Leadership defined...
 

http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/...-capitol-hill/

Leadership defined...
 

Tom Francis - SWSports wrote:
http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/...-capitol-hill/


A. We only have one head of state at a time here.

B. The Moonie paper? snerk

Leadership defined...
 

Boater wrote:
Tom Francis - SWSports wrote:
http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/...-capitol-hill/



A. We only have one head of state at a time here.

True. But, that hasn't stopped The Obama from selecting his cabinet and
making foreign policy statements and other national policy statements.

B. The Moonie paper? snerk

At least they didn't have the woman who faked the 8 year old heroin addict.

Leadership defined...
 

"Boater" wrote in message
...
Tom Francis - SWSports wrote:
http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/...-capitol-hill/



A. We only have one head of state at a time here.

B. The Moonie paper? snerk


Maybe, but Bush has pushed to redirect the $25B already authorized for green
car development to a temporary cash flow assistance to the auto industry to
tide them over until Obama takes office and decides what he wants to do.
Seems reasonable to me.

Meanwhile, up until yesterday, the Dems in Congress wanted to slice off some
of the $700B TARP funding to bail out Detroit, particularly GM. That is,
until Pelosi and Reid realized that the political wind wasn't in their
favor, so they changed their tune.

This crisis is not a typical, POTUS to POTUS transitional issue. Decisions
need to be made now, not on January 20th, if one believes GM needs to be
saved. Obama should be exercising his influence on the matter, not voting
"present" because unless something is done in the next 3 weeks or so, GM may
no longer exist as a going concern.

That doesn't mean that my personal opinion is for a bailout. I still
believe a planned, Chapter 11 filing and reorganization is necessary, under
which a bridge loan from the government (taxpayers) would be exercised to
help finance operations during the reorganization period.

Eisboch

Leadership defined...
 

On Fri, 21 Nov 2008 02:09:41 -0500, "Eisboch" wrote:


"Boater" wrote in message
...
Tom Francis - SWSports wrote:
http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/...-capitol-hill/



A. We only have one head of state at a time here.

B. The Moonie paper? snerk


Maybe, but Bush has pushed to redirect the $25B already authorized for green
car development to a temporary cash flow assistance to the auto industry to
tide them over until Obama takes office and decides what he wants to do.
Seems reasonable to me.

Meanwhile, up until yesterday, the Dems in Congress wanted to slice off some
of the $700B TARP funding to bail out Detroit, particularly GM. That is,
until Pelosi and Reid realized that the political wind wasn't in their
favor, so they changed their tune.

This crisis is not a typical, POTUS to POTUS transitional issue. Decisions
need to be made now, not on January 20th, if one believes GM needs to be
saved. Obama should be exercising his influence on the matter, not voting
"present" because unless something is done in the next 3 weeks or so, GM may
no longer exist as a going concern.

That doesn't mean that my personal opinion is for a bailout. I still
believe a planned, Chapter 11 filing and reorganization is necessary, under
which a bridge loan from the government (taxpayers) would be exercised to
help finance operations during the reorganization period.

It's all about signals and Obama hasn't sent the right signals.

I agree - he needs to put a transitional Treasury Secretary in place
to calm things down and send the right signal.

You would think a "community organizer" would understand the need.

Leadership defined...
 

Tom Francis - SWSports wrote:
On Fri, 21 Nov 2008 02:09:41 -0500, "Eisboch" wrote:

"Boater" wrote in message
...
Tom Francis - SWSports wrote:
http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/...-capitol-hill/

A. We only have one head of state at a time here.

B. The Moonie paper? snerk

Maybe, but Bush has pushed to redirect the $25B already authorized for green
car development to a temporary cash flow assistance to the auto industry to
tide them over until Obama takes office and decides what he wants to do.
Seems reasonable to me.

Meanwhile, up until yesterday, the Dems in Congress wanted to slice off some
of the $700B TARP funding to bail out Detroit, particularly GM. That is,
until Pelosi and Reid realized that the political wind wasn't in their
favor, so they changed their tune.

This crisis is not a typical, POTUS to POTUS transitional issue. Decisions
need to be made now, not on January 20th, if one believes GM needs to be
saved. Obama should be exercising his influence on the matter, not voting
"present" because unless something is done in the next 3 weeks or so, GM may
no longer exist as a going concern.

