Longtime GOP Texas Gov. Perry wins another term

Caution, Socialists at work:

Two months ago, Barack Obama decided he could intimidate the United States Supreme Court into finding his namesake healthcare plan Constitutional. Overturning the Affordable Care Act “…would amount to an unprecedented, extraordinary step of judicial activism” said the President at a rare White House news conference, adding “…I’m confident that the Supreme Court will not take what would be an unprecedented extraordinary step of overturning a law that was passed by a strong majority of a democratically elected Congress.”

Though someone with the hyper-arrogant mentality of the Manchurian Candidate doesn’t really need a reason to direct this sort of psycho-babble at a presumptive enemy, Obama was probably responding to information provided by far left Justice Elena Kagan that the Court’s closed-door, preliminary vote on ObamaCare had not gone very well. Each Friday, the 9 justices gather for an initial vote on the cases heard during the week. And although these weekly conferences are to be strictly confidential, it’s a safe bet that Obama’s Court stoolie was on the phone with the White House minutes after its conclusion.

However, as this preemptive strike on the court was met with a nationwide flurry of criticism even from a number of his media supporters, Obama made no further reference to the prospective ruling.

But on Monday, a new county was heard from. Dedicated leftist Senator Patrick Leahy directed a 2000 word dissertation at the Court from the Senate floor, selecting as his principle target Chief Justice John Roberts.“The constitutional challenge to the Affordable Care Act is the current instance in which narrow ideology and partisanship are pressuring the Supreme Court to intervene where it should not,” claimed Leahy, making clear his view that the Court has no business interfering with a Congressional assault on the Constitution. The senator advanced the 2000 Bush/Gore decision as an example of the sort of “judicial activism” that “shook the confidence of the American people in the Supreme Court.” He ridiculed conservative justices for their tough questioning of principle ObamaCare advocate Solicitor General Donald Verilli during oral arguments, stating “their action will not help restore American’s confidence in the Court to fairly apply the law.”

And he alternately praised and threatened the Chief Justice, literally claiming that if Roberts joined other conservatives in a 5-4 decision against ObamaCare it would “…undoubtedly further erode the reputation and legitimacy of the Supreme Court.”

But what prompted Leahy’s sudden decision to lecture the Supreme Court as to its proper role in government? Was it a last ditch effort to intimidate justices into finding ObamaCare constitutional? Or has Kagan perhaps advised Democrats that Roberts is “wavering” a bit, leading Leahy to believe his misguided, nonsensical claims might persuade the Chief Justice to decide in favor of passage?

Since its enactment in 2010, liberals have believed the Affordable Care Act to be a sure thing to pass Constitutional muster. They were stunned when Justices took offense at the law’s contempt for individual liberty during oral arguments. After all, how could forcing Americans to purchase something they don’t want be unconstitutional if it’s for their own good!

If 5 Justices rule the ObamaCare individual mandate unconstitutional, the American people will hear a wailing and gnashing of teeth unequaled since the pro-Gore efforts of the Florida Supreme Court were undone after the 2000 election. We will be in for some very entertaining days.

Bruser wrote:

Caution, Socialists at work:
Since its enactment in 2010, liberals have believed the Affordable Care Act to be a sure thing to pass Constitutional muster. They were stunned when Justices took offense at the law’s contempt for individual liberty during oral arguments. After all, how could forcing Americans to purchase something they don’t want be unconstitutional if it’s for their own good!
If 5 Justices rule the ObamaCare individual mandate unconstitutional, the American people will hear a wailing and gnashing of teeth unequaled since the pro-Gore efforts of the Florida Supreme Court were undone after the 2000 election. We will be in for some very entertaining days.

We can only pray that 5 will do the right thing and overturn ObamaCare.
I laugh every time I watch the lefties squirm and shake their heads trying to figure out why the rest of the country doesn't just " go with the program". They don't understand that not everyone agrees with them and don't see the hypocrisy of their tactics or arguments. It's good to see that the majority of our country disagrees with the far left, but I think we are to far gone as a nation to turn it around.

