Can you imagine the consequences of Joe Biden in the Oval Office?
Disrupting the Borg is expensive and time consuming!
Google Search
-
Recent Posts
- “a globally renowned scholar”
- ” Climate change may be coming for your house”
- “The Floridian quakes with apprehension”
- Milton Propaganda
- “Yes … definitely”
- “Antarctica has turned green”
- Rapidly Intensifying Hurricanes
- Kamala Can Prevent Hurricanes
- The Ultimate Global Warming Test
- “ready for the next one”
- Combining Science And Religion
- 500 Million Years Of Warmer Temperatures
- “Arctic sea ice is headed toward a historic low”
- “Record winter low”
- Kamala Planning Another Half Trillion Dollars For Ukraine
- “the science is absolutely certain”
- Electricity Is Proportional To CO2
- AI Climate Math
- AI Math
- Al Gore’s Arctic Forecast
- Mann Says He Was Correct
- “under the Intermediate Scenario”
- “under the Intermediate Scenario”
- “carbon emissions may have now peaked”
- Record Arctic Sea Ice Growth
Recent Comments
- Disillusioned on “a globally renowned scholar”
- conrad ziefle on “a globally renowned scholar”
- Bob G on “a globally renowned scholar”
- Russell Cook on “a globally renowned scholar”
- arn on “a globally renowned scholar”
- Bill Odom on “a globally renowned scholar”
- Richard E Fritz on “a globally renowned scholar”
- William on “a globally renowned scholar”
- William on “a globally renowned scholar”
- D. Boss on ” Climate change may be coming for your house”
Moe over Curly?
That is pretty much what I was thinking … although Biden’s fusterclucks might be less creative than Barry’s.
Even Joe Biteme would be a huge improvement than the mad Kenyan. “America is a Muslim nation,” Obama.
I concur. Joe Biteme isn’t nearly as capable of such damage as Obama is doing. Not even his own staff would listen to him and take him seriously. I am certainly willing to find out.
That’s a no-brainer. Give me Biden any day of the week.
Joe is relatively harmless. Certainly not nearly as anti-American as the
Islamist-in-Chief.
+1
Because Joe is a Cracker, the House would not be afraid of him and might even decide to fulfill their constitutional duties.
-1
The man may actually have some sense of his limitations, though.
Just barely.
lazy stupid leaders are always less trouble than active stupid ones.
advantage Biden.
that being said, having the #SCOAMF killed in an assassination would not be of benefit to this country, long term.
Unfortunately you are correct. I am sure the likes of Eric Holder, Jeh Johnson and Janet Napolitano will IMMEDIATELY blame the Tea Party, Sarah Palin and Conservatives no matter who was actually to blame.
Gine me stupidity (Biden) over treachery (Obama) any day of the week
Biden For President 2016: “My opponent is content to let the atmosphere collapse. I will keep that from happening!”
Maybe the bumper sticker should read BIDEN FOR PRESIDENT 2014!
Aug 2009 US President Barack Obama is the target of more than 30 potential death threats a day and is being protected by an increasingly over-stretched and under-resourced Secret Service, according to a new book.
I doubt if Obama is any more liked now than he was in 2009. Rasmussen Reports says, “The president’s monthly job approval rating held steady at 46% in August for the second month in a row and remains his lowest monthly approval rating this year. It’s up just a point from his two-year low of 45% reached in November during the troubled rollout period for the new national health care law. “
In another report from last year on the Obamacare rollout:
So it doesn’t seem as if Obama has managed to gain back the voters he lost over his signature Obummercare fiasco.
The big question is if we are going to have a ‘terrorist attack’ just in time to make the Democrats heroes before Nov 2014 or Nov 2016. Do I think much of the Middle East terrorism is staged? Yeah, I think there is some definite string pulling going on. Otherwise Fast and Furious would never have occurred and stimulus funds would have been used to build the darn wall from the Gulf to the Pacific. Instead the measly 700 miles we were promised during the last Amnesty go-round has yet to be built. (The Mexican border is almost 2,000 miles long.)
If I were Obummer I would certainly be a wee bit worried. He is now worth much more to the Movers and Shakers dead then he is worth alive. I wonder if he is smart enough to know it?
