at March 23, 2010 01:07 PM (SHdwl)

Oh please.  That means someone who has held nothing but American citizenship.  Get a friggin' grip.

199

But, maybe you just don't understand the difference between a dual citizen and a pure American?

What you said was factually wrong, progressoverpeace, so let's not backtrack.

200 "Natural born," aside, there is no disputing that Obama is the least American of all American Presidents, born and raised in foreign cultures.

201 Explain where it says in any State Constitution that a state can force me to buy shit from Democrat political donors.

Neither the federal government, nor state governments, have the right to force people to purchase products from the very same people filling campaign coffers.

If the State Constitution doesn't prohibit it, then generally, the State can do it.

202 "He can't be president if he doesn't yearn for power all his life, because you won't vote for him unless he does, because you think he can't win unless he does and you won't vote for him unless he can win, and you win by getting the most votes." Pretty much, yeah. Don't get me wrong, I voted for him in the primary. I tried to convince others to vote for teh Fred in the primary. But I'm trying to help you understand why he didn't get more votes. And it's because he did not really want to be President.

203 For those who seem to think that dual citizenship is no big deal, perhaps you ought to take a look at our CURRENT oath of citizenship and see what the US government demands people do, who are being naturalized as Americans.  There's no room in there for split allegiances ... because that used to be a known attitude that our government held about the idea of multiple citizenships.  But you have all forgotten, for some odd reason.  Let me refresh your memories about the start of the oath that we demand:

"I hereby declare, on oath, that I absolutely and entirely renounce and abjure all allegiance and fidelity to any foreign prince, potentate, state, or sovereignty of whom or which I have heretofore been a subject or citizen;"

And you folks are going to argue that a dual citizen could be President??  LOL.

204 Fred never came out west, politically that is. Other than to act on TV, of course.

How about the reason for that was too many people had already signed on to the asshole McCain because (1) liberal States voted first and (2) the media said he couldn't win only McCain could. The damn primaries for the Rs were essentially over after SC and FL. If you live in CA you should be screaming for primary rule changes.

And yes, he was late actually entering the contest but he also had legal commitments he had to meet with the TV show.

No, we got stupid McCain because of shitty rules in the primary which are yet to be even discussed for fixing and because too many people believe the media EVEN when they know the damn media whores lie about everything.

205

Was he born in Hawaii?  If so, he is a citizen.  Natural born.

Posted by: FUBAR at March 23, 2010 01:09 PM (1fanL)

So your view is, so long as someone was born in the US (and spent 14 years here) he is Constitutionally eligible to be President even if he holds citizenship in 132 other countries?  Really?

That's nuts, you know.  I think most understand what the Founders would say to someone who proposed such a moronic idea.  Hell, they didn't even accept the idea of an American having even one other citizenship.  And you think their "natural born citizen" included multiple nationals?  Sheesh.

206 "I hereby declare, on oath, that I absolutely and entirely renounce and abjure all allegiance and fidelity to any foreign prince, potentate, state, or sovereignty of whom or which I have heretofore been a subject or citizen;"

And you folks are going to argue that a dual citizen could be President??  LOL.

Posted by: progressoverpeace at March 23, 2010 01:13 PM (A46hP)

Another country extending the benefits of citizenship to a US citizen does not require fidelity or allegiance on the part of that citizen.  This is pretty well settled law.

207

That's nuts, you know.  I think most understand what the Founders would say to someone who proposed such a moronic idea.  Hell, they didn't even accept the idea of an American having even one other citizenship.  And you think their "natural born citizen" included multiple nationals?  Sheesh.

Posted by: progressoverpeace at March 23, 2010 01:15 PM (A46hP)

This is well-settled, uncontroversial law.  Sorry.

208 So, if your Dad is from Britain then you're not a "pure American" because Britain will grant you dual citizenship when you're 18? Perhaps we should institute a "one-drop" rule for our Presidents.

