.
.
.
Had George W. or Ronald Reagan made such a blunder the media would have immediately had a feeding frenzy, but not with the Anointed One. Touring Westminster Abbey President Obama paused to sign the guest book of the Unknown Soldier:
It is a great privilege to commemorate our common heritage, and common sacrifice.
Barack Obama
24 May 2008
Now I understand that 2008 was a really good year for the Anointed One, a tight presidential race turned into a landslide when the better candidate suffered because of collapsing economy, but that was THREE YEARS AGO. Maybe he is trying to relive those carefree election days, maybe he is trying to relive his “stunning” Nobel Prize win – who knows? This confusion over dates could actually further impact his already weak decision making – last week he thought it was 1967 and this week he thinks he is in 2008. Where is Michael J. Fox and that DeLorean time machine when you need it?
By the way, that media feeding frenzy over a clumsy gaffe? Never will happen to the Anointed One.
Geoff.
I see that Matt Drudge has posted this major breaking news story. It reminds me of V.P. Dan Quayle spelling “potatoe” in Trenton on June 15, 1992 when challenging a 12 year old’s spelling. That blunder also made the headlines.
You’re right, Brother Larry, the amazing breaking news of a slow day.
Dream all you want Willis. Obama is going to be reelected. That’s November 2012. Maybe you can convince Palin to run. Ha Ha!
Whats with the “annointed one” bullshit.
Let’s be frank Jeff….err.. Geoff… The last President BUTT XXXED working Americans harder than anybody in the past 100 years. This whole dogshit deficit arguement can easily be tracked to TWO uneeded wars, tax breaks for BILLIONARES (Geoff, I know you have a lot incommon with them????) and other bad policies. Now the “New Guy” or as you like to say “annointed one” has shifted some of that back to the working middle class.
Where do you live that 1,645,987,087.00 in a single payment to San Ramon’s Chevron is helpful to you? Oh, did I mention we did this SEVEN times under the last guy.
In other words, cut the horseshit pal.
Exactly how has Obama “shifted some of that back to the working middle class”? You do realize that the Bush tax breaks benefited the so-called middle class to the tune of $3 trillion, don’t you? Perhaps you are referring to the cigarette tax that Obama has signed into law. Or perhaps you are referring to Obama’s promise that his energy policy will cause energy rates to “skyrocket.” Or perhaps you are referring to Obama’s failed stimulus that did nothing stimulating. Or perhaps you are referring to the dozens of new taxes (love that tanning tax) included in Obamacare. Well, Obama sure has shifted something to the middle class – higher taxes and greater financial burdens.
HORSECRAP IS NOBAMA . your right gw . if this would have been bush he would have been taken to the cleaners .. these snott nose libs think they dont stink .with this clown in the white house bk the country . hopefully we can get someone in there and get his tx raising i hate rich people , redistribute wealth ass out of there in 2012 .
No media frenzy? What are you talking about? This was all over the news media today.
“…when the better candidate suffered because of collapsing economy…”
He didn’t suffer because of a collapsing economy…he suffered because he didn’t think the economy was collapsing.
So, this is the story that rightwingers are telling themselves today to make them feel better.
On the day when their devotion to killing Medicare caused them to lose Jack Kemp’s old seat, which had never gone Democratic before, to a Democrat.
On the day that Crysler paid back its “bailout” loan six years early, showing once again that Obama’s economic plans work.
On the day that their Republican Presidential candidates are flailing comically, with not a single one looking like they could possibly take on Barack next year.
But the President wrote a date down wrong – that should cheer them up.
Vern. As stated earlier it has been a slow news day.
I also like the story of Obama’s G-men filling his limo up at a BP station in England today. Way to make BP pay Mr. President – oh wait, it was your guys who were paying BP.
Oh, and I bet you could have told him a better place to fill his limo up, IN BRITAIN. You guys are WEAK.
I doubt Obama had any say on where the limo was filled up – the report says he wasn’t in the limo. I just found it ironic that the presidential limo was filled up with BP gas. And while I haven’t been to England, I seriously doubt that BP has the only stations in town.
