Remember the Tea Party selection has promised you 9 pizzas in 9 minutes for 9 pesos.

Meow

Yes. By all means, let's campaign against the incumbent Democrat. It worked so well in 2000.

There is no doubt my vote will go to Obama. As for repeating the small donations--we shall see.

Ah, the ship Obama is listing just a tad, because all those followers back in 2008 fell in line for hope and change.

May I suggest that they watch a couple of movies. First would be A face in the crowd, starring Andy Griffith from 1957, way before the current face in the crowd. Second, would be Citizen Kane an incredible movie from 1941 again way before the current savior of the country.

I guess it's true, the more things change(and hope), the more they stay the same.

Racism and bigotry rear their ugly head again.

I got the letter from BHO, with the little byline..."you elected me to make the tough decisions."

Yeah, like doing everything in my puny power to boot your *** in 2012, you sorry phoney.

And take your index cards with you:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VthH0ybYKF4

On a more charitable note, he may have done something good, if he has woken up enough people to their own blind naivete.

Racism and bigotry rear their ugly head again.

Heads. It would be heads, as in plural, if you really want to play that canard again.

For most folks, though, narcissism and incompetence are the defining factors.

narcissism and incompetence

sounds to me like a synonym for "uppity".

Sheep bickering.

Sheep bickering.

Get off my lawn!

"They've got a set of Republican waiters on one side and a set of Democratic waiters on the other side, but no matter which set of waiters brings you the dish, the legislative grub is all prepared in the same Wall Street kitchen."

— Huey Long, campaign speech for the re-election of Senator Hattie Caraway (D-AR), 1932 (Williams p. 589)

Excellent, clinamen

Eric L & Allan L - racism has nothing to do with it:

http://www.blackagendareport.com/content/barack-obama-vs-those-craaaazy-republicans-he-lesser-evil-or-more-effective-evil

Clinaman's quote of Huey Long is exactly right.

Obama, just another in the long line of sock puppets working for the faceless power elite, who love pulling the strings and watching the population eating up the stage show voting one phony party back to the other phony party.

O-BAMA!

Meanwhile the lamestream press [including the 'liberal' ny times] will not cover the protest 'Occupy
Wall Street'. Check out their website ,{and I think you can even buy them pizza}. BHO is up there on the Street doing 35K per plate fundraisers , he belongs to them now , he don't need us pleebs no more.

How is this remotely about racism and bigotry?

It's about an ineffective leader who has failed to live up to his promises and co-opted his platform at every turn. I don't believe we elected him because of his race, we elected him because of what he purported to represent. If we chose not to put him back in office, it will not be about race, it will be about his record.

Which is as it should be.

Déjà vu?

http://www.personalliberty.com/feature-video/jimmy-obama/

Only racists make race an issue.

Uppity sheep are indeed bickering.

But it is the uppity, bickering sheep-like rubes who see racism behind every shadow that amuses me.

The best line of 2010:
"You racist, she explained."

The best line of 2012:
"Racist? Really??? You are so 2010!"

If you liked Huey Long quote, found this speech:

Share Our Wealth
The Barbecue Speech

"How many men ever went to a barbecue and would let one man take off the table what's intended for nine-tenths of the people to eat? The only way you will be able to feed the balance of the people is to make that man come back and bring back some of that grub he ain't got no business with.
How are you going to feed the balance of the people? What's Morgan and Baruch and Rockefeller and Mellon gonna do with all that grub? They can't eat it. They can't wear the clothes. They can't live in the house.
But when they've got everything on the God-slaving earth that they can eat and they can wear and they can live in — and all that their children can live in and wear and eat and all their children's children can use — then we've got to call Mr. Morgan and Mr. Mellon and Mr. Rockefeller back and say, 'Come back here. Put that stuff back on this table that you took away from here that you don't need. Leave something else for the American people to consume."

Racism and bigotry have everything to do with it, and have had everything to do with it since 1776. Racism and bigotry will continue to have everything to do with it in the future as well. The sooner everyone gets the message, the sooner someone (apparently not Barack Obama) gets on with the revolution.

I believe this post was about the slowness and hesitation of the small $5 to $100 Facebook donors coming back to support Obama in his reelection.

Good to see things got derailed quick because the whole "racist," "tea party," and "uppity" bit is more interesting.