209 This is a moot point.The US doesn't legally recognize dual citizenship anyway. If you are born on american soil you are a natural born citizen, PERIOD; unless and until you renounce it by VOLUNTARILY obtaining citizenship somewhere else. You might not like it but thats the law.

210

And you folks are going to argue that a dual citizen could be President??  LOL.

You said that a dual citizen cannot be a natural born citizen.

Your words not mine.

 

211

George Washington did not really want to be president.

I know damn well why he didn't get more votes - because more people did not vote for him.

Democracy is the belief that the people know what they want, and deserve to get it, good and hard.

C'est la vie, if you're into mob rule.

212 The US doesn't legally recognize dual citizenship anyway

That was true in the past, but I believe they Do recognize it now.

213 Perhaps we should institute a "one-drop" rule for our Presidents.

Posted by: Huge at March 23, 2010 01:17 PM (SHdwl)

More with the idiotic attempts to smear me because you refuse to accept that a dual citizen is different from an American with no other citizenships.  Smear John Jay, instead:

In his July 1787 letter to George Washington:

Dear Sir,

Permit me to hint whether it would not be wise and seasonable to provide a strong check to the admission of foreigners into the administration of our national government ; and to declare expressly that the command in chief of the American army shall not be given to, nor devolve on any but a natural born citizen.

I remain, dear sir,

Your faithful friend and servant,

John Jay.

214

How about the reason for that was too many people had already signed on to the asshole McCain because (1) liberal States voted first and (2) the media said he couldn't win only McCain could. The damn primaries for the Rs were essentially over after SC and FL. If you live in CA you should be screaming for primary rule changes.

Mitt was out here, fundraising and meeting Republicans, before Iowa even. Ditto for Juan McLame. Ditto for Rudy. Ditto for Tom Tancredo even, who had no war chest. I rest my case.

And yes, he was late actually entering the contest but he also had legal commitments he had to meet with the TV show.

Again, case closed. Get in early or don't get in at all. Perhaps Tancredo and Hunter could have stayed out and have thrown what meager support they had early to Thompson.

It was striking to me on the Presidential debates how Tom Tancredo, who was hardly called on and had no war chest, set the pace for the other candidates when he actually *was* permitted to speak. Imagine what a real conservative with clout, a war chest, and a more favorable image could have done. All of which Fred! could have had, if he had just committed early.

215 This citizenship argument is like chasing a squirrel around the backyard with a tennis racket. The law is settled as FUBAR said, and uncontroversial. Donofrio v. Wells took the dual citizen argument to the supreme court. Cert denied without opinion. Game over.

216 Dear Sir, Permit me to hint whether it would not be wise and seasonable to provide a strong check to the admission of foreigners into the administration of our national government ; and to declare expressly that the command in chief of the American army shall not be given to, nor devolve on any but a natural born citizen. ALSO, MAKE SURE THAT THEY'RE PURE AMERICANS! BEING A NATURAL BORN CITIZEN IS NOT ENOUGH. IF HIS DAD IS FROM A BRITISH COLONY HE CAN'T BE PRESIDENT!!! KEEP OUR AMERICAN RACE PURE! I remain, dear sir, Your faithful friend and servant, John Jay.

217

Dear Sir,

Permit me to hint whether it would not be wise and seasonable to provide a strong check to the admission of foreigners into the administration of our national government ; and to declare expressly that the command in chief of the American army shall not be given to, nor devolve on any but a natural born citizen.

I remain, dear sir,

Your faithful friend and servant,

John Jay.

Posted by: progressoverpeace at March 23, 2010 01:22 PM (A46hP)

Foreigners vs. natural born citizens.  Does not support your point.  If a person is born in America, he is a natural born citizen, unless and until he intends to renounce his American citizenship.  And all the eleventy in the world won't change that.

