did he try and tell everybody the story about his baby? i think he should tell everybody the story about his baby. if that doesnt show how well qualified he is, then i dont know what does.

if you dont know the story, i highly recommend googling him.

This is a Gingrich plant. Beware of Trojan horses.

"We're going to talk about the Constitution and talk about being a strong conservative"

But that's ALL it is, just talk. When it comes to immigration, we're going to do the exact opposite. When it comes to solving problems, we're going to look the other way and blame the victim.

Hypocrite.

Go home, you are never going to win a state or national election. Ever.

Santorum has been outspent, outclassed, and outperformed by each of the other three candidates. Definetly the hanger on that the cool kids let stick around, simply because they can't seem to shake him. He should really tick off the rest of the field by quitting and endorsing Ron Paul.

Tired, broke and stupid. Santorum is the worst Presidential candidate ever.

There you go Santy.

Santorum got what he wanted (15 minutes of fame) after the way he treated the people of PA he didnt deserve that .. now Ricky can come out of the closet

Santorum is the perfect political embodiment of the Dunning-Kruger effect. I think it would be,... amusing if he had a second 'Google problem' related to that.

Santorum is the perfect political embodiment of the Dunning-Kruger effect. I think it would be,... amusing if he had a second 'Google problem' related to that.

[Deleting duplicate - error codes "bubblegum" and "spiceweasel"?!?!]

[Deleting duplicate - error codes "bubblegum" and "spiceweasel"?!?!]

Voters who want wars, torture, assassinations, "humanitarian" bombings in oil rich countries, indefinite detentions, drone attacks that kill the innocent, erosion of civil liberties, domestic war on the people (drug war), out-of-control debt and spending, graft and greed, crony capitalism, pandering to special interests, bailouts, more of the same, must NOT vote for Ron Paul.

Voters who want peace, a humane foreign policy, restoration of civil liberties, an end to the war on drugs, sound money, balanced budgets, honesty, integrity and transparency in government, and a President wholly committed to Constitutional government can vote for Ron Paul.

LouisJ-

Dude! I take absolute exception to you trying to send Newty and Frothy Mix to the Azores! I have lived in the Azores - and there is no reason to stain an otherwise beautiful collection of islands.

Besides - I want to retire to the Azores in about 10 years and I sure as hell don't want to have to put up with either of these yahoos in the cafes.....

Do you think that Santorum can really do his own taxes? He better have someone check his work.

How does anyone who was rejected in his home state expect to et elected to the highest office in the land? The people in his home state think he is a loser. All I can say is maybe he thought the other losers in this race would kill each other off and he would get to kooky vote to himself.

Ya know what? Who cares about his baby?

What I care about is the corruption (CREW voted him 3rd most corrupt politician in Congress in 2006 for selling his vote multiple times) and public theft (Google how his kids were educated by the state of Pa while he was a non-resident to the tune of 200k per year). Electing this man President would be a rerun of the corruption and croney capitalism of the Bush era.

Then there is the matter of his religious convictions and the deep-seated belief that he should legislate morality. Great! Just what America needs: the Spanish Inquisition reborn! How long would it be if this man were elected President before they started burning homosexuals at the stake?

The sad thing is not that he is going home; the sad thing is that it took this long to send him home!

Zarusky: Leaving an overburdening wife to care for a severely ill child, while he leaves to run a foolish, hopelessly misguided, losing campaign for preacher in chief is actually a PLUS in your book?? If that were qualifications, there would be millions of better candidates than this one.

Santorum has stayed in the race this long for only one reason: It's his occupation. He's a professional candidate who lives off his campaign donations.

Louis:

Wasn't this article about Santorum?

Santorum's problem is that in his attempt to appeal to the hard-core right of the party he has effectively alienated the more moderate Republicans. This strategy won't garner him the nomination unless the two front-runners make colossal mistakes and at this point that seems unlikely. His message about manufacturing is a more populist message and should have been his focus earlier in the campaign. At this point in time, I don't see a realistic path for him to the nomination.

SI

Oops! Sorry Chuck, I posted this on the wrong comment...

SI

Give it up Rick, you're toast. Buh-bye.

It's between the Moon Man, the Rich Guy and America's crazy grandpa.