NRH Man wrote:

<quoted text>
We can only pray that 5 will do the right thing and overturn ObamaCare.
I laugh every time I watch the lefties squirm and shake their heads trying to figure out why the rest of the country doesn't just " go with the program". They don't understand that not everyone agrees with them and don't see the hypocrisy of their tactics or arguments. It's good to see that the majority of our country disagrees with the far left, but I think we are to far gone as a nation to turn it around.

The far left and the far right...which do you prefer...

waco1909 wrote:

<quoted text> The far left and the far right...which do you prefer...

Well, one believes at its core that this is an evil nation and needs to be "fundamentally changed". The other, I guess it depends on your definition. Msnbc defines the far right as the neo nazis and such, which by true definition are to the far left. I guess you would all me a conservative libertarian if there such a thing. If conservative is your definition of far right, than that's me I guess.

NRH Man wrote:

<quoted text>
Well, one believes at its core that this is an evil nation and needs to be "fundamentally changed". The other, I guess it depends on your definition. Msnbc defines the far right as the neo nazis and such, which by true definition are to the far left. I guess you would all me a conservative libertarian if there such a thing. If conservative is your definition of far right, than that's me I guess.

Its not about what msnbc says or what Fox says...its about what the truth is.your definition of a left winger is a bit off.you gave the definition of an anarchist.Hitler was not a leftist.He despised communists.Hitler was a fascist.Far more to the right than a conservative.

NRH....I HAVE known more than a few liberals and they do not think this country is evil.I try not to demonize someone I disagree with until the disagreement a matter of life and death.

waco1909 wrote:

<quoted text> Its not about what msnbc says or what Fox says...its about what the truth is.your definition of a left winger is a bit off.you gave the definition of an anarchist.Hitler was not a leftist.He despised communists.Hitler was a fascist.Far more to the right than a conservative.

Don't forget that part of Nazi is 'National SOCIALIST'. Nazi, socialist, communist, all believe in total govt control of our lives, like the liberal left. If you believe that the nazis were far right, then you need to check your definitions of right and left, and not what you are told by the left leaning press.

waco1909 wrote:

NRH....I HAVE known more than a few liberals and they do not think this country is evil.I try not to demonize someone I disagree with until the disagreement a matter of life and death.

our prez and his gang aren't fans of our country. They want to "fundamentally change our country", his own words by the way. Just look who he hangs out with and learned from. Ayers, Van Jones, Wright, etc.

NRH Man wrote:

<quoted text>
Don't forget that part of Nazi is 'National SOCIALIST'. Nazi, socialist, communist, all believe in total govt control of our lives, like the liberal left. If you believe that the nazis were far right, then you need to check your definitions of right and left, and not what you are told by the left leaning press.

I am aware I of the word"socialist"in that and I thought I you might bring that up.Has nothing to do with the kind of socialist you are thinking of.I don't get my definitions from the the media.SO..you think Hitler was a commie..read about his life from any book you choose.Hitler hated communism violently.One of the reasons he insanely invaded Russia.I'm not running you down NRH nor am I trying to change your opinions.I believe East Germany used the word"democratic"in their title at one time.Obviously they were not a democracy.

NRH Man wrote:

<quoted text> our prez and his gang aren't fans of our country. They want to "fundamentally change our country", his own words by the way. Just look who he hangs out with and learned from. Ayers, Van Jones, Wright, etc.

NRH...if you and those who agree with you wish you can vote the present administration out of office.Everyone says Obama doesn't have a chance.I'm voting for Ron Paul come hell or high water.But one word of caution.If Romney wins the republicans have four years to make something happen.If they don't....it could be very bad for republicans.I hope Romney and the republicans improve the economy.Because if they do...I will have more money..I'm a realist.And I like money....

I don't know if you saw the primary debates he is as dumb as a he acts. He could not remember the 3rd reason,and acted like a queeron national TV.What has he done to fight corruption? He is in there for the rich only.

