Confident Obama lays out battle plan as he launches second term

Comments (128)
whitewidow wrote:

Those daughters of his don’t look too happy.

Jan 21, 2013 2:28am EST  --  Report as abuse
LoveJoyOne wrote:

“Those daughters of his don’t look too happy.”

Now THERE’S a relevant remark if I ever saw one.

Wow.

Jan 21, 2013 5:58am EST  --  Report as abuse
justinolcb wrote:

the wife should have looked in the mirror before she left the hairdresser’s

Jan 21, 2013 6:00am EST  --  Report as abuse
justinolcb wrote:

Embarrassing!!!

Jan 21, 2013 6:00am EST  --  Report as abuse
assmuncher wrote:

They aren’t happy.
“Here we go again”

Jan 21, 2013 7:34am EST  --  Report as abuse
kenezen wrote:

David Plouffe is converting a past money raising and political vote gathering machine that supported President Obama to a politically powerful nuclear event. This new Machine will reach out with philosophical intent to create Socialistic-Political change from our Constitutionally existing and embedded Capitalistic base replacing and transforming us to a Socialistic Base. In the past the second term has been a way of fearlessly reaching for goals that can be accomplished that truly fit the ideology of a President who is leaving.

Not this President. He’s going for more! WE will see a platform developed that will attempt to transform our Democracy into a singular outcome of heavily Socialistic content. Larger Federal Power and less States rights, weakening of Constitutional application by a slanted Supreme Court and eventual Socialism. We have seen our economy have a second Depression. Will the public continue to blame other for four more years? Perhaps we are ready for Socialism of wealth redistribution and poverty of the masses.

Our President has succeeded by constantly politically campaigning. He will now create massive Social Campaigning while he is still President and his current office assists in decimating the other Party and transforming with laws that codifies this desired outcome. It reminds one of the Single Party rulers of the past that succeeded with mass Propaganda resulting in long term tragic outcomes. The Soviet Union, Venezuela, Cuba, China-under-Mao, Mugabe in Africa and others that had trans-formative Social messages.
This is not an election device as is other machines on both sides. This has far wider and more provocative Socialistic designs.

Jan 21, 2013 8:08am EST  --  Report as abuse
kenezen wrote:

David Plouffe is converting a past money raising and political vote gathering machine that supported President Obama to a politically powerful nuclear event. This new Machine will reach out with philosophical intent to create Socialistic-Political change from our Constitutionally existing and embedded Capitalistic base replacing and transforming us to a Socialistic Base. In the past the second term has been a way of fearlessly reaching for goals that can be accomplished that truly fit the ideology of a President who is leaving.

Not this President. He’s going for more! WE will see a platform developed that will attempt to transform our Democracy into a singular outcome of heavily Socialistic content. Larger Federal Power and less States rights, weakening of Constitutional application by a slanted Supreme Court and eventual Socialism. We have seen our economy have a second Depression. Will the public continue to blame other for four more years? Perhaps we are ready for Socialism of wealth redistribution and poverty of the masses.

Our President has succeeded by constantly politically campaigning. He will now create massive Social Campaigning while he is still President and his current office assists in decimating the other Party and transforming with laws that codifies this desired outcome. It reminds one of the Single Party rulers of the past that succeeded with mass Propaganda resulting in long term tragic outcomes. The Soviet Union, Venezuela, Cuba, China-under-Mao, Mugabe in Africa and others that had trans-formative Social messages.
This is not an election device as is other machines on both sides. This has far wider and more provocative Socialistic designs.

Jan 21, 2013 8:08am EST  --  Report as abuse
kommy wrote:

“Sharia patrols” began to operate in London. I guess those are the “good” guys.

Read more: http://theeuropeanaffairs.blogspot.ca/2013/01/sharia-patrols-began-to-operate-in.html

Jan 21, 2013 9:02am EST  --  Report as abuse
Sensibility wrote:

On this day we celebrate Martin Luther King Jr., a great orator, a great citizen, and a great leader. I wish our President, in the next four years, could show even one-tenth the leadership that King showed. Alas, our President seems to only know the politics of hatred and division. One day, we will truly be free at last.

Jan 21, 2013 9:19am EST  --  Report as abuse
Rollo2 wrote:

Celebrate Martin Luther Kings memory today. Obama will be nothing more than a sad disappointment in our history.

Jan 21, 2013 9:31am EST  --  Report as abuse
whitewidow wrote:

Three-hundred million of them and counting…

Jan 21, 2013 10:55am EST  --  Report as abuse
whitewidow wrote:

Three-hundred million of them and counting…

Jan 21, 2013 10:55am EST  --  Report as abuse
whitewidow wrote:

Three-hundred million of them and counting…

Jan 21, 2013 10:55am EST  --  Report as abuse
inverse137 wrote:

@whitewidow, I’m gonna go out on a limb here and guess that you weren’t valedictorian of your college prep school.

Dumb people should not be allowed access to computers….

Jan 21, 2013 11:16am EST  --  Report as abuse
ramsglen wrote:

How about hiring someone to dress your wife for you.

Jan 21, 2013 11:26am EST  --  Report as abuse
sjfella wrote:

One secret service guy to another at the inauguration as they scan the crowd:
“Who are all these people?”
“The unemployed.”

Jan 21, 2013 11:39am EST  --  Report as abuse
RyGuy wrote:

“Obama looks “to finish what we started” as second term begins”

Finish taking away our rights. He’s been quite effective, thus far.