Obama/Biden 2012

MSNBC is a bought and paid for liberal machine. Nowhere did you see MSNBC report on Obama insisting the military could be used to indefinitely detain Americans through the NDAA, with no judicial recourse or even criminal charges made, which he signed into law December 31st. Nowhere did you see MSNBC report that while Obama was expressing sympathy for the outrage against SOPA/PIPA, he had already signed a treaty called ACTA on October 1st which basically does everything SOPA/PIPA would do, but affects all the nations that agreed to it. Right now the White House is pressuring the Senate to ratify it, and if they don't the President is declaring it an, "executive agreement," which is illegal because copyrights are constitutionally under the mandate of Congress, not the executive branch. Nowhere on MSNBC did they report about Solyndra, where the government backed the investments a certain Democrat billionaire put into the failed company and left the taxpayer on the dole. Nowhere on MSNBC did you see coverage on the federally run gun-running operation Fast & Furious. This is about the most corrupt administration in this country's history, whose sole purpose is to make serfs out of the American people. If you care at all about being a free citizen in this country, I strongly recommend you study our current President's actions. Sad to say, most of the Republican alternatives aren't much better.

Dave,

That's because it never happened. Stop listening to FOX and to Limbaugh, get out and play in the sunshine. You'll feel better.

But back on topic, are you voting for the moonman, the rich guy or America's crazy grandpa?

My choice is .....Obama/Biden 2012

Hey Ricky, I've got an idea for you, why don't you take whatever dough you've got left, and go to Oz and see if you can by a brain, or a heart or some courage..,or maybe you could just go the f--k home!

Dave? Dunno, who Dave is, but I presume you're writing to me. Go to Google, type Obama signs NDAA into law December 31st 2011. The first link will be from the ACLU explaining the President has signed indefinite detentions by the U.S. military of American citizens on American soil into law. Now, go back to Google, type ACTA October 2011. The first link will be from the, "Office of the United States Trade Representative," under which it will say, "Executive Office of the President." The government finally released the final text of the agreement, I recommend you read it and contact your Senators & write the President himself with your thoughts, because if you think SOPA/PIPA was bad, well, let's just say you won't want ACTA ratified by the Senate. You can search Politico for articles on Solyndra & Fast & Furious (and yes, they DID happen, or President Obama wouldn't be buying campaign advertising explaining messes like Solyndra). Perhaps you should stop reading MSNBC for your news source?

And perhaps you should stop getting your news from Limbaugh and Fox. Try CNN. It's a neutral alternative, neither left or right.

Chuck

Ha, Not even the Tea Party Moron's are listening to Rick these days

Seattle Indie

Santorum's problem is that in his attempt to appeal to the hard-core right of the party he has effectively alienated the more moderate Republicans.

You couldn't be farther from the truth. Santorum started as a Third Tier Candidate and has jumped to the lower end of the top Tier. He is going to be ignored because he is so low in name recognition. I didn't look at him until a couple of weeks ago myself.

His positions on issues combined with his record say that he probably is the best candidate not only for conservatives, but also independents. He wins the nomination if enough republicans realize the other two are acting like spoiled selfish children. Iowa shows that this could happen. His biggest problem is funding. Gingrich & Romney & their super PACs sucked up all the expensive air time in Florida.

Last night at the debate may be a turning point. The thing to watch for is should Santorum gets close to or manages a Second place in Florida. If he does, the funding will come.

I don't watch Fox or listen to Limbaugh. I do subscribe to the ACLU's newsletter though. Google that stuff I posted and you'll see it's all true. And no, CNN didn't report on any of it either, because they're bought & paid for by special interests who want you to be sheep which only get angry at what they direct you to, same as MSNBC, same as Fox.

T, I did hear about Obama signing the 'NDAA' into law on various broadcasts. Like you, I don't like it. Obama, while not perfect, will be a much stronger leader than either Newt or Mitt. These two have offered nothing new, only the same old GOP talking points.

I'm amazed at how far people will go to defend their political team. This country would be so much better off if people didn't think of politics as a sporting event. Our President has assumed the powers of a dictator, who now, legally, has the power to use the military on U.S. soil to indefinitely detain citizens with no judicial review or even charge of a crime, no access to family, not even the recourse of habeas corpus. Our President has signed an agreement where you can be cut off from internet access for the entirety of your life by the whim of the entertainment industry, and stated plainly, if the Senate doesn't ratify it, he will make it an executive agreement, which is unconstitutional as copyright falls under the Congress' mandate. Our President has used crony capitalism to pick winners and losers in the private sector. Our President has ensured the Bill of Rights no longer applies to American citizens until the war on terror ends (i.e. never). And you're cool with it because he's got a D in front of his name. Neither Democrats nor Republicans are the good guys. Americans need to wake up and realize, we're being conditioned to be serfs.