Next up on the Fox-Please Buy My Book$$$ Channel: Bill O’Reilly to remind us that Abraham Lincoln would not have let his bodyguards screw up like this. 😉
Did you know that there was gun walking in 2006-2007 called ‘Operation Wide Reciever’ where large numbers of guns were lost. Phoenix and Tucson was doing it even before that. Did you know??????
There was no gun ‘walking’ program until Fast and Furious. Operation Wide Receiver only used about 300 guns, and they were traceable using RFID chips and surveillance. F&F only recorded serial numbers of the roughly 2000 guns they employed, and sent them on their merry way. WR also worked hand in hand with the Mexican government while F&F was unknown to our southern neighbor. But the most important differences are that WR did not result in the death of any US border guards, and was abandoned when it was clear there was a problem.
F&F was the ‘new and improved’, liberaliized WR….
Nice try, but some of your statements fail to acknowledge the plenty of blame to go around.
http://www.justice.gov/oig/reports/2012/s1209.pdf
So Eric Holder says it’s all Bush’s fault. Got it Ed.
i would love it…..we could go back to posting monkey pictures
Hell no, keep the sorry sob alive. The last thing anyone needs is for B Hussein (Obama) to become any sort of martyr. If he were to become one, the US would never get rid of his legacy. Let him fade away into the memory of a bad dream / nightmare.
He is no Kennedy after all.
Jeopardy question: Who were James Garfield and William McKinley?
http://www.presidentsusa.net/assassinations.html
One saving grace is that there are 53 million people who are dumber than me as they voted for Obama twice! That and a dollar will buy me a cold cup of coffee
Not only were they dumber they also were deader.
Florida election officials have discovered that the state’s voter polls have 53,000 dead voters still registered to vote.1 That’s a whole city of dead voters still “eligible” to vote.
The Voting Dead …
Huff Po reported that when… Er… Ugh…
Well they never reported it…
Gail, I’m glad to still be on the sunny side of the dirt and intelligent.
I fear for the next pres in office not this current one.
I make this prediction with a confidence level of over 99%.
In the next US presedential elections, the people of the USA will lose …
I wouldn’t bet against you on this. The track record is not good.
The people of the USA have lost and lost badly in every single election since 1913.
Just watch what’s very possible to happen ahead. You know how I’ve told about the warnings of the petrodollar replaced by petrojuan.
http://scgnews.com/the-geopolitics-of-world-war-iii?utm_source=share-tw
http://consortiumnews.com/2014/08/01/putting-the-dollar-in-jeopardy/
Joe would be hilarious…
At least we’d get some entertainment value out of Biden at the helm…
“When the stock market crashed, Franklin D. Roosevelt got on the television and didn’t just talk about the, you know, the princes of greed. He said, ‘Look, here’s what happened.” –Joe Biden
Our very own Chauncey Gardner.
And they said Dan Quayle was an idiot for adding an ‘e’ to potato…
Good film ‘Being There’, every Democrat should watch it.
Chauncey Gardner seems very wise and knowledgeable compared to the current WH incumbent.
SS is just working at a comparable level to the standards the rest of the administration is performing at. I The closer to the WH any agency is, the lower the level acceptable of performance is. Don’t know why anyone would be surprised by that.
I am sure Barrack and Michelle are demanding the Secret Service uses Affirmative Action Objectives in their hiring. {:>D
1. Eyesight – best corrected visual acuity of 20/100
2. must be able to hit the broad side of a barn at 2 paces
3. Hearing loss range best corrected 56 to 70 (dB HL)….
Even a few of the morons at MSNBC are catching on to that! http://newsbusters.org/blogs/mark-finkelstein/2014/10/01/friction-morning-joe-over-whether-pierson-was-affirmative-action
BTW, I have always thought that AA had no place in the Army but sure does. Even back in the 80’s they lowered the PT standards so that females could go Airborne. Now I have no problem with female soldiers at all. In fact in Special Operations they can be a real asset. But their reason for having us do all those pushups was that it takes upper body strength to pull down on the risers to slip the chute. I did a whole bunch of extra pushups when a black hat (Airborne trainer) claimed that and I said “Well I guess the girls must be natural expert jumpers since they don’t do what we men are doing.”
