So the chicken that is basso's claim to really be liberal and progressive comes home to roost. It was a lie and that statement is proof enough, as if anyone thought they needed it.
this a thread by a guy who calls the POTUS B-HO.. will he call him that if the POTUS was white? you want to talk about points? is there a difference between Obama's comment addressed to the SC regarding a specific case and Reagan's comment addressed to the SC regarding a specific case?
is that all that a thousands of american lives and trillions of american taxpayer's money can buy? was it worth it?
Actually by 2016, he will not only have swapped out Ginsburg and Stevens, but probably will have replaced at least one of Scalia/Kennedy/Thomas as well. Scalia in particular is ripe for a heart attack or a stroke. That will leave Sonia, Kagan, Breyer + 2 more Obama appointees in control. Maybe even 3. I would say it would suck to be you in that circumstance, but since you don't appear to understand anything about the Court or the law it wouldn't really make much difference.
Not really considering when Reagan was criticizing the USSC some of the justices that decided Roe were still there.
Again, I don't really care. (If you really need an opinion, I agree that some of basso's post are inappropriate racially speaking and otherwise, but I don't consider him to be racist.) And again, it doesn't really matter if he is or not, because you bringing it up out of the blue brings the quality of the discussion down even further either way. That's all I'm trying to say. In my opinion, there isn't a significant difference. But then again, I don't think Obama deserves a ton of criticism (despite the fact that I generally agree with Roberts). Still, just because it was done before doesn't mean it wasn't wrong then as well. The only reason to point to the previous occurrences is to expose hypocrisy. I think it's a valid exercise as a side commentary, but not as interesting as the question of whether the Supreme Court should be at the State of the Union or the question of whether that's an appropriate place to comment negatively on a decision when the people who made it are in attendance.
so you admit that there's no diffference but the OP who has called the POTUS B-HO thinks they're not the same I just gave my opinion on what the difference was for him
And I rolled my eyes because I think that opinion is both silly and not constructive. If you had claimed that the difference was that this time it was Obama, who basso makes a significant effort to criticize as often as possible, and the other time it was Reagan who basso (presumably) supports, then that would have been fine and made sense. But if you honestly think that the real reason basso sees a difference is because Obama is black, I guess you have the right to your opinion. I just didn't think you actually believed that (it is a bit far-fetched), so I assumed you were just taking the opportunity to take a dig at him.
if basso doesn't see Obama as black, why does he have to always point out that Obama is black eg. B-HO? I think it's basso who takes the opportunity to take a dig at Obama's blackness
Given your history of forecasting elections on this BBS - the only way this could be true would be if you are plotting something unlawful. Are you?
I see Momma forgot to lock the masterlock on the front door of your trailer and that allowed you to go over to the rich dude with the doublewide to use his his 10 year old computer again... Given your history of ignoring the obvious, things are not going very well for Obama these days. If he is somehow successful in pushing this turd of a healthcare bill through, it will get worse.
Actually, Obama's latest polls have been remarkably stable around the 55% approval mark or so for months, and have even begun a slight upward tick, in conjunction with the one year anniversary of the market rally and the beginnings of the recovery. Meanwhile, congressional republicans have begun to lose their grasp. How unfortunately timed for you. If only a few million more americans would be out of work or if a few underwear bombs had gone off....your party would be much better off.
if someone who obviously hates you and everything you stand for tells that you won't be around in a year, what do you think he's trying to say?
Healthcare about to pass Economy and Job market is stabilizing and projections show increase over the next year Markets are strong Combat troops coming home from Iraq in 6 months What oh what will the crazies have to whine about come November?
This is why I've been cautioning people not to make early conclusions about the mid-terms. Just since 2 months ago, things have changed dramatically and there are still 8 months to go before the elections. The GOP will still gain ground but how much is in doubt. The bar of expectations has been raised very high and there is the potential for disappointment because they may never have another shot like 2010 for a while. Based on the Dem party's huge majority and the economy, 2010 is a dream year for the opposition party and the GOP needs to deliver a big body blow while they can. The tone of the 2012 campaign will be entirely different and likely a lot less favorable for Republicans.