T, I agree with all you points. However, the GOP candidates are more bellicose. Santorum would have us attack Iran. My point is that while both parties tack to the right on national security, the Democrats will do a much better job protecting our civil liberties here at home. They don't advocate turning our country into a theocracy.

Hey Skip, America's "crazy" grandpa was just crazy enough to predict the economic collapse caused by the housing bubble, the 911 attacks, and the uselessness of the Iraq war. He also doesn't want the president to have the right to assassinate you.

CRAZY, huh?

DB Akron:

I can tell that you like Santorum and I certainly don't mean to rain on your parade, I just call them like I see them and have to stand by my original post.

I believe that there are many things to like about Santorum with respect to the other candidates, and would go as far as to say I thought that he actually won Monday's debate and definitely turned in a solid performance last night. I gave Romney the win last night because I felt that he did exactly what he needed to do by effectively poking holes in the illusion that Gingrich is a great debater and that by virtue of that fact, should be the nominee.

That being said, as you yourself pointed out, Santorum lacks the funding to mount a credible challenge to the front-runners and there is a reason for that. I think he spends too much time focusing on religion and family values when universally, across all demographics, the economy and more specifically jobs is the number one issue on the minds of voters. As a fiscally conservative independent voter, I can tell you that his message about manufacturing jobs resonates with me. My only point in my former post was that had he spent more time emphasizing this part of his platform he might have garnered the support and in turn the funding necessary to still be a factor in this race. As it currently stands, I do not see a viable path to the nomination for him.

SI

"We're going to talk about the Constitution and talk about being a strong conservative," Santorum said at an event here this week. "And that's all we can do."

Really? “And that’s all we can do.” Really? Is it necessary for me, as an American citizen, to apologize to you for having to discuss such a boring subject as the Constitution? Without the Constitution, you have no guidance for addressing the economy, jobs, foreign trade, national defense, personal liberties, and civil rights. Any President who ignores the Constitution and circumvents the Legislative and Judicial branches of Government is no longer THE President but rather THE dictator.

T-1236278 …
Frustrating, isn’t it. Because of the human need to be on “the winning side” a calm rational calculated review of the acts by the Government is avoided. “Taxation without representation” is a phrase relegated to elementary school level discussions associated with the Boston Tea Party. Its meaning and implications
have long been forgotten or, at the very least, disregarded. With a public opinion rating of 13% - 18% favorability, apparently, that the money We the People have paid in taxes has not afforded us the representation of our consent. As for the “we voted them into office” argument, we learned, as recently
as 2000, it is not necessarily the votes cast but the votes counted that result in the outcome. That being said, The Boston Tea Party was just the beginning of what was to come, when those individuals, slow to realize the circumstance of their government, awakened to fact that interests of the citizens were not the
number one priority of the governing.

It doesn’t matter the political jersey worn by the occupants of the House, Senate, White House or the Supreme Court. They have all colluded in the incessant attacks on the U.S. Constitution. In just the last two administrations, they have done their part in the shredding of the Constitution First the repeal of the 4^th Amendment occurred with the enactment of The Patriot Act; next the disregard for the 8^th and the 10^th Amendment with the enactment of the (Health care law); and now the dismantling of the 5^th, 6^th, and 14^th Amendments and the 1^st Amendment (by intimidation) with the enactment of the NDAA 2012. Both political parties in all branches of government have failed to honor their oath of office to “support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic.”

Skip … while name calling may appear to give you the upper-hand, you might want to consider that
any person reading these forums may be a potential voter for your candidate. If you present your views in an unflattering light you create the stereotype of the person you believe your candidate needs in their camp.

R Bell-1536067…”the Democrats will do a much better job protecting our civil liberties here at home. They don't advocate turning our country into a theocracy.”

Neither the Democrats nor the Republicans can boast about protecting our civil liberties. They have not advocated for a theocracy, they have created a dictatorship, by legal precedence. Whether its President Bush enacting the Patriot Act or President Obama’s extending the Patriot Act or President Obama standing shoulder-to-shoulder with Mexico’s President Calderon against the American Citizens in Arizona, or President Obama enacting the NDAA, including Section 1021. The provisions of these Acts
afford ANY subsequent President the power of a dictator to circumvent all judicial and legislative oversight.