That doesn't mean that my personal opinion is for a bailout. I still
believe a planned, Chapter 11 filing and reorganization is necessary, under
which a bridge loan from the government (taxpayers) would be exercised to
help finance operations during the reorganization period.

It's all about signals and Obama hasn't sent the right signals.

I agree - he needs to put a transitional Treasury Secretary in place
to calm things down and send the right signal.

You would think a "community organizer" would understand the need.



Once again, we only have one president at a time. What you are
advocating is a variance of the parliamentary system, sort of, in which
the opposition party has some standing, and in which there are "shadow"
officials of the opposition party, ready to move in and take over on
practically a moment's notice.

At the moment, Barack Obama has absolutely no standing constitutionally.
Hell, he even resigned his seat in the U.S. Senate. How can he "put a
transitional Treasury Secretary in place"? If he attempted that, under
our system, it would be usurpation of power and, in fact, pretty much a
coup.

What could be done is this: Bush, as president, could call upon Obama,
as president-elect, to meet with him and his advisers on a daily basis,
come up with plans both entities endorse 100% and jointly announce and
implement those plans on an interim basis with the help of Congressional
leaders. Or something like that.

Part of the problem here is that the current president has skirted the
intent and sometimes the letter of the Constitution when it suited his
purposes because he had no understanding or respect for it. I doubt he
has even read it. The incoming president is a professor of
constitutional law, understands he has to follow the document, and sure
as hell does not want his administration to start with him in violation
of it.

George W. Bush baked our cake. We have to eat it until he is no longer
in office. The mess we are in rightfully belongs on Bush's desk, and
Obama will inherit it. But it isn't Obama's mess...yet.

Sorry, boys...and once again, we only have one president at a time.

Leadership defined...
 

On Nov 21, 7:48*am, Boater wrote:
Tom Francis - SWSports wrote:





On Fri, 21 Nov 2008 02:09:41 -0500, "Eisboch" wrote:

"Boater" wrote in message
...
Tom Francis - SWSports wrote:
http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/...tays-out-of-ca....

A. We only have one head of state at a time here.

B. The Moonie paper? *snerk

Maybe, but Bush has pushed to redirect the $25B already authorized for green
car development to a temporary *cash flow assistance to the auto industry to
tide them over until Obama takes office and decides what he wants to do.
Seems reasonable to me.

Meanwhile, up until yesterday, the Dems in Congress wanted to slice off some
of the $700B *TARP funding to bail out Detroit, particularly GM. * That is,
until Pelosi and Reid realized that the political wind wasn't in their
favor, so they changed their tune.

This crisis is not a typical, POTUS to POTUS transitional issue. *Decisions
need to be made now, not on January 20th, if one believes GM needs to be
saved. *Obama should be exercising his influence on the matter, not voting
"present" because unless something is done in the next 3 weeks or so, GM may
no longer exist as a going concern.

That doesn't mean that my personal opinion is for a bailout. * I still
believe a planned, Chapter 11 filing and reorganization is necessary, under
which a bridge loan from the government (taxpayers) would be exercised to
help finance operations during the reorganization period.

It's all about signals and Obama hasn't sent the right signals.

I agree - he needs to put a transitional Treasury Secretary in place
to calm things down and send the right signal.

You would think a "community organizer" would understand the need.

Once again, we only have one president at a time. What you are
advocating is a variance of the parliamentary system, sort of, in which
the opposition party has some standing, and in which there are "shadow"
officials of the opposition party, ready to move in and take over on
practically a moment's notice.

At the moment, Barack Obama has absolutely no standing constitutionally.
Hell, he even resigned his seat in the U.S. Senate. How can he "put a
transitional Treasury Secretary in place"? If he attempted that, under
our system, it would be usurpation of power and, in fact, pretty much a
coup.

What could be done is this: Bush, as president, could call upon Obama,
as president-elect, to meet with him and his advisers on a daily basis,
* come up with plans both entities endorse 100% and jointly announce and
implement those plans on an interim basis with the help of Congressional
leaders. Or something like that.

Part of the problem here is that the current president has skirted the
intent and sometimes the letter of the Constitution when it suited his
purposes because he had no understanding or respect for it. I doubt he
has even read it. The incoming president is a professor of
constitutional law, understands he has to follow the document, and sure
as hell does not want his administration to start with him in violation
of it.