When it comes down to it, either you meet the standards or you don’t and changing the standards to accommodate any sex, race, or religious belief is just plain wrong. And it has only gotten worse. Now they have allowed a Seik to serve with his beard. Beards in the Army have been forbidden (except under specific medical or operational exceptions) for a very long time on the basis of hygiene and because they claimed that the facial hair would not allow a gas mask to seal correctly. But now that they have allowed a Seik to serve with his beard all those claims have gone out the window.
rah,
I met the last three Sikhs serving in the United States Army during 1991 through 1994. We were also in the same unit, used the same karate studio–the Army banned Sikhs who followed the tradition about unshorn hair.
So the Army was forced to change again?
http://www.army.mil/article/36339/sikh-soldiers-allowed-to-serve-retain-their-articles-of-faith/
Doesn’t seem to be a big deal right now. Perhaps the Army will permit carrying a Bible and wearing Christian religious medallions again, too.
I agree with you. As much as it rankles, women just do not have the muscle mass of men. That means we should stick to what we can do. If the female can meet the standards good for her. If not then she should do another job. (My ex was a basic training officer and talk about pathetic…)
And then why should any soldier not now be allowed a beard since uniformity has gone out the window?
Short hair is a hygiene matter. It also doesn’t allow a useful hand hold in a fight.
Army manuals have been refined for over three thousand years. As technical writers say, they have had over three thousand years to get it right. The Darn Progressives need to keep HANDS OFF!
The Art of War was written nearly 4000 years ago, by Sun Tzu, a high ranking Chinese general. The book was created as a military strategy guide. Sun Tzu is universally recognized as the greatest military strategist in history, a master of warfare interpretation.
http://www.amazon.com/The-Art-War-Liddell-Hart/dp/0195014766
Actually I got the Kindle version of that book free though I read the dead tree version years ago.
It is obviously not a hygiene matter for Sikhs though and so why should it be for any other solider?
Obviously I agree with you Gail but the fact is that when unnecessary exceptions for regulations are allowed then the stated reasons for those regulations can be rightfully brought into question.
On top of that uniformity is a necessary discipline.
While attending PLDC (Primary Leadership Development Course) at Ft. Knox as an already SF qualified and assigned soldier I was told by my platoon instructor that I could not wear the regulation green beret of my specialty and unit in the interest of uniformity. The green beret, unlike any other Army head gear, was stipulated as the garrison and dress headgear for Army Special Forces as per an executive order from JFK. Thus the Army can’t take it away. But in the interest of comity and in the spirit of uniformity I complied without complaint or comment.
Then one cold morning during the course our ordered uniform included the Army winter cap with ear flaps but that same instructor was standing at the front of our formation wearing his fatigue cap. That is when I stepped out of the crowd and made the point that he was not uniform. It went all the way up to the schools Sergeant Major and my point was taken. Of course I was dogged for it. The very next morning I failed inspection because it was claimed my pin on rank was out of position by about a 64th of an inch. But it was worth it to make the point. If your gonna make the rules then by God your going to live by them.
This is why many service schools like that hate to see an SF troop in attendance. We tend to not stay quiet when we see the all too frequent examples of the Military habit of abuse of authority under the auspices of “leadership.”
I certainly agree that it is all about discipline and conformity.
As a female who has caved and backpacked with long hair, I can also say it is a matter of hygiene too. Long hair out in the field is a real royal pain to keep clean. So much so that when I went on a 6 week camping trip I had my hair cut Army short. Wiping the entire head with a wet rag is a LOT easier than washing, rinsing and drying long hair.
The other hygiene problem is head lice. Very contagious and hard to get rid of. Much easier to just cut all the hair off the heads of the recruits and then keep the hair short.
Beards can also carry lice link
I since human lice are common, I am fairly sure they are probably the reason for requiring short hair and no beards aside for the handy hand grip problem and the drive for uniformity.
Andy portion of the body or for that matter even certain apparel having fur can provide habitat for the lice and their nits leading to pediculosis. The three varieties are capitus, corpus, or pubis.