As T-1236278 and manyothers are pointing out, this election is not about the “sides” of this One Party election. The one true issue at stake is ‘Do we allow the Constitution to be undermined by the Government, or do we restore an environment of adhering to the principles embodied in the Constitution?” A calm rational calculated review of the candidates of all parties reveals a startling fact, and I mean fact, not conjecture, opinion or spin, the only candidate who has been consistently fighting for the freedom, liberty and prosperity of the American Citizen for the last 30 years is Ron Paul. It is strange that this fact is so distrubing.

To all the pundits, experts and “got-to-be-on-the-winning-side” individuals I ask the following question, on the day after the Primary Election and eventually the General Election will you be saying, “Bummer, my guy lost. So what, I only voted for the lesser of two evil. It won’t be so bad. How much damage can the elected President do in four years?” Or, will you say, “It’s a great day to be an American, because I had the freedom and liberty to cast my vote, yesterday. I feel great because I cast my vote for the person who has stood for those ideals I have felt in my heart for years and want to pass on to my children to learn and apply.”

Oldbook, I really don't know what to say to these guys. They think they'll have civil liberties when the Bill of Rights has been thrown out the window by this administration. President Obama was supposed to be the guy who would bring the government back in line with the Constitution, instead he doubled down on what Bush started by eviscerating it. And these guys talk like they'll still have civil liberties left, when they'll have no liberties left.

Last year America jumped the shark, and if people don't truly take their government to task for NDAA, ACTA, ridiculous subsidies to companies who fail even with millions and billions of tax dollars just handed to them, and our own Justice Department running guns to criminals, just because of the sitting President's party affiliation, then we are truly lost.

T - Wasn't NDAA passed overwhelmingly by a bipartisan super majority Congressional vote? Do we know who put the offending parts in this piece of legislation? Just asking.

Yes amused, Dems and Repubs both voted overwhelmingly in support of it. The Obama administration threatened to veto the original version of the bill because they felt not being able to hold American citizens indefinitely, without charge, would limit the powers of the Executive branch. And if there's one thing this administration can't have, it's limited powers. Just read our President's signing statement. Google Obama administration insists NDAA watch the videos on the Senate floor and read the signing statement the President wrote. Keep in mind, first the Dem & Repub Senators, and President himself, said the NDAA would not apply to American citizens, until after it passed when they all admitted it does indeed apply to American citizens.

double post

What it comes down to is that Rick Santorum is completely insane. He's eager to get us into a war with Iran for one thing. For another, even most conservatives have a hard time swallowing the idea that if their daughter gets raped and impregnated, Ricky supports legally requiring her to have the baby. Or legally requiring her to die if her life is endangered by a pregnancy. He would also, if given his druthers, legislate what people can do in the privacy of their own bedroom - and that goes for heterosexuals as well as homosexuals. He's a control freak who would love to be able to exert his influence over your most private life. But the worst is that he can't even offer up coherent defenses of his extremist viewpoints.

Look, PA got rid of him via an 18-point margin. That's an awful lot, even if conservatives were taking a beating that year. They have his number, and soon the rest of America will as well, hopefully.

Amused … You are correct that the Democrat controlled Senate passed the SR 1867 overwhelmingly (93Y-7N), while the Republican controlled House passed HR1540 by a simple majority (283Y-136N). As you said it passed with bipartisan approval. The President, after saying he would veto the bill, if he was presented with it, then “reluctantly” signed “with reservations” the NDAA into law. It was the White House that requested the decision making aspects of the bill be changed from the Secretary of Defense and given to the President and as well as the detention of American citizens. (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kKfyao7ABME)

It is this very collusion of members of political parties, branches of government and the national media (for not widely reporting this) that is separating us from our liberties.

As a sidebar, check out (Signing statement of President Obama – NDAA 2012)
(http://www.whitehouse.gov/the-press-office/2011/12/31/statement-president-hr-1540) It will give you insight into what portions of the NDAA2012 bill of which the President will be the sole interpreter. Regardless of Democrat or Republican, these codified powers reside with the Office of the President.