Jan 21, 2013 11:48am EST  --  Report as abuse
Bagehot wrote:

Eisenhower, Reagan, Clinton. All finished out 8 years realizing that the carriage always was a pumpkin after all. Obama never had to be great, and neither will his successor. That’s his point in his speech. Your country, you fix it. The pols at best can lend a hand. As long as he obeys the law and gets out in one piece, it’ll do.

Jan 21, 2013 12:08pm EST  --  Report as abuse
ChangeWhat wrote:

@sjfella

LOL!!!

Jan 21, 2013 12:10pm EST  --  Report as abuse
USA4 wrote:

decisive reelection? really? feels more like spin rather than objective reporting…

Jan 21, 2013 12:10pm EST  --  Report as abuse
USA4 wrote:

decisive reelection? really? feels more like spin rather than objective reporting…

Jan 21, 2013 12:10pm EST  --  Report as abuse
ChangeWhat wrote:

These ponzi schemers are confused why there was such a low turnout. They try to lay cover by saying the crowd is more manageable lol. Obama do you see the “change” in your support from your first term to your second term yet? I’m sure you do but I know as well as you do that you don’t care, you have your agenda for America all laid out don’t you. Please don’t “finish what you started” there will be nothing left and we will be degraded even further as a nation.

Jan 21, 2013 12:14pm EST  --  Report as abuse
xyz2055 wrote:

kenezen..that was the most delusional, out of touch with reality bold face lie of a comment I think I’ve ever seen. I think your tin hat is on a just a tad too tight. All those countries and leaders you hold up as examples have a very distinct difference with the U.S….they don’t have our Constitution or our separation of powers. To turn America into a Socialist country, you would have to convince Congress into going along with it. Every law and Legislation that governs our country is first written and passed by Congress.

Jan 21, 2013 12:42pm EST  --  Report as abuse
xyz2055 wrote:

USA4…what would you call a re-election where the other side couldn’t even carry their own home states. Romney/Ryan lost by 23 percentage points in Massachusetts where Romney was Governor, Romney/Ryan lost by 10 percentage points in Michigan where Romney was born and Romney/Ryan lost by 7 percentage points in Wisconsin where Ryan is a sitting member of Congress. I’d call that decisive!

Jan 21, 2013 12:46pm EST  --  Report as abuse
Fantasywriter wrote:

Point taken, xyz2055, perhaps you should check out what your president has been doing over the last 4 years. He has ignored both the congress and the Constitution on several occasions. If you read his latest 23 executive orders he has disregarded not only the 2nd Amendment but it’s intent. The congress, in the form of the senate, has failed to allow, much less pass, a budget through its chamber. Instead of governing as an executive he has been increasingly governing by fiat. And Obama and the socialist left have been and will continue to campaign to get more and more leftists in congress to make conservatives as irreverent as they are in California. You can see what a disaster that has been over the recent past. As for the election Obama was far more successful getting Conservatives to not come out for Romney then he was getting his own base out. That was the difference in this election.

Jan 21, 2013 1:15pm EST  --  Report as abuse
Johan-Doh wrote:

Now he wants the name calling to stop, NOW. If he were a bigger person, It should never have started. He is not.

Jan 21, 2013 1:23pm EST  --  Report as abuse
AlaskanDude wrote:

I didn’t read the story just the headline…. so post speech… how long before he restarts the name calling? It IS name calling if you say …. “now, now, now the ah… republicans (pause for boos and hisses from the assembled crowd including press) the republicans they think/say/believe/want you to believe… followed by they caused the problem or they want to go backwards” yada yada. If he really wanted to get anything done, he’d park our jet, stay in washington, shut his mouth and negotiate with honesty…. My bet… before this time tomorrow, he will be back to name calling.

Jan 21, 2013 1:25pm EST  --  Report as abuse
ChangeWhat wrote:

@xyz2055

“To turn America into a Socialist country, you would have to convince Congress into going along with it. Every law and Legislation that governs our country is first written and passed by Congress.”

Or Pass executive orders infringing on the bill of rights and constitution as your savior just did with gun control.

Your savior is also unable to cross the aisle and make deals that benefit the majority of Americans without having that same majority pay for it in the long run.

At the end of this term all the poor people will be on food stamps, and more middle class will be on food stamps. The economy will still be stagnant, the housing sector will still be in shambles, but wallstreet will be kicking as always and the banks will continue to have reign on America. The wealthy will still be able to break laws and get a slap on the wrist payment, unemployment will not improve, college students graduating will still be unable to find a job that they were trained and educated for so they will be saying, “Would you like to make that order large?”.

Thank you xyz for supporting the destruction of America with your vote.

Jan 21, 2013 1:31pm EST  --  Report as abuse

man, if that aint the kettle calling the pot black!

Jan 21, 2013 1:32pm EST  --  Report as abuse
spca wrote:

seems to me he uttered the same words all thru his first four years and now like a record he starts all over again. sounds great if the demos.abide by it

Jan 21, 2013 1:35pm EST  --  Report as abuse
USA4 wrote:

51% of the popular vote is not decisive. There is no mandate for Obama’s policies, or those of the republicans. This is why congress needs to fully debate every major law/rule and reach a consensus that will involve give and take on both sides. The behind the scenes rule making and 23rd hour shenanigans (e.g. obamacare) should never be allowed to happen again. They are ruining this country, and polarizing it to a degree not seen in many many years.

Jan 21, 2013 1:35pm EST  --  Report as abuse
ChangeWhat wrote:

Nice way to change the headline Reuters, I guess this is now common practice for news agencies to get more click through’s. Truly pathetic to say the least.