George W. Bush baked our cake. We have to eat it until he is no longer
in office. The mess we are in rightfully belongs on Bush's desk, and
Obama will inherit it. But it isn't Obama's mess...yet.

Sorry, boys...and once again, we only have one president at a time.- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

Well, if Obama's afraid to step up, maybe he shoudn't have run...

Leadership defined...
 

wrote:
On Nov 21, 7:48 am, Boater wrote:
Tom Francis - SWSports wrote:





On Fri, 21 Nov 2008 02:09:41 -0500, "Eisboch" wrote:
"Boater" wrote in message
...
Tom Francis - SWSports wrote:
http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/...tays-out-of-ca...
A. We only have one head of state at a time here.
B. The Moonie paper? snerk
Maybe, but Bush has pushed to redirect the $25B already authorized for green
car development to a temporary cash flow assistance to the auto industry to
tide them over until Obama takes office and decides what he wants to do.
Seems reasonable to me.
Meanwhile, up until yesterday, the Dems in Congress wanted to slice off some
of the $700B TARP funding to bail out Detroit, particularly GM. That is,
until Pelosi and Reid realized that the political wind wasn't in their
favor, so they changed their tune.
This crisis is not a typical, POTUS to POTUS transitional issue. Decisions
need to be made now, not on January 20th, if one believes GM needs to be
saved. Obama should be exercising his influence on the matter, not voting
"present" because unless something is done in the next 3 weeks or so, GM may
no longer exist as a going concern.
That doesn't mean that my personal opinion is for a bailout. I still
believe a planned, Chapter 11 filing and reorganization is necessary, under
which a bridge loan from the government (taxpayers) would be exercised to
help finance operations during the reorganization period.
It's all about signals and Obama hasn't sent the right signals.
I agree - he needs to put a transitional Treasury Secretary in place
to calm things down and send the right signal.
You would think a "community organizer" would understand the need.
Once again, we only have one president at a time. What you are
advocating is a variance of the parliamentary system, sort of, in which
the opposition party has some standing, and in which there are "shadow"
officials of the opposition party, ready to move in and take over on
practically a moment's notice.

At the moment, Barack Obama has absolutely no standing constitutionally.
Hell, he even resigned his seat in the U.S. Senate. How can he "put a
transitional Treasury Secretary in place"? If he attempted that, under
our system, it would be usurpation of power and, in fact, pretty much a
coup.

What could be done is this: Bush, as president, could call upon Obama,
as president-elect, to meet with him and his advisers on a daily basis,
come up with plans both entities endorse 100% and jointly announce and
implement those plans on an interim basis with the help of Congressional
leaders. Or something like that.

Part of the problem here is that the current president has skirted the
intent and sometimes the letter of the Constitution when it suited his
purposes because he had no understanding or respect for it. I doubt he
has even read it. The incoming president is a professor of
constitutional law, understands he has to follow the document, and sure
as hell does not want his administration to start with him in violation
of it.

George W. Bush baked our cake. We have to eat it until he is no longer
in office. The mess we are in rightfully belongs on Bush's desk, and
Obama will inherit it. But it isn't Obama's mess...yet.

Sorry, boys...and once again, we only have one president at a time.- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

Well, if Obama's afraid to step up, maybe he shoudn't have run...


You missed the point. Under our form of government, Obama has no
standing to do what has been suggested here. It's not fear that keeps
him from acting. It is respect for our Constitution, our laws, our
traditions. The President cannot do whatever the hell he/she wants,
although obviously Bush bent those rules whenever it pleased him. Obama
is a lawyer and versed in the Constitution. He is not going to ignore
the Constitution while President-elect.

Leadership defined...
 

On Nov 21, 7:02*am, Boater wrote:
Obama
is a lawyer and versed in the Constitution. He is not going to ignore
the Constitution while President-elect.

LOL!

So, he WILL ignore it after Jan 20?

Leadership defined...
 

"Boater" wrote in message
...
wrote:

Tom Francis - SWSports wrote:

It's all about signals and Obama hasn't sent the right signals.
I agree - he needs to put a transitional Treasury Secretary in place
to calm things down and send the right signal.
You would think a "community organizer" would understand the need.


Once again, we only have one president at a time. What you are
advocating is a variance of the parliamentary system, sort of, in which
the opposition party has some standing, and in which there are "shadow"
officials of the opposition party, ready to move in and take over on
practically a moment's notice.