T-1236278 … As for what to say to these guys, I have taken it upon myself to assume responsibility for my own convictions and continue to seek out ways of clarifying and demystifying our current state of affairs. For example, here’s a small video which clearly and graphically illustrates the challenge of increasing the national debt limit (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Li0no7O9zmE)

Also, I have been told by several people, vast numbers of people have NO or VERY SLOW (dialup) internet connectivity. Therefore their only sources of public information is television and radio. To deal with this I have taken to sending information to my friends and family by snail-mail and discussing it with them, if they want, at a later date. A major benefit of this media blackout, misinformation and infotainment is a renewed connection with friends and family based on a mutual desirable foundation of Liberty, Freedom and Prosperity.

T-1236278 -- Well that's kinda freaky. I hadn't 'refreshed' my screen, before I posted. I guess we're pretty much on the same page ... huh?

"It's between the Moon Man, the Rich Guy and America's crazy grandpa.

Obama/Biden 2012"

How is doing the same thing and expecting a different result sane? Obama campaigned on change and has been Bush on steroids. The only candidate who is any different from Bush/Obama is Ron Paul.

MSNBC is a bought and paid for liberal machineI love when the bots start off with this. Means you do not have to continue reading the rest of their crap. They are so brainwashed by Faux when they read what is going on in the real world their heads get so hot their tinfoil hats glow red.

Yes, obviously I'm wearing a tin-foil hat for actually knowing what our government is doing, and just how dangerous the Democrats and Republicans are to our liberties, and not just nodding my head with whatever news organization's say, despite the facts which are in plain sight. You sure showed me.

BTW, once again I don't watch Fox, or MSNBC for that matter. Just do the Google searches:

Obama signs NDAA into law December 31st 2011 SOURCE ACLU

ACTA October 2011 SOURCE US TRADE REPRESENTATIVE OFFICE OF THE US PRESIDENT

And tell me again how it's made up, not true, because MSNBC didn't report it. Also follow with more ad hominem attacks, for you will surely convince others how you're right and everything I've written is made up, despite the evidence by credible sources (including our own government websites).

"IF I DIDN'T HEAR IT ON FOX, LIMBAUGH, BECK OR HANITY THEN IT IS NOTHING MORE THAN LIBERAL PROPAGANDA, AND YES I WOULD RATHER BE A RIGHT-WING KOOK THAN A FRE AMERICAN"

What I want to know is ...

IF "American-Love it or LEAVE IT !" is a Conservative rally cry used against Liberals when they complain about Administration failures.

Then WHY haven't all of those Conservatives LEFT the COUNTRY THAT THEY NO LONGER RECOGNIZE & LIVE IN FEAR OF...?

IF I was about to be rounded up & jailed for no reason

I would be hauling azz out of the place I was in....

what is the conservative excuse ?

LOVE IT or LEAVE IT !

Wow, you guys are one-note. 1. I'm not a conservative. 2. I don't watch Fox, listen to Beck or Limbaugh.

And you think you're a free American when our President has gutted the Bill of Rights so that on his whim he can detain you, indefinitely, without even charging you of a crime? In what world does that = free?

I bet you were one of the guys nodding his head in agreement with the protests for SOPA/PIPA (and if you weren't, you should have). So why are you not outraged President Obama signed the ACTA treaty in October, which is worse than SOPA/PIPA put together? And even further, he's going to push for the treaty's enforcement even if the Senate doesn't ratify it, in direct violation of the U.S. Constitution.

But MSNBC and CNN don't report on these things, so they must not be true, despite the ACLU having a hard stand on NDAA and expressing their disappointment at the administration insisting indefinite detention of U.S. citizens be a part of it (search for the video of Democrat Senator Mark Levin arguing against this on the Senate floor).

If you guys were so mad at Bush's Patriot Act (which was a horrible stripping of our liberties), why aren't you upset about President Obama extending & expanding the Patriot Act, why aren't you mad at the loss of the Bill of Rights through the President's insistence of indefinite detention of U.S. citizens by U.S. military through the NDAA? Why aren't you mad that while the two-faced President nodded in agreement on the outrage over SOPA/PIPA, he'd signed a worse treaty in October which does worse than those proposed bills?

It's like you have your heads in the sand and just don't want to admit, this last year was the complete and total decimation of the Bill of Rights by our current President's administration. If you're cool with it, because he's got a D in front of his name, then perhaps you should keep in mind those powers this power-hungry President has assumed, will still be in effect when the next President comes into power, and he might have an R in front of his name.

T-1236278

Actually you might want to retake your high school civics classes because it was CONGRESS that did what you accuse the president of doing. The president even wrote a signing statement indicated that he would not in any way use the terms of the legislation in a way that you imply he would.

So while you may not watch fox, your views are certainly being colored by those that do.