Jan 21, 2013 1:37pm EST  --  Report as abuse
xyz2055 wrote:

Fantasywriter (fitting handle,btw)…I’m an Independent, btw…but just for the sake of morbid curiosity please detail the circumstances where Obama ignored Congress and the Constitution. And like it or not Obama is OUR president…not mine. We’re a quirky country..majority rules when it comes to elections. But nice spin on the election. Losers always see it with a twist. But I’m dying to hear your take on how Obama’s Campaign suppressed conservatives from voting in Massachusetts, Michigan and Wisconsin.

Jan 21, 2013 1:37pm EST  --  Report as abuse
Ciao wrote:

“decisive” depends on whose spin you adhere to. Decisive in Electoral college, less than 2% in popular vote. Guess we know whose spin the author prefers…

Jan 21, 2013 1:39pm EST  --  Report as abuse
will_rich wrote:

“Nevertheless, Obama’s appeals for bipartisan cooperation will remind many Americans of his own failure to meet a key promise when he came to power – - to act as a transformational leader who would fix a dysfunctional Washington.” Yep that was pretty big talk for a newbie. Let’s not forget that he has added fuel to the fire. Obamacare was a complete partisan effort force fed to the nation. Let’s see what gets done in four years…

Jan 21, 2013 1:41pm EST  --  Report as abuse
xyz2055 wrote:

BTW….the 23 Executive Orders on Assault weapons that Obama just issued….what’s different with the 2nd Amendment? Exactly how has it been altered or diminished? You do of course know that Congress has the right to challenge ANY Executive Order all the way to the Supreme Court? Right? The odds aren’t good, of the more than 13,000 presidential Executive Orders issue since 1789 only two have been over turned.

Jan 21, 2013 1:42pm EST  --  Report as abuse
Kuji wrote:

kenezen wrote:

And how is this different from what Karl Rove did with American Crossroads except on the right? No one on the right seemed to have a problem with that.

Jan 21, 2013 1:43pm EST  --  Report as abuse
KDupre wrote:

Our president should set the proper example by changing his ways first by not insulting the opposing party and suggesting that they are guilty of horrible evil. That would be an excellent start for his new term.

Jan 21, 2013 1:48pm EST  --  Report as abuse
xyz2055 wrote:

USA4…didn’t even carry their own home states? Now that’s a statement! Bush won his second election by the thinest of margins that came down to how many recounts in Florida?

Jan 21, 2013 1:50pm EST  --  Report as abuse
xyz2055 wrote:

USA4….it’s beginning to look like a trend when you have a Democrat in the White House and a Republican Congress. Look at the Clinton years. Major gridlock, they impeached him and they failed to raise the debt ceiling shutting down the government.

Jan 21, 2013 1:54pm EST  --  Report as abuse
xyz2055 wrote:

Ciao..that is an accurate assessment. But don’t you think it speaks VOLUMES when they couldn’t even carry their own home states? Obama won Illinois and Hawaii by a landslide.

Jan 21, 2013 1:58pm EST  --  Report as abuse
Kuji wrote:

“decisive reelection? really? feels more like spin rather than objective reporting…”

George Bush barely won Florida and claimed a mandate even after losing the popular vote by over 1/2 a million. This has been the precedent for over a decade. Obama won 332/206 with + 2 million for the popular vote . In 2008 it was 365/173 with more than 10 million for the popular vote. It’s not really a spin. It’s a decisive victory by wide margins in GOP standards – some may even call it a landslide on the right (if they’re candidate had one), and therefore President Obama should have a mandate by the GOP definition. I don’t see any spin here by Reuters. I only see spin coming from your post to downplay wide electoral and popular vote margins – in terms defined by the GOP.

Jan 21, 2013 1:58pm EST  --  Report as abuse
Ciao wrote:

“But I’m dying to hear your take on how Obama’s Campaign suppressed conservatives from voting in Massachusetts…” There are conservatives in Massachusetts? They must have had to lie on their applications.

Jan 21, 2013 2:00pm EST  --  Report as abuse
xyz2055 wrote:

KDupre..Obama (in his first term) nominated Republicans to Secretary of the Army, Dense and Transportation. He also nominated Republican Governor Jon Huntsman as our Ambassador to China. Name another President that included that many opposition members to his cabinet. He put together 3 separate bi-partisan committees to try and tackle the debt. The “fiscal cliff” is the result of the “Super Committee” failure to agree on a measly $1.2T in cuts over 10 years. Three years ago, Obama and Boehner had a handshake deal on approx. $4T in tax increases and spending cuts over 10 years. The Tea Party Republicans and the “Gang of 6″ shot it down. The knock on Obama from the left is that he crosses the aisle way way too much. If any one entity is responsible for our governments failure over the at least the last two years..it’s the House Republican’s. Their budget proposal for 2013 (Paul Ryan’s “Path to Prosperity”) is absolutely unworkable. It eliminates Capital Gains and Dividend taxes, give the rich another round of huge tax breaks, INCREASES Defense spending and the only cuts come from Medicare and Social Security.

Jan 21, 2013 2:11pm EST  --  Report as abuse
xyz2055 wrote:

Ciao..Mitt Romney..you know a Republican..was Governor of the State. There’s obviously at least a few Conservatives there..right?

Jan 21, 2013 2:14pm EST  --  Report as abuse
Ciao wrote:

“But don’t you think it speaks VOLUMES when they couldn’t even carry their own home states?” No, but apparently you do as many times as you’ve brought it up.