218

That's nuts, you know.  I think most understand what the Founders would say to someone who proposed such a moronic idea.  Hell, they didn't even accept the idea of an American having even one other citizenship.  And you think their "natural born citizen" included multiple nationals?  Sheesh.

You are confusing what ought to be with what is. To quote FUBAR (not the acronym, the guy), "This is well-settled, uncontroversial law.  Sorry."

And you are right, that may well be "FUBAR" (not the guy, the acronym). But it is legal.

219

Not to be too skeptical, but I think we chose when Obama was elected and when we fail to realize that elections have consequences, and that electing Democrats will push s further down the slippery slope. And we choose each time an interest group goes nuts when its particular entitlement program is in any danger of being trimmed. And we have chosen when we let the government and media label a slowdown in the rate of increase in an entitlement program as a "cut".

I will live as a conservative and do my best for the cause. But I think the die is pretty much cast.

220 Posted by: progressoverpeace at March 23, 2010 01:22 PM (A46hP)

Everybody in this country, if not the world, knows that he has dual citizenship.  If that was a disqualifier, surely he would have been disqualified.

221

That's nuts, you know.  I think most understand what the Founders would say to someone who proposed such a moronic idea.  Hell, they didn't even accept the idea of an American having even one other citizenship.  And you think their "natural born citizen" included multiple nationals?  Sheesh.

Posted by: progressoverpeace at March 23, 2010 01:15 PM (A46hP)

This is well-settled, uncontroversial law.  Sorry.

Posted by: FUBAR at March 23, 2010 01:17 PM (1fanL)

LOL. You're just making shit up, now.  There is no settled law or rulings on whether dual citizenship obviates 'natural born citizen' status, though it is clear what the Founders thought.  At the very least you should have wanted this ruled on - though the Court might well have come down on your side.  But the cowardice is that you don't even want a ruling on this, which is why you say stuff like "That is settled law" which is pure, unmitigated bullshit.

The fact is that the 'natural born citizen' clause was meant to avert exactly the sort of person we have in the White House, right now - someone with no American sensibilities and even contempt for American culture and traditions.  Btu ... we tried to warn you folks, and even as you see the destruction wrought, you stick to the silliness.

222 The US doesn't legally recognize dual citizenship anyway

That was true in the past, but I believe they Do recognize it now.

Posted by: Vic at March 23, 2010 01:20 PM (QrA9E)

The US recognizes multiple citizenship now.  It's detailed right on your American passport. 

223 So far you have provided one quote from John Jay which doesn't say anything about involuntary dual citizenship, or refute the point that anyone born in america is a natural born citizen. I think you may be confusing "what the founders thought" with "what you wish were true".

224 Well, they'll fix all the bad just as soon as they pass illegal alien amnesty and reparations bills.

225 So, if your Dad is from Britain then you're not a "pure American" because Britain will grant you dual citizenship when you're 18?

Perhaps we should institute a "one-drop" rule for our Presidents.

Posted by: Huge at March 23, 2010 01:17 PM (SHdwl)

Maybe you should ask Chester Arthur about this one, as his British dad (at the time of Arthur's birth) scared Arthur enought to hide all details, lest he be found out to be not a "natural born citizen" even though he was born in America to an American mother.  But, maybe Chester Arthur just didn't know jack about it ...

226
KEEP OUR AMERICAN RACE PURE!

I remain, dear sir,

Your faithful friend and servant,

John Jay.

Posted by: Huge at March 23, 2010 01:24 PM (SHdwl)

Can you not debate intelligently?  You are as bad as the amnesty shills and race-baiters on the left.

227

LOL. You're just making shit up, now.  There is no settled law or rulings on whether dual citizenship obviates 'natural born citizen' status, though it is clear what the Founders thought.  At the very least you should have wanted this ruled on - though the Court might well have come down on your side.  But the cowardice is that you don't even want a ruling on this, which is why you say stuff like "That is settled law" which is pure, unmitigated bullshit.