When it suits him, he is more than ready to turn his back on his Christian faith. He's very quick to toss the least among us under the grinding wheels of the bus, because they don't vote anyway.

What a hypocrite he is. At least Mitt is open about only standing up for the rich guy.

Actually, the Westboro Baptist Church thinks he's Satan--he's Catholic! (Or were you making a joke & I missed it?) They hate Catholics at least as much as they hate everybody else. Kind of funny to think of the different parts of the Christian Taliban all imploding on themselves.

I dont have a horse in this Republican race, but I personally think it is sad that, regardless of how qualified a person is, you will never stand a chance to run for most offices unless you have money, and tons of it. These Super Pacs are destroying politics and the sense that anybody could be elected to office. Not so anymore. The few dollars that the average American citizen could donate to a worthy candidate is totally trumped by the wealthy and their ability to help "buy" a candidacy if they so desire. If you dont have hundreds of millions of dollars, or the ability to tap into it, you will forever be sitting on the sidelines with little ability to influence a person's candidacy for office. It's only going to get worse.

I dont know what the SCOTUS was thinking when they allowed these Super Pacs. They were instrumental in totally screwing things up. It's worse now than it ever was before.... and there for a while, I didnt think it possible to get any worse than it ever was.

Leprechaun - It was the right wing members of the SCOTUS that dumped that load of BS. Or maybe, it would be more accurate to say the Corporation's members of the SCOTUS.

I love how people who haven't read the Citizen's United decision love to rant about it.

Count - Who is ranting? Not I. The facts are the facts. 5-4 decision, Corporate's SCOTUS wins.

Maybe he should open a personal lube company.

Hah!

I feel the same way and have for many election cycles now. Theoretically we have more than two political parties, but in reality there are only two self serving parties in our country and their sole purpose is to get elected and stay elected. I'm not sure what honorable and qualified person would want to subject themselves to the presidential election process anyway. This process itself may be the reason why we get the poor quality of candidates (from both parties) that we get.

Like I said above (4.1)... it's all about the money. Only those willing to sell their souls are able to get the funding.

Have you forgotten that it was the Democrats who were in control of Congress for 2 years when the economy imploded?

He who must not be named is not a topic for consideration in the grand ol' party. Have you lost count of how many times Reagan is mentioned though? (they sure know their audience...and it sure ain't under 30)

Santorum is a Catholic and the evangelicals don't want that kind of theocracy.

He always looks like that.

Duh, they have people do to their taxes and hide their money for them!

Please don't mention "trickle down" and Santorum in the same sentence :)

Nothing could make the loony Ron Paul palatable...not even a face transplant.

Good point, oats willy. Pseudo-Christians will not do. And, I'm glad to see that you, through your use of the word antediluvian, are promoting, however slyly, the truth of the Flood, implying the need for a true Christianity, which exists according to the law of the true and living God.

Thomas, the biblical flood story is a parable about reaping what you sew, a sort of lesson in Karma if you will. What goes around comes around. There was no actual Noah, no Ark, it's a fable. I'm not so sure there is a God but if there is I imagine he's getting to the point of being about as pissed as he was just prior to that flood deal. If fools like Santorum and Gingrich keep invoking his name there could be some biblical retribution in the offing.

Well, oats willy, though I might admire your Sumerian avatar (despite avatars being a Hindu concept), I am bound by conscience to disagree with your conclusions about the Biblical narrative. As for me and my house, they are all quite literal. There is a God and an approaching judgement for all who reject Jesus Christ.

However, I defer to your judgement as to political things. I know little of them. Politicians who invoke the name of God should live as though they believed in Him. Apparently, not all do.

LOL...I think you are on to something there... Wouldn't it be fantastic to watch those fools debate on who is the craziest?? Three of of four go the call from their god...Guess it was the wrong number!

This is why guys like Gingrich and Santorum have a platform for their vitriol. You can disagree with everything this President has done and stands for but he is a good patriotic American. His religious affiliation should not matter. ( He is not Muslim but what if he were?) We have Catholics and Mormons running on the right and their religion which they piously wear on their sleeves is not an issue until they try to impose their antiquated morality on everyone else. That is the difference, the right wants to create a theocracy, trample peoples individual freedom, and deny science, while the left just wants a little equity and social justice.

Chum bucket - what a fitting name for the garbage you spew.

chumbucket, Check your facts. 1. The president is not a muslim. 2. Santorum want to enact sharia law in this country. That big word may be a little over your head. I advise you do some research.