At the moment, Barack Obama has absolutely no standing constitutionally.
Hell, he even resigned his seat in the U.S. Senate. How can he "put a
transitional Treasury Secretary in place"? If he attempted that, under
our system, it would be usurpation of power and, in fact, pretty much a
coup.



I don't think Tom suggested a working Treasury Secretary. Of course he
can't do that yet. I think he meant announcing his choice for one, which
might help generate some optimism for the economic climate that exists.
Instead, Hillary is doing her routine again, holding up much needed
announcements while she negotiates her level of power in the pecking order
of his proposed cabinet. It's just like the negotiations that took place
before she would agree to concede victory to Obama in the primaries and
drop
her threats of "taking it to the convention". You can bet that *that* is
exactly what is going on. Hillary first. Country second.

Traditionally, the incoming POTUS keeps his mouth shut about current issues
until he takes office.
The current economic situation is not typical or traditional. GM may be
gonzo by Jan 20th.
Obama needs to chime in and present his plan to be executed as soon as he
takes the reigns. Instead, he has quickly and conveniently resigned from
the Senate sooner than traditionally, so he won't have to go on record with
his vote for the possible bailout.

Creeps, every single one of them.

Eisboch
p.s. Harry, sorry about sending this email. Hit the wrong "reply" button.

Leadership defined...
 

Tim wrote:
On Nov 21, 7:02 am, Boater wrote:
Obama
is a lawyer and versed in the Constitution. He is not going to ignore
the Constitution while President-elect.

LOL!

So, he WILL ignore it after Jan 20?


Actually, I'm certain President Obama will follow the Constitution much
more closely than the current Administration.

Leadership defined...
 

Boater wrote:
wrote:
On Nov 21, 7:48 am, Boater wrote:
Tom Francis - SWSports wrote:





On Fri, 21 Nov 2008 02:09:41 -0500, "Eisboch" wrote:
"Boater" wrote in message
...
Tom Francis - SWSports wrote:
http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/...tays-out-of-ca...

A. We only have one head of state at a time here.
B. The Moonie paper? snerk
Maybe, but Bush has pushed to redirect the $25B already authorized
for green
car development to a temporary cash flow assistance to the auto
industry to
tide them over until Obama takes office and decides what he wants
to do.
Seems reasonable to me.
Meanwhile, up until yesterday, the Dems in Congress wanted to slice
off some
of the $700B TARP funding to bail out Detroit, particularly GM.
That is,
until Pelosi and Reid realized that the political wind wasn't in their
favor, so they changed their tune.
This crisis is not a typical, POTUS to POTUS transitional issue.
Decisions
need to be made now, not on January 20th, if one believes GM needs
to be
saved. Obama should be exercising his influence on the matter, not
voting
"present" because unless something is done in the next 3 weeks or
so, GM may
no longer exist as a going concern.
That doesn't mean that my personal opinion is for a bailout. I still
believe a planned, Chapter 11 filing and reorganization is
necessary, under
which a bridge loan from the government (taxpayers) would be
exercised to
help finance operations during the reorganization period.
It's all about signals and Obama hasn't sent the right signals.
I agree - he needs to put a transitional Treasury Secretary in place
to calm things down and send the right signal.
You would think a "community organizer" would understand the need.
Once again, we only have one president at a time. What you are
advocating is a variance of the parliamentary system, sort of, in which
the opposition party has some standing, and in which there are "shadow"
officials of the opposition party, ready to move in and take over on
practically a moment's notice.

At the moment, Barack Obama has absolutely no standing constitutionally.
Hell, he even resigned his seat in the U.S. Senate. How can he "put a
transitional Treasury Secretary in place"? If he attempted that, under
our system, it would be usurpation of power and, in fact, pretty much a
coup.

What could be done is this: Bush, as president, could call upon Obama,
as president-elect, to meet with him and his advisers on a daily basis,
come up with plans both entities endorse 100% and jointly announce and
implement those plans on an interim basis with the help of Congressional
leaders. Or something like that.

Part of the problem here is that the current president has skirted the
intent and sometimes the letter of the Constitution when it suited his
purposes because he had no understanding or respect for it. I doubt he
has even read it. The incoming president is a professor of
constitutional law, understands he has to follow the document, and sure
as hell does not want his administration to start with him in violation
of it.