Jan 21, 2013 2:15pm EST  --  Report as abuse
deerecub1977 wrote:

Is the 2nd term over yet? the first never began.

Jan 21, 2013 2:19pm EST  --  Report as abuse
deerecub1977 wrote:

Is the 2nd term over yet? the first never began.

Jan 21, 2013 2:19pm EST  --  Report as abuse
deerecub1977 wrote:

the first term never began.

Jan 21, 2013 2:19pm EST  --  Report as abuse
Ciao wrote:

xyz2055 I believe the term “cherry picking” is particularly relevant here. You’re focusing on a particular small element that reinforces your view. Refer to my earlier comment about whose spin you prefer…

@Kuji “I only see spin coming from your post to downplay wide electoral and popular vote margins – in terms defined by the GOP.” So you admit that by normal terms it was not decisive, only in terms of someone with an agenda to push.

Jan 21, 2013 2:27pm EST  --  Report as abuse
whitewidow wrote:

This is Helter Skelter.

Jan 21, 2013 2:29pm EST  --  Report as abuse
whitewidow wrote:

This is “Helter Skelter.”

Jan 21, 2013 2:30pm EST  --  Report as abuse
xyz2055 wrote:

Ciao..truth hurts doesn’t it buddy!

Jan 21, 2013 2:34pm EST  --  Report as abuse
xyz2055 wrote:

It’s amusing how someone can dismiss as not significant when the people of a candidates own home state vote against him. You know the people that know that person best. Particularly as their Governor! lol

Jan 21, 2013 2:37pm EST  --  Report as abuse
xyz2055 wrote:

Ciao..my “cherry picking” to your biased slant and raise you one!

Jan 21, 2013 2:45pm EST  --  Report as abuse
Ciao wrote:

@xyz2055 I’m glad that you felt that Romney was such a strong candidate that he should have carried the most liberal state in the union, however I don’t think many others expected it.

Jan 21, 2013 2:53pm EST  --  Report as abuse
USAPragmatist wrote:

xyz, keep fighting the good fight for reason and facts instead of bluster and name calling. I know you and I do not agree on many political points, but I give you kudos for standing up for, like me, a reasoned political discourse. When you look at Obama’s first term (and first days of his 2nd) from an objective standpoint, these cries from the right that he is a ‘dictator’, ‘tyrant’, or has ‘violated Constitution with Executive Orders’ are just plain wrong.

Jan 21, 2013 2:54pm EST  --  Report as abuse
xyz2055 wrote:

Romney lost in Massachusetts (where he was governor) by 23 percentage points…that’s “cherry picking”…lol

Jan 21, 2013 2:58pm EST  --  Report as abuse
Ciao wrote:

Thanks USAPragmatist. I agree we should debate on ideas and facts rather than hyperbole. That is why I have avoided it in our discussion. I merely pointed out the spin applied by others using politically charged terms like “decisive.” In fact I haven’t even stated my bias in any of my posts here, although I don’t deny I have one and that it is probably not difficult to guess from the side I chose to apply myself to.

Jan 21, 2013 3:10pm EST  --  Report as abuse
Ciao wrote:

@xyz2055 so by your definition, George HW Bush lost decisively in 1988 since he didn’t carry his home state of Massachusetts?

Jan 21, 2013 3:17pm EST  --  Report as abuse

Collective action to protect our individual rights and freedoms, is an accurate description of why we have a second amendment. He was doing what he does best jiving his useful idiots, the rest of us know the phony and what his real agenda is!

Jan 21, 2013 3:29pm EST  --  Report as abuse
LTCB wrote:

When it comes to the Constitution that he SWORE to protect and defend,then, sorry. I’m for “political absolutism”. The fact is, WE ARE NOT THE WORLD AND WILL NOT BE RULED BY THE REST OF YOU. Nor will we be ruled by one of your surrogates whom you gave a “peace prize” to for NOTHING. If anything, I’d say he closer borders on a “war criminal” because of his actions and orders that lead to countless deaths NOT sanctioned by our Congress.

Jan 21, 2013 3:34pm EST  --  Report as abuse

His entire speech seemed to be filled with coded statements concerning what he expects to accomplish that might not be to the liking of the American Citizen.

Jan 21, 2013 3:35pm EST  --  Report as abuse
DaddyBruce wrote:

A prescription for fascism looming for our collective health? Oh, that’s right, fascism is reserved for those on the right, not the well intentioned progressive movement. The child should not question the parent’s judgement and authority. We’ll see. All rebellions begin as a small obscure movement. I’m sure any that rear their head will be crushed. I only hope the media will treat them with the same respect/admiration that they accorded the OWS movement instead of the disdain accorded the TEA Party movement. A silenced people will not remain quiet for long. This has been a small rant from an NRA member that doesn’t yet own a gun. It saddens me that it’s time to buy one and my fear isn’t the common criminal.

Jan 21, 2013 3:38pm EST  --  Report as abuse

Freedom through Collectivism? This is not even close to America’s freedom. It is a distorted sort of Freedom concept that is based on the idea that the “Workers” will take care of the “Bums”. One of those Communist ideas of Share and Share Alike. It gets old real fast.

Jan 21, 2013 3:39pm EST  --  Report as abuse
Dirtmover wrote:

“Preserving our individual freedoms ultimately requires collective action,” he said.
He got that right,,, for a change,,, and that “collective action”
is called the Tea Party.
“O” has no love, just disdain for individual freedoms. The last four years are proof enough. He has done everything in his power to relieve us of those freedoms.