Posted by: progressoverpeace at March 23, 2010 01:26 PM (A46hP)

Do you honestly think, in almost 250 years, that the question of what is a "natural born citizen" has never come up?  Seriously.

228 Again, case closed. Get in early or don't get in at all. Perhaps Tancredo and Hunter could have stayed out and have thrown what meager support they had early to Thompson.

Perhaps Tancredo and Hunter could have done better has well if the media whores had not persisted in the "House members can never win" meme.  I would have MUCH preferred either one of them to McCain or Romney.

Note that I have mentioned that shit stick gomer Huck.

In any case regardless of the 2008 primary choices why the fuck do we still have the same rules that gave us McCain?

229 you can not only have dual citizenship you can join and swear allegiance to a foreign army/governemnt like with Jews and Israel

230

LOL. You're just making shit up, now.  There is no settled law or rulings on whether dual citizenship obviates 'natural born citizen' status, though it is clear what the Founders thought. 

See #216 above. As for what the founders thought, heck, I'd like the whole Warren Court thrown out on its arse. But that again is what Ought To Be, not what Is.

At the very least you should have wanted this ruled on - though the Court might well have come down on your side.  But the cowardice is that you don't even want a ruling on this, which is why you say stuff like "That is settled law" which is pure, unmitigated bullshit.

There was a ruling. A lower court ruling, cert denied.

The fact is that the 'natural born citizen' clause was meant to avert exactly the sort of person we have in the White House, right now - someone with no American sensibilities and even contempt for American culture and traditions.  Btu ... we tried to warn you folks, and even as you see the destruction wrought, you stick to the silliness.

OK, now you are trying to be a martyr and are downright insulting. ALL of us here bitterly opposed the Obamunist. But that doesn't change the fact that too many people in this country -- at least 52% -- are either:

1) mushyheaded dupes who thought electing the Obamunist would mean racial healing (when in fact, the opposite is true),

2) ignoramuses who think Obama was going to buy them a house and a fridge (as the welfare breeder ghetto lady in Detroit did, and there are *millions* of people like her, especially among African Americans, sadly), 

3) leftover communists who infiltrated academia and the media and the entertainment industry

4) people who believe they can put anything in their mouths or up their anuses without consequence and can have the government take care of them when the inevitable consequences occur.

Sad, but true. 

231

And you folks are going to argue that a dual citizen could be President??  LOL.

You said that a dual citizen cannot be a natural born citizen.

Your words not mine.

 

Posted by: Circa (Insert Year Here) at March 23, 2010 01:18 PM (B+qrE)

Uh ... yeah.  Dual citizens cannot be President - at least not by the Constitutional rules.  You guys are arguing against that and claiming, effectively, that one could have 172 citizeships and still be eligible, so long as the person was born American.  That is clearly a joke and I find it amazing that anyone wouuld argue that the Founders were cool with the idea of multiple citizens holding the Presidency.  It's amazing that anyone would even think that, knowing what the Founders thought about split allegiances - with that bit from our current oath to show that that attitude about sole allegiance to the US extended all the way down to a mere naturalized American.  But you guys are arguing that the restrictions we place on someone being naturalized an American are stricter than the Constitutional requirements for President.  Do you really believe that?

232 Hmm. This:

Can you not debate intelligently?  You are as bad as the amnesty shills and race-baiters on the left.

Would not seem to go with this:

LOL. You're just making shit up, now.  There is no settled law or rulings on whether dual citizenship obviates 'natural born citizen' status, though it is clear what the Founders thought.  At the very least you should have wanted this ruled on - though the Court might well have come down on your side.  But the cowardice is that you don't even want a ruling on this, which is why you say stuff like "That is settled law" which is pure, unmitigated bullshit.

Maybe you could provide a shred of support for your view?

233 Perkins v. Elg 307 US 325 (1939) Ball-game. And I'm done with this thread. If i wanted to have this pointless of an argument i'd talk to a 9/11 truther.