George W. Bush baked our cake. We have to eat it until he is no longer
in office. The mess we are in rightfully belongs on Bush's desk, and
Obama will inherit it. But it isn't Obama's mess...yet.

Sorry, boys...and once again, we only have one president at a time.-
Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

Well, if Obama's afraid to step up, maybe he shoudn't have run...


You missed the point. Under our form of government, Obama has no
standing to do what has been suggested here. It's not fear that keeps
him from acting. It is respect for our Constitution, our laws, our
traditions. The President cannot do whatever the hell he/she wants,
although obviously Bush bent those rules whenever it pleased him. Obama
is a lawyer and versed in the Constitution. He is not going to ignore
the Constitution while President-elect.

The Obama could, as others have said, disclose his Treas. Sec. nominee
and use that press conference to provide guidance as to what he expects
of his Treas. Sec.

Leadership defined...
 

Boater wrote:
Tim wrote:
On Nov 21, 7:02 am, Boater wrote:
Obama
is a lawyer and versed in the Constitution. He is not going to ignore
the Constitution while President-elect.

LOL!

So, he WILL ignore it after Jan 20?


Actually, I'm certain President Obama will follow the Constitution much
more closely than the current Administration.

After he rips out a few paragraphs, sections and articles. The ones that
he has already expressed he doesn't like.

Leadership defined...
 

Eisboch wrote:
"Boater" wrote in message
...
wrote:

Tom Francis - SWSports wrote:

It's all about signals and Obama hasn't sent the right signals.
I agree - he needs to put a transitional Treasury Secretary in place
to calm things down and send the right signal.
You would think a "community organizer" would understand the need.


Once again, we only have one president at a time. What you are
advocating is a variance of the parliamentary system, sort of, in which
the opposition party has some standing, and in which there are "shadow"
officials of the opposition party, ready to move in and take over on
practically a moment's notice.



At the moment, Barack Obama has absolutely no standing constitutionally.
Hell, he even resigned his seat in the U.S. Senate. How can he "put a
transitional Treasury Secretary in place"? If he attempted that, under
our system, it would be usurpation of power and, in fact, pretty much a
coup.



I don't think Tom suggested a working Treasury Secretary. Of course he
can't do that yet. I think he meant announcing his choice for one, which
might help generate some optimism for the economic climate that exists.
Instead, Hillary is doing her routine again, holding up much needed
announcements while she negotiates her level of power in the pecking order
of his proposed cabinet. It's just like the negotiations that took place
before she would agree to concede victory to Obama in the primaries and
drop
her threats of "taking it to the convention". You can bet that *that* is
exactly what is going on. Hillary first. Country second.

Traditionally, the incoming POTUS keeps his mouth shut about current issues
until he takes office.
The current economic situation is not typical or traditional. GM may be
gonzo by Jan 20th.
Obama needs to chime in and present his plan to be executed as soon as he
takes the reigns. Instead, he has quickly and conveniently resigned from
the Senate sooner than traditionally, so he won't have to go on record with
his vote for the possible bailout.

Creeps, every single one of them.

Eisboch
p.s. Harry, sorry about sending this email. Hit the wrong "reply" button.



I am sure Obama will announce his choice for treasury secretary soon.

I believe the current "Hillary" to-do is entirely a creation of the
media, which has nothing to do, and the usual Hillary haters. The media
is speculating on speculation, nothing more.

Also, I have a theory about the decline in the stock market. I think the
price of stocks has been widely inflated for a long, long time, that
shares were being traded at prices that bore no relationship to value or
anything credible and reasonable, such as honest bookkeeping. Perhaps a
Dow around 7000-8000 is more reflective of reality in the value of
the shares of the companies than a Dow over 12000.

Sadly, many pension funds representing workers in private and public
employment were heavily invested in stocks, and with the 35%+ fall in
the value of shares generally, the funds are scrambling to meet their
pension payout obligations to retirees. That means they have to pull
back on their investments in more productive sectors of the economy.

Perhaps in the future the "prudent man" decision makers at pension funds
will realize that the stock market is no place for the funds managed for
the benefit of retirees.

Leadership defined...
 

On Nov 21, 7:16*am, Boater wrote:
Tim wrote:
On Nov 21, 7:02 am, Boater wrote:
*Obama
is a lawyer and versed in the Constitution. He is not going to ignore
the Constitution while President-elect.

LOL!

So, he WILL ignore it after Jan 20?