Jan 21, 2013 3:41pm EST  --  Report as abuse
xyz2055 wrote:

Ciao..now you’re just getting petty. GH was born in Milton, Mass (population 265 yahoo!) but spend most of his life in Texas where he was governor. Carried Texas by a landslide.

Jan 21, 2013 3:42pm EST  --  Report as abuse
Doc62 wrote:

Sadly, we all will lose in this battle. President Obama will challenge the fat cats again, with the same results. The lobby $ is for “inequality”. The powerful rich have teamed up with the racists. They hate our president because he tries to narrow the financial gap and he is BLACK.
GW Bush was a stupid man who spoke with a stammer. He gave the rich what they wanted and got major support. Good ole boys stick together like cow pies.

Jan 21, 2013 3:43pm EST  --  Report as abuse
Ciao wrote:

@xyz2055 my whole point is that I feel you’re being petty by arguing that losing your home state defines an election as decisive. To me popular vote is the most telling statistic from an election. So yes, if it had been a popular blowout I would concede that it was decisive. I feel that you are laser focused on the detail that supports your argument, thus my charge of cherry picking.

Jan 21, 2013 3:47pm EST  --  Report as abuse
xyz2055 wrote:

USAPrag..what you and I disagree on is minutia! Just having a little fun with the right-wingers.
I was impressed with the Republican’ in the House this week though. They put the Senate in charge of writing the Budget (because their’s sucks). Now let’s see if they will ACTUALLY negotiate in good faith once the Senate has completed the task. Obama has the right idea..balance..that means cuts other than Medicare and Social Security and there is still work to do on tax reform. Our financials aren’t that far out of control..yet! Debt to revenue is 8 to 1 and the interest on the debt is only 12% of expenses. This isn’t the right time for austerity. But once the economy picks up….these guys have to start cutting expenses in earnest.

Jan 21, 2013 3:54pm EST  --  Report as abuse
xyz2055 wrote:

Ciao..I’ve posted nothing but facts. You can go look any of them up. Because you don’t like the facts doesn’t make them hyperbole. It is an absolute fact that Romney lost Mass by 23%, Mich. by 10% and Wis by 7%.

Jan 21, 2013 3:57pm EST  --  Report as abuse
steve0261 wrote:

“No man is free until every man, woman and child is on a government subsidy”

Jan 21, 2013 3:59pm EST  --  Report as abuse
NealR.WV wrote:

It’s real irony that the Pres. would say “preserving our individual freedoms will require collective bargaining” all the while he is working to take away our freedoms both individual and collective. Taxes are a round about way of taking away rights. If not then why raise taxes on things to cut usage i.e. cigs? It starts off as a way to cut usage but never reverts back, only goes forward. Then we can’t smoke in bars, trying to go after smoking in cars, and in private homes. If you tax stuff to the point that only the rich can afford it then is discriminating against poor and especially Obama’s devout minority, who are often the poor. Politics is full of ironies such as: Republicans are the racists. When in fact the Republican party was started to stop slavery and fought segregation while Democrats were on the other side of both arguments. Now, the Dems have somehow coop the minority vote and which only hurts the poor. By supporting those who keep their schools the worst in the country and fight against vouchers. You have to wonder if the Dems do such things like the no vouchers policy because of their previous positions.

Jan 21, 2013 4:04pm EST  --  Report as abuse
Ciao wrote:

@xyz2055 I’m not disputing your facts, I’m disputing the significance you attach to those facts. To me failure to carry your home state fails as a definition of “decisive victory.”

Jan 21, 2013 4:11pm EST  --  Report as abuse
xyz2055 wrote:

Ciao..what better litmus test of a candidate than the states where he governed and was born. If the candidate can’t gain the support of those people in those states, then why should the rest of us? That really is my only point.

Jan 21, 2013 4:19pm EST  --  Report as abuse
bobber1956 wrote:

And the headline says it all. He wants to FIGHT us not serve us. Bring it on.

Jan 21, 2013 4:20pm EST  --  Report as abuse
harleybike wrote:

He calls for less partisanship and then goes right into his class warfare. And by gay rights I assume he wants everyone to embrace homosexual marriage; no way. Marriage is between one man and one woman. And abortion, which he supports, is the killing of unborn babies. Where is his compromise on that. Forget it Obama. This is political war and you must be fought every inch of the way.

Jan 21, 2013 4:20pm EST  --  Report as abuse
BioStudies wrote:

“We cannot mistake absolutism for principle, or substitute spectacle for politics, or treat name-calling as reasoned debate,” Obama said from atop the Capitol steps overlooking the National Mall.

-Is he looking in a mirror when he says this? Surely he can’t be talking to anyone else.

Jan 21, 2013 4:22pm EST  --  Report as abuse
Rascal69 wrote:

Such a statement is often referred to an Oxymoron. In this case, it is delivered 1/2 of that word.

Jan 21, 2013 4:34pm EST  --  Report as abuse
Ciao wrote:

@xyz2055 Well, you already conceded the “state where you were born” point earlier in reference to GHWB. I admit that losing your home state (by whichever definition you choose) is embarrassing, but I still maintain that popular vote remains the gold standard. Also, when that state happens to be Massachusetts I think the sting for a conservative is diminished.