234 Posted by: progressoverpeace at March 23, 2010 01:39 PM (A46hP)

Did you read that link, or are you just going to keep eleventy-ing?

235 Arrrg: Note that I have NOT mentioned that shit stick gomer Huck.

236 great post

237

Do you honestly think, in almost 250 years, that the question of what is a "natural born citizen" has never come up?  Seriously.

Posted by: FUBAR at March 23, 2010 01:34 PM (1fanL)

There has never been a ruling on the operative definition of the Constitutional clause, "natural born citizen".  You might find that strange, but then people think it strange that no one bothered checking the eligibility of candidates before putting them on the ballots, with things being so bad that a NON-AMERICAN (you hear that a NON-AMERICAN) Roger Calero was on the ballot for President in 6 states in 2008 (and he was on some in 2004, too).  The guy doesn't even hold US citizenship!  He's got a friggin' green card.

238

There has never been a ruling on the operative definition of the Constitutional clause, "natural born citizen".  You might find that strange, but then people think it strange that no one bothered checking the eligibility of candidates before putting them on the ballots, with things being so bad that a NON-AMERICAN (you hear that a NON-AMERICAN) Roger Calero was on the ballot for President in 6 states in 2008 (and he was on some in 2004, too).  The guy doesn't even hold US citizenship!  He's got a friggin' green card.

Posted by: progressoverpeace at March 23, 2010 01:43 PM (A46hP)

Look, Mr. Birther.  Did you read Perkins v. Elg?  You are asserting things that just aren't true.  Eleventy.

239 Well, I wouldn't worry. Mitch McConnell has said that "Repeal and Replace" will be the cry this fall. Come next year, job number one for the new majority. And if Mitch said it...well, you know, his word is his bond.

Of course, there is a reason why many people are forced to actually fork over real money as surety...not saying anything, but...

240 From Dennis Prager: "ItÂ’s a Civil War: What We Do Now" from National Review On Line. I'd post the link but I an a tinyurl deficient moron.

241

"I'll say this for the Democrat Congressmen who voted yea knowing it will probably cost them their job: They were willing."

I woke up last night thinking about this. I hate the miserable #$%&* but they put their jobs on the line.

And now I hear that prominent R's such as Sessions are going to work to try to repeal some of the most onerous provisions of this debacle - to chip around the edges as it were.

They fought hard. They lost through lack of numbers on their side. The people are behind them. They will likely get the chance to come back again and fight again when they have the numbers on their side. Will they go for the full bore beatdown when they have the chance or will they trim sails once again? The Democrats didn't trim their sails.

242 Hey wait a minute, Reagan didn't save us from the soviets, Gorbachav did................According to the room full of people that are signing the Bolshevik bill anyhow.

243 Did you read that link, or are you just going to keep eleventy-ing?

Posted by: FUBAR at March 23, 2010 01:41 PM (1fanL)

Either write what you want or paste it.  Don't assign me linkwork.  I know the history of natural born citizen issues in the US, since this debate has been gonig on since way back in the Dem primary.  If you have something new to add then write it.  You have a link to a case or a ruling (and forget the Wong Kim Ark crap), put that in, but don't send me to wiki pages or whatever.

244 The birth issue is a loser, move on.

245

OK, now you are trying to be a martyr and are downright insulting. ALL of us here bitterly opposed the Obamunist. But that doesn't change the fact that too many people in this country -- at least 52% -- are either:

1) mushyheaded dupes who thought electing the Obamunist would mean racial healing (when in fact, the opposite is true),

2) ignoramuses who think Obama was going to buy them a house and a fridge (as the welfare breeder ghetto lady in Detroit did, and there are *millions* of people like her, especially among African Americans, sadly), 

3) leftover communists who infiltrated academia and the media and the entertainment industry

4) people who believe they can put anything in their mouths or up their anuses without consequence and can have the government take care of them when the inevitable consequences occur.