Perry wrote:

there are issues in Texas that Rick Perry is familiar with and can resolve: Such as fighting corruption within the courts and innocent people wrongly sent to death row on no evidence and even having DNA clearing them. These problems take many terms to correct and are complicated. Perry has the knowledge and experience as governor about issues Texas needs to acknowledge and prioritize.
Great Job, Perry.

oH HECK, THE guv ONLY HAS BRAIN FREEZES from eating to much Blue Bell ice cream. He just can not help himself and overindulge.

Now when you foks go to vote for Romney just remember he has a lot of experience in jobs---firing people and downsizing companies, overhauling retirement plans so they are take over by the goverment. by doing thie it enhances the profits of the company . So when he is elected he will know how to downsize the meals on wheels program for the senior citizens. And how about the down sizing of head start, and the schools so the charter schools will make more profit on their voucher plans. Yep he can do what ever republicn wanted to do , down size the goverment. Yep, he has lots of experience in downsizing. And you can forget thsoe grants for your city's fire and police department and improvements to your streets,water and sewer departments to. DOWNSIZED.

Texas has one the better economy's in America despite the rescission

dontmesswithtexas wrote:

Texas has one the better economy's in America despite the rescission

Texas has advantages over other states...such as oil.second largest economy....second largest in population....and now a multi billion dollar deficit...

I liked Perry and wish he had gotten the nomination for president.

waco1909 wrote:

<quoted text> I am aware I of the word"socialist"in that and I thought I you might bring that up.Has nothing to do with the kind of socialist you are thinking of.I don't get my definitions from the the media.SO..you think Hitler was a commie..read about his life from any book you choose.Hitler hated communism violently.One of the reasons he insanely invaded Russia.I'm not running you down NRH nor am I trying to change your opinions.I believe East Germany used the word"democratic"in their title at one time.Obviously they were not a democracy.

Socialist, Communist, Fascist are all peas in a pod. All believe in total govt control of everyones life.
I never said Hitler was a commie, just pointing out that they are pretty much the same.
My other point was the factual error of calling Fascists "extreme right wingers". Again, Fascism is a very close kin to socialism and communism, ie total govt. All of which are the exact opposite of what a true conservative wants, which is LESS govt control or invovlement in our lives.

pappy wrote:

Now when you foks go to vote for Romney just remember he has a lot of experience in jobs---firing people and downsizing companies, overhauling retirement plans so they are take over by the goverment. by doing thie it enhances the profits of the company . So when he is elected he will know how to downsize the meals on wheels program for the senior citizens. And how about the down sizing of head start, and the schools so the charter schools will make more profit on their voucher plans. Yep he can do what ever republicn wanted to do , down size the goverment. Yep, he has lots of experience in downsizing. And you can forget thsoe grants for your city's fire and police department and improvements to your streets,water and sewer departments to. DOWNSIZED.

If we relect Obummer, we can pass another stimulis package and spend a few billion more on squirrel tunnels and 'green energy' projects. I mean what the heck, who cares about that whole deficit thing. Lets just keep spending like theres no tomorrow.

waco1909 wrote:

<quoted text> NRH...if you and those who agree with you wish you can vote the present administration out of office.Everyone says Obama doesn't have a chance.I'm voting for Ron Paul come hell or high water.But one word of caution.If Romney wins the republicans have four years to make something happen.If they don't....it could be very bad for republicans.I hope Romney and the republicans improve the economy.Because if they do...I will have more money..I'm a realist.And I like money....

If you want Romney to win, then dont waste your vote on Paul. A vote for him is a vote for Obummer.

NRH Man wrote:

<quoted text>
If we relect Obummer, we can pass another stimulis package and spend a few billion more on squirrel tunnels and 'green energy' projects. I mean what the heck, who cares about that whole deficit thing. Lets just keep spending like theres no tomorrow.

for the last couple of years the Europeans went the opposite direction of America and enacted austerity programs to fix their economies.they cut spending.it was a disaster.while we had anemic growth.....they had disaster.now they are going full speed ahead with spending as their economic salvation.