Jan 21, 2013 4:34pm EST  --  Report as abuse

Chrysler to build plant in China, Romney was RIGHT,the top wop – Marchione Pres/ceo Chrys/Fiat is a liar and cannot be trusted. Chrysler is Government Motors II

Jan 21, 2013 4:41pm EST  --  Report as abuse

Chrysler to build plant in China, Romney was RIGHT,the top wop – Marchione Pres/ceo Chrys/Fiat is a liar and cannot be trusted. Chrysler is Government Motors II

Jan 21, 2013 4:42pm EST  --  Report as abuse
USAPragmatist wrote:

@Bio Studies, please quote, not your idea but an actual quote, where Obama substituted spectacle for politics or used name-calling instead of reasoned debate.

Jan 21, 2013 4:42pm EST  --  Report as abuse

Chrysler to build plant in China, Romney was RIGHT,the top wop – Marchione Pres/ceo Chrys/Fiat is a liar and cannot be trusted. Chrysler is Government Motors II

Jan 21, 2013 4:42pm EST  --  Report as abuse
GLJones wrote:

I like Michelle’s hair….don’t like her or her husband but this hairdo work for her.

Jan 21, 2013 4:52pm EST  --  Report as abuse
xyz2055 wrote:

USAPragmatist..see you’ve picked up the torch where I left off. Good luck with that brother! Wish there were more like me and you. Ask good questions…don’t drink the koolaid. Do some research and don’t have a pre-concevied bias before to find the facts. America would be in a much better place if we all thought like that.

Jan 21, 2013 4:53pm EST  --  Report as abuse
xyz2055 wrote:

Ciao said “@xyz2055 Well, you already conceded the “state where you were born” point earlier in reference to GHWB.”

You just don’t get it do you? It wasn’t 1 state where Romney lost…it was three key states where Romney lost.

Jan 21, 2013 4:56pm EST  --  Report as abuse
gotham1883 wrote:

What do you call a president who uses voter fraud and intimidation to get re-elected. I call him the Great One. As for MLK. The Great One carries his true legacy. Both were and are unabashed communists who use the banner of civil rights, but hidden in that banner is a hammer and sickle and the words,”take from those willing to work and give to those who will not.”

Jan 21, 2013 4:59pm EST  --  Report as abuse
BioStudies wrote:

@USAPragmatist Show me one time where Obama hasn’t gone on the road and pandered to the public, while calling the republicans names and saying “he is open to all ideas, except this or that,” which is conveniently always the sticking point.

Jan 21, 2013 5:04pm EST  --  Report as abuse
bates148 wrote:

@xyz2055 What’s your point? WI, MI and MA went Democrat in 2008, 2004, 2000, 1996, 1992 and many more elections. Maybe the folks in those states like to vote Democrat for their president?

Jan 21, 2013 5:04pm EST  --  Report as abuse
xyz2055 wrote:

Ciao..I’m beginning to think you see these processes as either Republican or Democrat and you chose Republican. If we just examine the platform that Romney ran on..it tells the tale. He ran on the Paul Ryan “Path to Prosperity” platform that has “trickle down economics” as the main feature. There isn’t a scientific study anywhere that supports that premise. Go read “Path to Prosperity”: version 3.0 2013 in pdf on line. What is proposes is elimination of Capital Gains and Dividends Taxes, a huge tax break for the richest in this country, an INCREASE in Defense spending and the only cuts coming from Medicare and Social Security. This is what America rejected. This is why Romney lost. What we want as Americans is that we’re all in this together as opposed to “You’re on your own”.

Jan 21, 2013 5:05pm EST  --  Report as abuse
msmaria wrote:

On Wednesday, I did the math that most of the mainstream media couldn’t do in March 2007. I asked how Barack Obama could have told a Selma audience that the 1965 March on Selma resulted in his conception when he was born in 1961.

Jan 21, 2013 5:05pm EST  --  Report as abuse
USA4 wrote:

Obama called for “an end the political partisanship”? That is almost funny coming from him. In the past four years, he has shown zero leadership on tough issues. His greatest skill seems to be insulting people that don’t agree with him.. That type of negotiating style might have worked when he was a schoolboy, but intelligent adults tire of it very quickly. I suppose that what he would really like is to simply be appointed King, but that ins’t going to happen in this country. The best thing that he can do for this country is to take his lovely family with him to Hawaii for the next four years, sit in the sun, and read the books of his choice…

Jan 21, 2013 5:05pm EST  --  Report as abuse
moonhill wrote:

If USAPragmatist will just do a search on the internet he will find that Obama has recently called Republicans “enemies”, “hostage takers”, “unamerican”. I can’t tell you the names he called Romney during the campaign, because Reuters won’t publish such language.

Jan 21, 2013 5:06pm EST  --  Report as abuse
robertoh wrote:

It’s good to see Obama this weekend did adhear to the Constitution for once.The Constitution requires the President to be sworn in on January 20th.,which was Sunday.I guess he liked that part,the rest of the Constitution,not so much.

Jan 21, 2013 5:11pm EST  --  Report as abuse
tonyloaf wrote:

Obama has no interest in preserving our freedoms. He is preparing us for the bait and switch when he intends to substitutes collectivism for collective action. Collectivism means slavery.

Jan 21, 2013 5:11pm EST  --  Report as abuse
victor672 wrote:

Battle plan? To destroy what’s left of America? The media is having an orgasm today.

Jan 21, 2013 5:13pm EST  --  Report as abuse
xyz2055 wrote:

bates148..I don’t know..call me naive..but in Wisconsin they put Paul Ryan in as their Congressman..but voted against him as Vice President? How do you explain that?

Jan 21, 2013 5:16pm EST  --  Report as abuse
xyz2055 wrote:

tonyloaf..based on you’re comment. I’d say you’re well suited for slavery!