Sad, but true. 

Posted by: Curmudgeon at March 23, 2010 01:36 PM (ujg0T)

And the Founders understood that masses of people can be like this, which is why we got a Constitutional Republic instead of a Democracy.  The Founders intended to NOT even allow the population to elect certain people (like non-citizens, though one can make a great case that a non-citizen could be a fine US President).  That's the difference of a Republic, right?  The ultimate power is in the Constitution, and that Constitution tried to limit the choice of those eligible to be Chief Executive, regardless of what the people wanted.  Because the Founders foresaw exactly what we have, now.  They did their best, but the US got too soft.

This was what that whole Franklin(?) quote about "A Republic, if you can keep it" meant.

Whether peopel agree with me ont he dual citizenship/natural born citizen debate or not, everyone should have wanted this officially checked, verified and hashed out in court.  If things were as simple as everyone says, then the courts would have ruled your way and that would be that.  But the cowardly "no standing" bullshit that the courts all pulled was really pathetic.  Take the standing given to so many discrimination cases - especially cases of "disparate impact" and then compare that to the harm a voter suffers from not having assurances that all on the ballot are eligible, or that every citizen suffers from a usurpation ... and the courts ruled that 'everyone suffers so no one is relly harmed' [paraphrased].  That was so bad that even leftist turds like Jonathan Turley found the rejections for standing to be bad and to harm the judiciary in the eyes of the public.

246 You're right.  This is our country now.  Love it or leave it.  I would prefer you choose the latter.

247

The Founders intended to NOT even allow the population to elect certain people (like non-citizens, though one can make a great case that a non-citizen could be a fine US President).

Now you are going in circles. Baracky *isn't* a non-citizen, and dual citizenship has already been legally established not to be a problem.

I don't like the communist anymore than you do. But here we are.

 

248

US is in a death spiral. For the first time ever each dollar of government spending is actually damaging GDP. The more the US spends now the faster the GDP falls and the closer the US comes to completely collapsing.

Must read: http://tinyurl.com/ykwrm32

249

Now you are going in circles. Baracky *isn't* a non-citizen,

I made no such assertion. I only pointed out how little checking was done before letting people on ballots by pointing out that an actual non-citizen was on the ballot in more than few states.

and dual citizenship has already been legally established not to be a problem.

I don't like the communist anymore than you do. But here we are.

 

Posted by: Curmudgeon at March 23, 2010 02:11 PM (ujg0T)

If there is no problem with dual citizens being President, then the court rulings should have said that and not thrown them out for lack of standing, which was laughable.

Look, Mr. Birther. Did you read Perkins v. Elg? You are asserting things that just aren't true. Eleventy.

Posted by: FUBAR at March 23, 2010 01:46 PM (1fanL)

I read Perkins v Elg and see that they discuss "native-born citizen", though they uphold the citizenship of Elg who was declared a 'natural born citizen' by the lower court.  The difference, of course, is that both of Elg's parents were naturalized Americans at the time of her birth.  I guess that little detail doesn't mean much to you.

Here is what the Perkins v Elg case about - from the filing:

The question is whether the plaintiff, Marie Elizabeth Elg. who was born in the United States of Swedish parents then naturalized here, has lost her citizenship and is subject to deportation because of her removal during minority to Sweden, it appearing that her parents resumed their citizenship in that country but that she returned here on attaining majority with intention to remain and to maintain her citizenship in the United States.

As her parents were naturalized Americans at her birth, I don't know why you think her case has anything to do with what we are talking about.  You are confused, I think, because no one contests the idea that the American born child of two naturalized Americans is a "natural born citizen".  But that is not the case with The Precedent, now, is it?

250

It's gonna be a long, bitter struggle.

Yes.  It is.

But you want to know what keeps me going?  Simple.  Everytime I think about that I think about the guys that hit the beach on D-Day, or the ones that landed on Iwo Jima.