What would be really helpful is the ability to do a recall election of a president at least once per year. (I would prefer twice.) Then there would no need for this talk of assassinations. A good threshold for signatures might be:
25% of the registered voters of a state must sign the petition for a recall vote, with the requirement that this threshold be met in enough states so that if every state voted to recall, their electoral votes would total 270 or more.
In other words not every state would have to meet the threshold in order for a vote to be triggered, and the vote would only happen if, prior to the deadline, sufficient states met the threshold so that if they all voted to recall, the electoral vote in favor of recall would be at least 270. In states where the petition did not meet the threshold or there was no petition as of the deadline, participation in the vote would be at the state’s discretion.
I would also support the idea of having a mandatory interim election for both President and VP in the event of a successful recall, with the winners to serve out only the remainder of that current four-year term, and then have to stand again for re-election if they want to continue. The VP of the recalled President would be President only during the time of the interim election and a transition period, unless of course he is re-elected during the interim election.
RTF
Actually I didn’t mean “no need for this talk…” but “no reason” for it. There isn’t any need anyway. RTF
Actually I liked the old way. No parties and the second place winner was VP. That way if you remove the first guy from office you do not get his clone.
But I just wrote just now that you would not get him for more than a few months! What exactly is wrong with what I’ve written?
Also there’s nothing in what I wrote that requires parties in any way, shape or form! I didn’t even mention them, and neither does the Constitution. If you want to eliminate parties from the presidential elections, that would require the support of far more people than we are likely to get for any kind of reform. Why not start with something easier?
Richard,
I am not criticizing you or your idea. I am just stating a preference. I also wish politicians were honest but I know better than to hope for it.
Actually I would start smaller. The right of recall for all federal (and state) senate and house congress critters. Unfortunately not all states have that as an option.
You might want to look into
http://www.recalltherogues.org/faq.html
http://tenthamendmentcenter.com/
and
http://fija.org/
No use working alone.
Why do say that I’m working alone? It seems you imagine that I’m the only one who wants the President recalled. Don’t you want him recalled? There is a whole blog page here of people who want the President out. So don’t just sit there complaining. If we want presidents to be recallable, this is the ideal time to pursue that, because the President is extremely unpopular right now. It is absolutely achievable to present a state legislature with an impressive-sized petition for such an amendment. If you have a major grievance, petition your government for redress of that grievance under the First Amendment. But what you have argued makes no sense:
1. Actually, I prefer doing more than your petition.
2. Actually, I support doing less than your petition.
I repeat my question: what exactly, in your view, is wrong with my idea? Or would you sign it if presented with such a petition? Also, have you signed a paper petition for the congressional idea that you support?
P.s. Are any of those three groups planning to pass any paper petition of any sort on Election Day? Because I don’t see them saying anything about it on their home pages. RTF
Also regarding the honesty of politicians, that is precisely why we need a presidential recall passed as a constitutional amendment. I am sure there are states where at least one chamber of the legislature would pass this. I have little doubt that with sufficient signatures as an impetus, the Florida House would be happy to pass it!
RTF
I do want the ability to recall esp. Federal Senators and Congressmen or at least term limits but there is little hope for that.
I Do Not want Obummer recalled. He and his asinine moves are the best publicity for a saner government I have ever seen. Also impeachment or recall leaves Obummer a martyr – a really bad move. Plus impeachment leaves us with Biden who can, as a sitting president, run for office – UGH!
Right now Obummer’s popularity is ~45% so not enough people have woken up to just how bad this government really is.
Wednesday, October 01, 2014
47% of Likely U.S. Voters approve of President Obama’s job performance. Fifty-two percent (52%) disapprove
WE can see just how bad things are but most people can’t. Wasting time on getting recall through is useless until we wake the sheeple up. That is our most important job right now.
Oh, and just to add insult to injury, a new study shows the Sheeple are much happier with more government (Blech gag) or that is the how the reporter sees it. Typical twisting of facts.
I do not think she even read the words she wrote or she is hoping no one reads the entire piece.
I respect your view on the consequences of recalling Obama. However, this would not be enacted so quickly anyway. So I think that if one wants generic presidential recall, this is a good time to start it.