Actually, I'm certain President Obama will follow the Constitution much
more closely than the current Administration.

Oh, I know what you were saying, but I couldn't resist the play-on-
words...

Leadership defined...
 

On Nov 21, 7:21*am, BAR wrote:
Boater wrote:
Tim wrote:
On Nov 21, 7:02 am, Boater wrote:
*Obama
is a lawyer and versed in the Constitution. He is not going to ignore
the Constitution while President-elect.

LOL!

So, he WILL ignore it after Jan 20?

Actually, I'm certain President Obama will follow the Constitution much
more closely than the current Administration.

After he rips out a few paragraphs, sections and articles. The ones that
he has already expressed he doesn't like.

Well Actually he is playing his part in boosting the economy already.
Ever since he's been elected. Gun 'n ammo sales have really inclined
because people are afraid of the 2nd Amendment being tampered with.

Leadership defined...
 

Tim wrote:
On Nov 21, 7:21 am, BAR wrote:
Boater wrote:
Tim wrote:
On Nov 21, 7:02 am, Boater wrote:
Obama
is a lawyer and versed in the Constitution. He is not going to ignore
the Constitution while President-elect.
LOL!
So, he WILL ignore it after Jan 20?
Actually, I'm certain President Obama will follow the Constitution much
more closely than the current Administration.
After he rips out a few paragraphs, sections and articles. The ones that
he has already expressed he doesn't like.

Well Actually he is playing his part in boosting the economy already.
Ever since he's been elected. Gun 'n ammo sales have really inclined
because people are afraid of the 2nd Amendment being tampered with.


Actually, gun and ammo sales are booming because the simple-minded fools
who listen and pay attention to right-wing radio and the NRA and read
certain discussion groups are being led like sheep by gun manufacturers
and gun dealers.

Leadership defined...
 

Boater wrote:
Tim wrote:
On Nov 21, 7:21 am, BAR wrote:
Boater wrote:
Tim wrote:
On Nov 21, 7:02 am, Boater wrote:
Obama
is a lawyer and versed in the Constitution. He is not going to ignore
the Constitution while President-elect.
LOL!
So, he WILL ignore it after Jan 20?
Actually, I'm certain President Obama will follow the Constitution much
more closely than the current Administration.
After he rips out a few paragraphs, sections and articles. The ones that
he has already expressed he doesn't like.

Well Actually he is playing his part in boosting the economy already.
Ever since he's been elected. Gun 'n ammo sales have really inclined
because people are afraid of the 2nd Amendment being tampered with.


Actually, gun and ammo sales are booming because the simple-minded fools
who listen and pay attention to right-wing radio and the NRA and read
certain discussion groups are being led like sheep by gun manufacturers
and gun dealers.

We are all doing out part to help out the economy in any way we can. I
am surprised that you, Harry, are against people purchasing implements
to hurl lead at their own stumpy's.

Leadership defined...
 

BAR wrote:
Boater wrote:
Tim wrote:
On Nov 21, 7:21 am, BAR wrote:
Boater wrote:
Tim wrote:
On Nov 21, 7:02 am, Boater wrote:
Obama
is a lawyer and versed in the Constitution. He is not going to
ignore
the Constitution while President-elect.
LOL!
So, he WILL ignore it after Jan 20?
Actually, I'm certain President Obama will follow the Constitution
much
more closely than the current Administration.
After he rips out a few paragraphs, sections and articles. The ones
that
he has already expressed he doesn't like.

Well Actually he is playing his part in boosting the economy already.
Ever since he's been elected. Gun 'n ammo sales have really inclined
because people are afraid of the 2nd Amendment being tampered with.


Actually, gun and ammo sales are booming because the simple-minded
fools who listen and pay attention to right-wing radio and the NRA and
read certain discussion groups are being led like sheep by gun
manufacturers and gun dealers.

We are all doing out part to help out the economy in any way we can. I
am surprised that you, Harry, are against people purchasing implements
to hurl lead at their own stumpy's.



Alas, Stumpy is no more. He was shot to hell the last time we were out
there, and then...he was tractored out to make room for drainfield.

Hey, I have no problem with folks buying guns, but the current
irrationality in the gun world that is provoking sales is funny to
watch. The "boys" are being played, big time.

Leadership defined...
 