I think about the guys that fought in Korea.  The ones who went to Nam.  The ones who went to Desert Storm or Afghanistan.

And I realize that if this thing stands, all of the blood we shed and all of the lives we lost were thrown away for nothing.  If we give away our freedoms now then their courage, their sacrifice was all in vain.

So Obama and his band of merry bandits can go fuck themselves.  If I have to fight this in court, it will be fought in court.  If I have to take to the streets, I'll do that next.  The day they come to my door and demand me to pay their fine or go to jail, I'll go to jail. 

I will never dishoner the memory of my fallen comrades by submitting to this tyranny, not after they fought so hard to keep this nation free.  This isn't over, and it won't be over till Obamacare is repealed.

251 I messed up the formatting.  Here's another try:

[[Now you are going in circles. Baracky *isn't* a non-citizen, ]]

I made no such assertion. I only pointed out how little checking was done before letting people on ballots by pointing out that an actual non-citizen was on the ballot in more than few states.

[[and dual citizenship has already been legally established not to be a problem.

I don't like the communist anymore than you do. But here we are.

 

Posted by: Curmudgeon at March 23, 2010 02:11 PM (ujg0T)]]

If there is no problem with dual citizens being President, then the court rulings should have said that and not thrown them out for lack of standing, which was laughable.

[[Look, Mr. Birther. Did you read Perkins v. Elg? You are asserting things that just aren't true. Eleventy.

Posted by: FUBAR at March 23, 2010 01:46 PM (1fanL) ]]

I read Perkins v Elg and see that they discuss "native-born citizen", though they uphold the citizenship of Elg who was declared a 'natural born citizen' by the lower court.  The difference, of course, is that both of Elg's parents were naturalized Americans at the time of her birth.  I guess that little detail doesn't mean much to you.

Here is what the Perkins v Elg case about - from the filing:

The question is whether the plaintiff, Marie Elizabeth Elg. who was born in the United States of Swedish parents then naturalized here, has lost her citizenship and is subject to deportation because of her removal during minority to Sweden, it appearing that her parents resumed their citizenship in that country but that she returned here on attaining majority with intention to remain and to maintain her citizenship in the United States.

As her parents were naturalized Americans at her birth, I don't know why you think her case has anything to do with what we are talking about.  You are confused, I think, because no one contests the idea that the American born child of two naturalized Americans is a "natural born citizen".  But that is not the case with The Precedent, now, is it?

252 Man, this gonna be just like Christmas.

253 This all seems moot since our economy will collapse before the health care bill fully kicks in and America will look like a Mad Max film.

254 Now you are going in circles. Baracky *isn't* a non-citizen,

Posted by: Curmudgeon at March 23, 2010 02:11 PM (ujg0T)

And I put the "non-citizen" example in, for who else could have been allowed to run for President, to show the restrictions the Founders had decided on, not to imply that the Indonesian Imbecile was a non-citizen.

255 You're right.  This is our country now.  Love it or leave it.  I would prefer you choose the latter.

Posted by: Sally Ann Cavanaugh at March 23, 2010 02:09 PM (FRErk)

Then who will pay all of your bills for you; you freeloading cockwhore?

256 Romney, Gen Petraus. I think by the time re-election comes along Obama will be so battered and dragged down by still having to defend this HC bill that any GOP candidate will crush him.

Obama is already hitting the road to campaign for support on this bill that he signed into law.  When you have to defend a bill you signed into law, it is not a good sign.

257 will Republicans finally stand up and try and shrink the size and scope of government or will they simply be content trimming the edges and handing out scraps to their favorite groups?

Get your trimmers here! Line up for some scraps over there!

258 of course we have chosen poorly. but the truth of the matter is that we have not passed on the habits of freedom to a whole generation of people. we are reaping what has been sown.

259 http://www.buybrandcheap.com