The latest Gallup poll that I looked at (yesterday) showed Obama at 51 percent disapproval. Is it enough to recall him under the scheme I proposed (assuming it were in place, which it wouldn’t be)? Maybe, maybe not, but that misses the point. The point is that to gain support for a constitutional amendment, we need more than just websites, membership organizations, and angry online comments. (Though there’s nothing necessarily wrong with those.) We need petitions! The act of passing them gets people talking, and that can produce higher levels of support in the future. We have to start somewhere. Truthfully, there is no valid reason I can see not to.
You yourself said on another thread, “[Too] bad there is no way, we as citizens can not take these *&^%$ to court for Tre@$0n.” Well, theoretically we could petition to give ourselves that power. However, this has the same effect, and is much more practical to enact than trying to give ourselves the power to try a President for treason. In addition, I think making a case against this or any President for treason would be very difficult because it would require the open and public testimony of two witnesses to the same overt act of providing aid and comfort to a specific enemy. And of course he would have the right of cross-examination. Recall, on the other hand, would be a superior option.
If you don’t like the idea of the VP becoming president because he would have an incumbency advantage, would you sign the petition if we changed it to recall both of them at the same time, or not at all? We could say that the Speaker would become President for the time it took to run an election and do the transition, and that he could not run in that same election.
RTF
BTW the Gallup poll said 43% support, and I strongly believe that a significant portion of those are lying because they don’t want to be labeled a racist. But if you give them a ballot that says, should he stay, a certain number of that 43% will vote “no”. That’s why this is an ideal time. The anger level is much higher, I think, than many people are willing to admit. RTF
And that would also explain the continuing composition of the House. Remember in 2010 the “zeitgeist” was that that only happened because of demographic shifts that had not yet been reflected in the districting. Everything was going to change when the new districts kicked in in 2012, or so we were told by both sides. Oops….
We may not get a better time than this to enact a constitutional amendment designed to shift some power back out of Washington. There could be several in play at the same time. I am simply arguing to include this as part of the mix.
RTF
I would prefer to think about it for a bit mainly to research this:
Found here:
http://politics.stackexchange.com/questions/2098/can-i-recall-my-us-senator-or-representatives-in-congress
I also do not think a simple majority is a good idea for recall because it would cause too much instability in the government. It could make the president fearful of making hard decisions that are correct but unpopular. It also means the new media would become the rulers of the USA (Not that they are not already)
Since I have great respect for those who thrashed out the Constitution I would prefer to know why they decided not to give the citizens the right of recall but left it to their representatives to impeach those who abused their power.
My SWAG is they expected the right of jury nullification to be the method left to the citizens to rein in an out of control government.
….As Thomas Jefferson put it to Tom Paine in a 1789 letter, “I consider trial by jury as the only anchor ever yet imagined by man, by which a government can be held to the principles of its constitution.” ….
http://prorev.com/juries.htm
Here is how the politicians have gotten around the US Constitution to make sure citizens are denied their right to a trial – link
And then there is the growth of the unconstitutional bureaucracy.
Very well, I’ll watch for your further comment. Thanks! RTF
“It could make the president fearful of making hard decisions that are correct but unpopular.”
The problem we face is that the people are much more malleable than they used to be. It is much easier to talk them into voting for an obviously bad candidate. By the same token, it may also be easier to talk them into voting against a decent incumbent. That’s the tradeoff.
But … if you prefer a supermajority, one problem I see with that is that our goal is to make presidents who want to make bad decisions that, by some miracle, happen to be unpopular, to think twice about it, and to remove them if they prove intransigent. Making it too hard could prove to be the same as the status quo. I’d rather take the chance of creating some unwanted instability than take the chance that all our efforts would end up being in vain. I could certainly support 275, and I’ll go along with whatever has the most support. But I think that 280 is a mistake. In my opinion, it would be too hard to get over that hill. Plus, if you introduce the public to the idea of a supermajority, all of a sudden the entire fight is going shift from “should any President ever be recalled” to “how much power for the people is too much”? Everyone will have their own preferred number, and the campaign will fracture. No one will get what they want. The Obamas and their kind will laugh till they can’t breath.
Politics is about compromise.
RTF