Sam

The Supreme Court in a 9-0 vote just open the door for Sharia Law to be practiced in this country by stating that religious law can hold president over legislative law.

The only thing for sure we know about the president is that he is a con man who uses the expectations of the American people to run his con.

what happened
Would you like to explain your reasoning? I would LOVE to hear this one!

chumbuckt: so what makes you think the president isn't a christian...you don't know any christians who don't spew the hate you do???

And Romney or Newt would accomplish 4% growth how? I haven't heard any viable ideas from them yet, only talking points. BTW, you may despise Obama but get your facts straight. Obama is not a Muslim, not that it would matter. Muslim of Christian extremist, like Santorum, whats the difference?

yawn. presidents have very little, if any, effect on economic growth, and even more so as the world becomes more global.

I know they take the credit for it, and get the blame for it, but that doesn't make it intelligent to whine about obama and overall global economic growth. In the past 3 years it isn't clear how many countries out of the hundreds in the worth have achieved 4% growth, especially in developed countries (its easier in countries with lower income and no regard for "minor" things like the environment like china to grow faster).

Vermont,

You could not be more wrong. The Oval Office determines entirely the economic direction of the nation. Do you think the switch by the Reaganistas from the Heritage Foundation to trickle down and away from 40 years of Keynesian growth and middle class protections had no effect on world markets. Or conversely Clintons tax increases on the wealthy and streamlined budgets had no impact. The idiot, Bush with his tax giveaway and mail a check plans did not precipitate a monumental crisis. Economic policies from the Budget to the Fed appointments and the Secretary of the Treasury are all directed by the president. The Laissez faire approach of Reagan and Bush while spending like drunken yahoos has had a devastating effect on the economies of the entire world.

jkh

T - Wasn't NDAA passed overwhelmingly by a bipartisan super majority Congressional vote? Do we know who put the offending parts in this piece of legislation? Just asking.

T - Wasn't NDAA passed overwhelmingly by a bipartisan super majority Congressional vote? Do we know who put the offending parts in this piece of legislation? Just asking.

Vermontguy is right. The President has little influence over the economy and Congress, not the President, makes the budget and decides tax law. So let's look at what Obama is really responsible for. He's increased the number of troops in Afghanistan despite our mission, get OBL, being completed. Keep in mind that OBL wasn't in Afghanistan either. He ordered the assassination of an American citizen who never received a trial for his alleged crimes. He urged Congress give him the power to indefinitely detain American citizens without due process and signed the law when they did. He violated the War Powers Act. He's committed acts of war against Libya, Yemen, Iran, and Pakistan. He promised that his first act as President would be to bring the troops home from Iraq, and they are still there or have been moved to Afghanistan. He promised to close GITMO, secret prisons in foreign countries, and to give GITMO prisoners fair trials. He's failed on all three accounts. He sold automatic weapons to Mexican drug cartels and then tried to cover it up (so much for his promise of bringing transparency back to the government).

And you would prefer we were still in the Bush recession still heading toward a cliff?? What is your point?

Iblis et al,

You appear to know very little about the history of US economics. It was established in the Constitution and by statute that the executive branch would be in charge of establishing economic direction and it has always been so. The GAO, Treasury, CBO and the OMB are either independent or work at the discrection of the president. The president submits a budget after receiving input from House and Senate leaders on what they would like to see in the next year, Treasury and the OMB and then the Whitehouse submits to the CBO for what funding will be needed. Congress throughout our history has never attempted to try to derail a presidents economic direction except for the current Congress and the Gingrich led House in the 1990s. Federalist plans were enabled the same with Jeffersonian and Jacksonian economic direction. Manifest Destiny was enabled with railroads and homesteads funded by tax dollars and land grants. Teddy Roosevelts Progressive Movement the deregulation trickledown of Coolidge, Harding and Hoover followed by FDRs New Deal, Trumans Fair Deal, Eisenhower considered himself a manager of prosperity and Kennedys vision led to LBJs Great Society and Reaganomics and trickledown was a thermadorian reaction to LBJs Great Society and we are still suffering its consequences. None of these economic directions has ever been associated or credited to a Congress or Congressional Leader. Economic history is driven by the executive and all that Congress can do is enable or obstruct and history has never viewed the obstructers with favor.

Please feel free to enlighten me as to whe Congress has EVER set US economic policy.

jkh