Jan 21, 2013 5:22pm EST  --  Report as abuse
Blackstone3 wrote:

omg, he won the fiscal cliff battle? Why I thought Obama ran on and demanded that taxes increase on incomes over $250,000. Wasn’t that changed to $400,000? Did something happen to the debt ceiling that I am unware of. Someone approved a change? It was eliminated? Thought not. Typical lying press.

Jan 21, 2013 5:28pm EST  --  Report as abuse
USAPragmatist wrote:

@biostudies and moonhill, please post one QUOTE where Obama himself has used the type of language you all are talking about, and FYI calling Congress unproductive is NOT name calling.

Jan 21, 2013 5:28pm EST  --  Report as abuse
smit1610 wrote:

National unity, you must be kidding. It was partisan and divisive in substance and tone. He will get nothing if he doesn’t govern from the center and deal with the biggest problem that our country faces: massive deficits and his reluctance to address them.

Jan 21, 2013 5:30pm EST  --  Report as abuse
Heretic2011 wrote:

Born in Hawaii has yet to be proven, yet the author spews it out as fact. The medias refusal to investigate ANYTHING about this joker is going to cause the downfall of this country. We will not forget.

Jan 21, 2013 5:32pm EST  --  Report as abuse
AZWarrior wrote:

Dr. King would be so disappointed with the political direction if our first African American President. But then, Dr. King was a Republican and would be tarred as an “Uncle Tom” by the current administration.

Jan 21, 2013 5:46pm EST  --  Report as abuse
xyz2055 wrote:

Heretic2011..the State of Hawaii released their official birth certificate for Barack Obama. If you are contesting that..you qualify as a moron.

Jan 21, 2013 5:49pm EST  --  Report as abuse
bates148 wrote:

@xyz2055 Easy. The U.S. has congressional districts. If you’re interested, you can read more about them here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_United_States_congressional_districts

Jan 21, 2013 5:53pm EST  --  Report as abuse
divinargant wrote:

For this to work you must believe and obey….or not.

Jan 21, 2013 5:54pm EST  --  Report as abuse
xyz2055 wrote:

bates148…nice diversion. Explain in simple terms how Wisconsin puts Ryan in Congress but Romney/Ryan loses by 7% points in the race for President.

Jan 21, 2013 6:01pm EST  --  Report as abuse
Globalman wrote:

23 millions out of work, trillions in debt, country more divided then in the 1960′s, health care a disaster, taxes increasing, world in turmoil, politics about as nasty as ever, yep lots to celebrate.

Jan 21, 2013 6:04pm EST  --  Report as abuse
xyz2055 wrote:

bates148. how about we throw out the congressional districts theory and simply say that the platform that Romney/Ryan ran on sucked. Try debating it from that angle.

Jan 21, 2013 6:05pm EST  --  Report as abuse
SpeaktheTruth wrote:

Are you kidding me with this statement:

“The Democrat arrived at his second inauguration on solid footing, with his poll numbers up, Republicans on the defensive and his first-term record boasting accomplishments such as a U.S. healthcare overhaul, ending the war in Iraq and the killing of Osama bin Laden.

The Country is divided like it has never been in my lifetime.

People are worried that we have a dictator and not a President.

Our freedom is under attack in every aspect (spying, indefinite detention, targeted killings, second amendment,..etc)…

And you have a man who thinks he can rule by fiat.

And yet this article indicates that the Country is united and loving this guy.

Really?

Jan 21, 2013 6:19pm EST  --  Report as abuse
Max17 wrote:

What about lowering the oceans and closing Gitmo? ROFL!

lord god king obama better get busy and quickly. Have you seen the mess he was left by the idiot that’s been in charge the past four years?

Jan 21, 2013 6:23pm EST  --  Report as abuse
bates148 wrote:

@xyz2055 What diversion? What theory? I’ve already put it in simple terms for you. You asked, “I don’t know..call me naive..but in Wisconsin they put Paul Ryan in as their Congressman..but voted against him as Vice President? How do you explain that?” You can reread my response. Paul Ryan represents Wisconsin’s 1st congressional district. It’s not the entire state. Get it? The entire state didn’t vote for him as congressman.

Jan 21, 2013 6:36pm EST  --  Report as abuse
rowley wrote:

Dehumanization of population for ultimate enslavement

Jan 21, 2013 6:46pm EST  --  Report as abuse
Speaker2 wrote:

Good thing there are liberals, otherwise from reading these comments, “the stupid would indeed inherit the earth”. Serious folks, Socialist? Really? where?

Jan 21, 2013 7:16pm EST  --  Report as abuse
americanguy wrote:

Let’s hope everybody in Washington will work together for the good of the country, and not “das party”.
We can also hope we all win the lottery, and people wake up with wings and are able to fly.

Jan 21, 2013 7:29pm EST  --  Report as abuse
JustMe256 wrote:

OK WAIT, WAIT WAIT a minute here, seriously did he really say this:

“an impassioned call for a more inclusive America that rejects partisan rancor and embraces immigration reform, gay rights and the fight against climate change.

People if you don’t already know this then I’m here to tell you – people who embrace immigration reform, gay rights and the fight against climate change are the poster child’s for partisan rancor.

And Mr Obama is a Jedi master at partisan rancor…

If this wasn’t so serious I’d be busting a gut but I’m NOT!