Boater wrote:
Jim wrote:
BAR wrote:
Boater wrote:
Tim wrote:
On Nov 21, 7:02 am, Boater wrote:
Obama
is a lawyer and versed in the Constitution. He is not going to ignore
the Constitution while President-elect.

LOL!

So, he WILL ignore it after Jan 20?


Actually, I'm certain President Obama will follow the Constitution
much more closely than the current Administration.

After he rips out a few paragraphs, sections and articles. The ones
that he has already expressed he doesn't like.

I don't know what it is about this guy that makes Ol' Harry feel all
warm and fuzzy.



One of reasons is that he gives the right-wing retards heart palpitations.

What I want to know is The Obama's definition of change and hope. He
keeps pulling in Clinton retreads for his administration. I think The
Obama Hopes we will view this as Change when all it is is Clinton Redux.

Leadership defined...
 

Boater wrote:
Jim wrote:
Boater wrote:
Jim wrote:
BAR wrote:
Boater wrote:
Tim wrote:
On Nov 21, 7:02 am, Boater wrote:
Obama
is a lawyer and versed in the Constitution. He is not going to
ignore
the Constitution while President-elect.

LOL!

So, he WILL ignore it after Jan 20?


Actually, I'm certain President Obama will follow the Constitution
much more closely than the current Administration.

After he rips out a few paragraphs, sections and articles. The ones
that he has already expressed he doesn't like.

I don't know what it is about this guy that makes Ol' Harry feel all
warm and fuzzy.



One of reasons is that he gives the right-wing retards heart
palpitations.
As usual you have it ass backwards. It's the far left that are
swooning and palpitating. He will disappoint you in the end.


No one gives a schitt what the far left wants or says. The far left does
not control the Democratic party, the party apparatus, or government
officials elected from the party's ranks. There is no far left
equivalent of the right-wing evangelicals bearing down on the Democrats.

The far left got The Obama the nomination. Do you think they will do it
again?

I have some friends among the Social Democrats. Their switchboard is not
ringing with calls from the incoming administration.

What is a Social Democrat?

Leadership defined...
 

"Vic Smith" wrote in message
...
On Fri, 21 Nov 2008 12:30:15 -0500, Boater
wrote:

Tom Francis - SWSports wrote:

And he will be a one term President.

Which, all-in-all, might not be a bad thing.

By the way, get ready for 2010 and the repudiation of the Democratic
Congress. It's going to be 1994 all over again.


I know you are hopeful, Tom...and it is traditional the party in power
loses seats at the mid-terms...but...

...your party is dead, bereft of ideas, and controlled by the
evangelical fruitcakes. You cannot win national elections by appealing
only to the watchers of Faux News and listeners to Rush Limbaugh.

There seems to be something missed in this discussion of Obama
interfering with the policies of our current President.
Namely, with only a bare two months left, it is only honorable and
polite to let GWB cement his legacy in his own way.
Give the current President of The United States of America and his
party, The Republican Party, every opportunity to continue
their policies, and lead us to prosperity.
They have earned that, at the least.
IMHO.

--Vic

Then Obama should not have resigned from the Senate. He should have stayed,
contributed to a solution and earned his pay until Jan 20. Instead he did
the equivilent of voting "present" and exited stage right (or left) at a
very critical and historically difficult period of time.

Eisboch

Leadership defined...
 

On Fri, 21 Nov 2008 19:08:20 -0500, "Eisboch"
wrote:


"Vic Smith" wrote in message
.. .
On Fri, 21 Nov 2008 12:30:15 -0500, Boater
wrote:

Tom Francis - SWSports wrote:

And he will be a one term President.

Which, all-in-all, might not be a bad thing.

By the way, get ready for 2010 and the repudiation of the Democratic
Congress. It's going to be 1994 all over again.


I know you are hopeful, Tom...and it is traditional the party in power
loses seats at the mid-terms...but...

...your party is dead, bereft of ideas, and controlled by the
evangelical fruitcakes. You cannot win national elections by appealing
only to the watchers of Faux News and listeners to Rush Limbaugh.

There seems to be something missed in this discussion of Obama
interfering with the policies of our current President.
Namely, with only a bare two months left, it is only honorable and
polite to let GWB cement his legacy in his own way.
Give the current President of The United States of America and his
party, The Republican Party, every opportunity to continue
their policies, and lead us to prosperity.
They have earned that, at the least.
IMHO.