Oh, and then there’s Obama’s February budget proposal losing 0-97 in the Senate. And the Senate Democrats’ support for a resolution rebuking Obama on his Israel border policy (on the heels of Harry Reid himself publicly rebuking Obama). So, it’s not really a slow news week, just another bad one for the President.
Hey Willis!
How do you feel about the Senate extending the USA PATRIOT Act (ak.a.Uniting and Strengthening America by Providing Appropriate Tools Required to Intercept and Obstruct Terrorism Act of 2001) today? Not only are Repuglicans and their faux Tea Partier enablers inconsistent with their mantra of “limited Constitutional government,” they seem to be inconsistent in their support of the 2nd Amendment as well. But I suppose you have NO problem with warrantless wiretaps, incessant frisking from TSA and consistent snooping into private bank records, gun ownership records, etc because we’re all gulity until proven innocent. (And don’t get me started on the recent anti-marriage constitutional amendment that was passed by the GOP majority led legislature in my former residence of Minnesota!)
Since Tennessee Repuglicans voted the word “gay” out of everyday speech this past week, the national GOP (with the exception of Rand Paul) and several Democrats decided to follow their lead and remove the 4th Amendment and the words “probable cause” from our national vocabulary. Where’s the “Mission Accomplished” banner to celebrate that milestone?
What pathetic apologies or GOP cheerleading do you have for us this week?
I’m back…with a venomous vengenance!
All good questions Mr. Fawkes. You have a way of pushing me into a corner because you seem to know my Kryptonite – I am a true “small government” person and frankly this frequently puts me at odds with traditional GOPers. I will try to honestly answer each of your questions:
1. I do not support warrantless searches whether they be electronic (wiretapping) or otherwise. I also am strongly against the exclusionary rule. The exclusionary rule was created in the 60s and 70s to deal with police searches that were done without a warrant or beyond the scope of the warrant. The Court could have come up with any number or remedies and still be consistent with the constitution. The Courts could have easily and constitutionally determined that the appropriate remedy for police malpheasance was to punish the police. Instead the Court decided that they should exclude the improperly gathered evidence. Again, there is nothing in the constitution that requires exclusion. I would prefer to punsih those violating rights than let the clearly guilty walk away from their crimes.
2. Not sure I follow you on the second amendment issues, but I fully believe in supporting the second amendment. I think that modern technology causes us to deal with issues not contemplated by the founding fathers (a nuke is technically an “arm” and I don’t support private caches of nukes – where do you draw the line on private ownership – nukes, surface to air missles, tanks, rocket launchers, AK47s? This is one I don’t know the answer.)
As far as the 2nd Amendment, we have been lead to believe, thanks to politicians and some so called advocates, that people who possess guns or other weapons will automatically use them on other people. So in the midst of our paranoia, we throw out reason and the concept of probable cause and make assumptions that people are going to do bad things because they have things in their posession that don’t correlate with our pre-conceived notions of morality. Whether I am growing an acre of marijuana or have a cache of automatic weapons and rocket launchers in my closet should not be the business of anyone much less the government. I don’t believe that there is going to be a pandemic of murders and terrorist acts if people possess automatic weapons. Just like I don’t beleive there will be a pandemic of mass marijuana use if marijuana is legalized.
In essence, we have already determined one’s guilt by association or in this case ownership before investigating if there is a reason to make this person a suspect. We see that already with the TSA as they pull over people who are wearing hijabs or carrying Korans. We see that in cities like Irvine where people who don’t possess the right colored skin pigmentation getting pulled over or harassed by police. So if we believe things like racial profiling are wrong, shouldn’t we be also outraged about adults who get profiled because of things that they choose to own or possess?
If law enforcement has “probable cause” to make me or anyone a suspect in conjunction with terrorist acts, then they should go to a judge and get a warrant. The judges in the FISA courts were signing off on warrants long before the USA PATRIOT Act was passed. But they have to have probable cause to believe that I am a suspect. Which means the police will actually have to do the jobs that we, the taxpayers, pay them to do.
There is a saying that some people like to use, “just because you have the right doesn’t mean you should.” I am a firm believer of this statement: just because I own or possess (a rocket launcher, several plutonium rods, pirate swords, or your weapon of choice) doesn’t mean I will.
If that makes me a “gun nut,” so be it.