Jan 21, 2013 7:30pm EST  --  Report as abuse
fande3rls wrote:

Mr Obama , I Can take Care of Myself , I do not need the collective ,
You sound more like the Borg King instead of a president ,

“The welfare of the people in particular has always been the alibi of tyrants, and it provides the further advantage of giving the servants of tyranny a good conscience.” –French Algerian author Albert Camus (1913-1960)

Jan 21, 2013 7:51pm EST  --  Report as abuse
fande3rls wrote:

An elective despotism was not the government we fought for; but one in which the powers of government should be so divided and balanced among the several bodies of magistracy as that no one could transcend their legal limits without being effectually checked and restrained by the others.”

- James Madison, Federalist No. 58, 1788

Jan 21, 2013 7:54pm EST  --  Report as abuse
fande3rls wrote:

A major source of objection to a free economy is precisely that group thinks they ought to want. Underlying most arguments against the free market is a lack of belief in freedom itself.
Milton Friedman

Jan 21, 2013 7:57pm EST  --  Report as abuse
fande3rls wrote:

Throughout history, government has proved to be the chief instrument for thwarting man’s liberty. Government represents power in the hands of some men to control and regulate the lives of other men. And power, as Lord Acton said, corrupts men. ‘Absolute power,’ he added, ‘corrupts absolutely.’ State power, considered in the abstract, need not restrict freedom: but absolute state power always does.” –U. S. Senator Barry Goldwater (1909-1998)

Jan 21, 2013 8:01pm EST  --  Report as abuse
Dave2009 wrote:

“The Democrat arrived at his second inauguration on solid footing”
I think that idea is like saying having a wet dream is as good as having the real thing.

Jan 21, 2013 8:33pm EST  --  Report as abuse
BioStudies wrote:

@USAPragmatist Just google his speeches dude. I’m not going to do research for you. His name calling and lying is well documented.

Jan 21, 2013 8:55pm EST  --  Report as abuse
BioStudies wrote:

@Dave2009 OMG I laughed really hard reading that. Very true.

Jan 21, 2013 8:56pm EST  --  Report as abuse
aberdeenvet wrote:

CESS AT LAS!

“We cannot expect the Americans to jump from capitalism to Communism, but we can assist their elected leaders in giving Americans small doses of socialism until they suddenly awake to find they have Communism.”

Soviet Leader Nikita Khrushchev, 1959

Jan 21, 2013 10:17pm EST  --  Report as abuse
Ciao wrote:

@xyz2055 woah! signal before you change topics that quickly. So we’ve switched from discussing the definiton of a “decisive election” to comparing platforms. To try to pull it back on topic, you say that “What we want as Americans” which brings us back to our original discussion. You portray all Americans as prefering Obama’s plan and rejecting Romney’s through the use of the term “we” but the whole essence of our discussion is that Amrrica is essentially evenly divided between the competing ideas based on the fact the slightly more than half voted for one, and slightly less than half voted for the other, far from “decisive.”

Jan 21, 2013 10:41pm EST  --  Report as abuse
JL4 wrote:

There are two ways to change the U.S. Constitution. The following is the only way that has been used to date:

CONGRESS must pass with two-thirds votes in BOTH houses (that’s the House of Representatives and the Senate), and then the proposed change/addition goes to the State Legislatures, where three-fourths votes of states in favor are required to ratify the change.

The President has NOTHING to do with the process. A President can voice his/her opinion, cannot veto a ratified change.

Obama doesn’t have the power to make changes, and he doesn’t have the power to GRANT himself the power.

The President has the ability to issue Executive Orders. All Presidents have done it, and all will continue to do it. It has NOTHING to do with the Constitution, and does not conflict one iota with Congress’s responsibilities. Obama cannot circumvent Congress’s responsibilities. (Although Congress seems to be doing a good job of circumventing their own responsibilities)

Regarding “Decisive Elections”, that means there is no doubt about the outcome of an election. As in, there was no doubt that Obama won the election over Romney by a clear majority of popular vote, and a clear majority of electoral votes. It was, indeed, decisive. And part of that decisiveness of the popular and electoral vote was that Romney and Ryan lost in the three states it is usually assumed they would have taken “decisively” but did not. Obama took those states decisively. In fact, he pretty much ripped ‘em a new one.

Jan 22, 2013 2:53pm EST  --  Report as abuse
jaham wrote:

What Obama failed to mention on inauguration day:

Gallon of gas 1/20/2009: $1.84
Gallon of gas 1/20/2013: $3.26

Unemployment rate 1/20/2009: 7.8%
Unemployment rate 1/20/2013: 7.8%

Estimated welfare spending as of 1/20/2009: $563 billion
Estimated welfare spending as of 1/20/2013: $1.03 trillion

Number of Americans on food stamps 1/20/2009: 34 million
Number of Americans on food stamps 1/20/2013: 47.5 million

Average monthly premium for individual health policies 1/20/2009: $161
Average monthly premium for individual health policies 1/20/2013: $184

Median household income in America adjusted for inflation 1/20/2009: $52,195
Median household income in America adjusted for inflation 1/20/2013: $50,054

Number of American soldiers killed in Afghanistan as of 1/20/2009: 630
Number of American soldiers killed in Afghanistan as of 1/20/2013: 1324

US national debt as of 1/20/2009: $10 trillion
US national debt as of 1/20/2013: $16.4 trillion

Social Security income/deficits as of 1/20/2009: SURPLUS of roughly $4 billion
Social Security income/deficits as of 1/20/2013: DEFICIT of roughly $20 billion

Jan 22, 2013 3:18pm EST  --  Report as abuse
This discussion is now closed. We welcome comments on our articles for a limited period after their publication.