--Vic

Then Obama should not have resigned from the Senate. He should have stayed,
contributed to a solution and earned his pay until Jan 20. Instead he did
the equivilent of voting "present" and exited stage right (or left) at a
very critical and historically difficult period of time.


Bottom line is you'll bitch, no matter what he does.
Just a fact of life.
Would be pretty boring otherwise, I admit.
So what's new on the boat front?

--Vic

Leadership defined...
 

On Fri, 21 Nov 2008 19:08:20 -0500, "Eisboch"
wrote:


"Vic Smith" wrote in message
.. .
On Fri, 21 Nov 2008 12:30:15 -0500, Boater
wrote:

Tom Francis - SWSports wrote:

And he will be a one term President.

Which, all-in-all, might not be a bad thing.

By the way, get ready for 2010 and the repudiation of the Democratic
Congress. It's going to be 1994 all over again.


I know you are hopeful, Tom...and it is traditional the party in power
loses seats at the mid-terms...but...

...your party is dead, bereft of ideas, and controlled by the
evangelical fruitcakes. You cannot win national elections by appealing
only to the watchers of Faux News and listeners to Rush Limbaugh.

There seems to be something missed in this discussion of Obama
interfering with the policies of our current President.
Namely, with only a bare two months left, it is only honorable and
polite to let GWB cement his legacy in his own way.
Give the current President of The United States of America and his
party, The Republican Party, every opportunity to continue
their policies, and lead us to prosperity.
They have earned that, at the least.
IMHO.

--Vic

Then Obama should not have resigned from the Senate. He should have stayed,
contributed to a solution and earned his pay until Jan 20. Instead he did
the equivilent of voting "present" and exited stage right (or left) at a
very critical and historically difficult period of time.

Here is what disturbs me the most - with two exceptions, he's picked
the most radical members of Clinton's administration to populate his
cabinet. It's Clinton all over again only this time, the President is
really black.

And the one that's even more scary than Gorelick for AG is Eric Holder
- this is the guy who wants to limit free speech and really believes
that it's necessary.

It's like GEB populating his cabinet with the more radical members of
his father's administration - which he did.

I guess it's just a matter of perspective.

Leadership defined...
 

On Fri, 21 Nov 2008 05:35:22 -0800 (PST), Tim wrote:

On Nov 21, 7:21*am, BAR wrote:
Boater wrote:
Tim wrote:
On Nov 21, 7:02 am, Boater wrote:
*Obama
is a lawyer and versed in the Constitution. He is not going to ignore
the Constitution while President-elect.

LOL!

So, he WILL ignore it after Jan 20?

Actually, I'm certain President Obama will follow the Constitution much
more closely than the current Administration.

After he rips out a few paragraphs, sections and articles. The ones that
he has already expressed he doesn't like.

Well Actually he is playing his part in boosting the economy already.
Ever since he's been elected. Gun 'n ammo sales have really inclined
because people are afraid of the 2nd Amendment being tampered with.

They need to be worrying more about the 1st Amendment.
--
John H.

Leadership defined...
 

On Fri, 21 Nov 2008 18:40:15 -0500, BAR wrote:

Boater wrote:
Jim wrote:
Boater wrote:
Jim wrote:
BAR wrote:
Boater wrote:
Tim wrote:
On Nov 21, 7:02 am, Boater wrote:
Obama
is a lawyer and versed in the Constitution. He is not going to
ignore
the Constitution while President-elect.

LOL!

So, he WILL ignore it after Jan 20?


Actually, I'm certain President Obama will follow the Constitution
much more closely than the current Administration.

After he rips out a few paragraphs, sections and articles. The ones
that he has already expressed he doesn't like.

I don't know what it is about this guy that makes Ol' Harry feel all
warm and fuzzy.



One of reasons is that he gives the right-wing retards heart
palpitations.
As usual you have it ass backwards. It's the far left that are
swooning and palpitating. He will disappoint you in the end.


No one gives a schitt what the far left wants or says. The far left does
not control the Democratic party, the party apparatus, or government
officials elected from the party's ranks. There is no far left
equivalent of the right-wing evangelicals bearing down on the Democrats.

The far left got The Obama the nomination. Do you think they will do it
again?

I have some friends among the Social Democrats. Their switchboard is not
ringing with calls from the incoming administration.

What is a Social Democrat?

Kissing cousins of Secular Progressives.
--
John H.