Those who argue that voters are holding a double standard against Obama that they did not hold against George W and Clinton amaze me.

Why was it not racist to support one White candidate over another White candidate? Are you implying that Whites as a race do not matter? Anyone remember the days where WASPS were suspicious of Italians and Southern European Immigrants?

Obama (equally Black and White) not being the traditional, "vanilla" White candidate is supposed to get an equal amount of support from voters in 2012 as he did in 2008? Why?

We elected Obama during a recession and we tasked him to get us out of this recession. Yes, he has had some major policies victories on health care, equal pay for equal work for women, the assassination of Osama Bin Laden, and a major repairing of US diplomatic relations since the last administration.

Yet, we never elected Obama for those things. If anything, Obama misplaced his priorities, was not used to and could not cope with Republicans in Congress who were hostile to his traditional statist, liberal policy beliefs, and instead focused on winning where he could in order to build the best case to get reelected.

Obama was elected over McCain because a majority of us believed in him and thought he presented a different path out of the economic crisis we were in then and have slipped back into now. What we learned is maybe he was not so different than all the other Ivy league educated, globalist predecessors.

So the question remains, what has Obama done to deserve to be reelected? Will he get anything done with divided government? Why run again if Republicans in 2013 will be just as intransigent, if not bolder than they are now (especially if they pick up seats in the Senate)?

My opinion? Obama should step down and not run for reelection. He has achieved history and if he gets reelected, the legacy he leaves behind will be tarnished. Tarnished because I believe he is a lame duck now and will be a lame duck from 2013 until he leaves office. He should cut his losses and support whoever gets the Democratic nod for 2012.

"Yet, we never elected Obama for those things. If anything, Obama misplaced his priorities, was not used to and could not cope with Republicans in Congress who were hostile to his traditional statist, liberal policy beliefs, and instead focused on winning where he could in order to build the best case to get reelected."

There was no need to cope - he had majorities in both the house and senate for two years. As he said early on - "I won." He had the right idea, he clearly believed he had the mandate and the actual power. Why didn't he do more with it?

"Obama was elected over McCain because a majority of us believed in him and thought he presented a different path out of the economic crisis we were in then and have slipped back into now. What we learned is maybe he was not so different than all the other Ivy league educated, globalist predecessors."

Perhaps the majority did believe in him, but what was it based on? Achievements or idealology? I don't think he had any achievements anyone could point to, so it must have been ideology and in large part symbolism - what he was was more important than who. Many middle class whites voted for him to try and put the legacy of slavery and racism behind us - which was the wrong reason. People need to understand there will never be anything which can remove this from our consciousness or more importantly the conciousness of the minority community. The media subtly sold this idea and many people bought it.

I still don't think we have a clear view of who Barack Obama is. The only presidential candidate ever to opt out of public financing has yet to fully reveal who his corporate sponsors (or other sponsors) are.

To be fair, Republicans from the start of the health care debate intended to frame and shape it. They did so with rhetoric and actions indicating that unless the US Senate had 60 votes to close the debate, then nothing would get passed.

Democratic partisans would call this holding the country "hostage." Then again, Democratic partisans used the same "60 vote or no vote" parliamentary tactics against then President George W Bush when it came to entitlement reform after the 2004 election.

As for not knowing who Obama is, I cannot disagree there.

I usually have a difficult time with how people read election results, and then prescribe so many nuances. Obama "winning" majority was only 53% of those who voted-MANDATE. That's only 3 more voters out of 100. And only 57% of eligible voters voted. Then you have those who are of voter age who didn't register to vote. So the "huge significance" that some prescribe to a winner becomes so deluded besides diluted.

I accept the delusion that probably 1 or 2 out of 100 voted for Obama because of race. That makes all the claims that Obama winning met we wanted Obamacare, we wanted out of the Middle East in three months, we wanted Gitmo closed now, we wanted our taxes raised...as misinformed.

If he didn't have the backbone, neither did he have the background, and a majority of us just did not want to see or believe that.

As soon as he started making his appointments it was all too clear that he had little idea and few connections for how to be president.

lw - at least Obama did win the majority of the vote and did not have the presidency handed to him (illegally) by the Supreme Court as Shrub the Younger did. He's still a lamer but less lame than W.

Lucs,

Name a Bush policy that he's reversed.

Max and which one would the Repugs in office let him have reversed? Meanwhile I do find him a disappoint.