If you were elected President of the United States
- Thread starter trademarcs
- Start date
Today our Laborer Participation Index dipped to 62.6, a 38 year low. Bureau of Labor Statistics.
Soonersincefitty
Sooner starter
Well, certainly it must be pointed out that the 62.6 figure includes parttime and even unpaid intern positions.
Isn't that special?
So, what can we deduce by this?
50% tops, working full time, or 40 hrs. per week. Pitiful.
Isn't that special?
So, what can we deduce by this?
50% tops, working full time, or 40 hrs. per week. Pitiful.
Medic007
Sooner starter
You haven't been paying attention to the Dear Leader's lectures. The economy is booming and the pay of the "average" non-working American is soaring thanks to His entitlement (wealth redistribution) programs. Everyone will get back on their feet on the backs of those that work hard.
For post 10K I call bullshit on your "most of the nation" comment and follow that up by hopefully successfully linking the results from NBC http://elections.nbcnews.com/ns/politics/2012/all/president/#.VZYmbflViko
51-48 with less than half the folks in America even bothering to vote is no kind of mandate except perhaps in the inability of the R's running a viable candidate, imho. (No offense intended)
The reason that I made a post on this thread is that it is somewhat of a distortion. Everyone seems to hate Obama. But, Oklahoma is not exactly characteristic of the nation as a whole. Oklahoma (2010) is 72.2% white, whereas the US is approximately 63.7% non-Hispanic white, about a 8.5% difference. Curiously, Oklahoma is 8.6% Native American whereas the country as a whole is only 0.9% Native American. But, Oklahoma is not a typical minority state: African-American 7.4%, Hispanic 8.9%. The nation as a whole is 12.2% Hispanic and 12.6% African-American, almost double that of Oklahoma.
The point is that Oklahoma is quite different from the nation as a whole, and tends to be quite different in its politics. Actually, Oklahoma does tend to have demographics more like that of the US some forty years ago.
The point is that Oklahoma is quite different from the nation as a whole, and tends to be quite different in its politics. Actually, Oklahoma does tend to have demographics more like that of the US some forty years ago.
You did notice that not a single Oklahoma county went for Barry in the 2012 election syb?
History will show that O, despite winning twice is a failed President on a scale far worse than Carter (who I voted for in my addled youth). No his winning in 12 was a product of 3.5 million disenfranchised R's that chose to stay home, nothing more.
History will show that O, despite winning twice is a failed President on a scale far worse than Carter (who I voted for in my addled youth). No his winning in 12 was a product of 3.5 million disenfranchised R's that chose to stay home, nothing more.
Soonersincefitty
Sooner starter
Well, hate to pile on, Lord knows that's not my style but, never underestimate the abject cunning of a Chicago based national voting 'machine'. Ruthless...without ruth.
Yeah there is always that and the panthers at certain precincts assuring "fairness" to boot!
I think you made my point for me. Oklahoma was solidly anti-Obama. But, despite four years of total assault, he was elected rather easily.
I don't think that either carter or Obama will go down as failed presidencies. I think that the favorites of Oklahomans and Texans will probably end up with the lowest rankings once the dust clears. I suspect that Nixon will be rated more highly than Reagan or the Bushes, perhaps even over Clinton. History is rarely written by current agendas.
Since Theodore Roosevelt, Truman, Nixon, and Carter had tried to get the ball rolling for a national health care program, I think Obama will be forever recognized as the one who got it off the ground, although it was probably more Pelosi. That type of thing is what pins a label on a President. Despite the current opposition, it is here to stay, probably to become more like medicare. We remember those who do things like Social Security, Medicare, and Health Care.
Carter is already known to be the prez who lost Iran to the fanatics along with having our hostages for over two years, only to be released when a true "Cowboy" leader was elected.
O had to cheat in the dead of night (while the D's controlled both sides) to pass his law.
Why the Supremes defected and continue is the mystery. We will see impeachment (of justices) if it continues.
O had to cheat in the dead of night (while the D's controlled both sides) to pass his law.
Why the Supremes defected and continue is the mystery. We will see impeachment (of justices) if it continues.
You give your extremism away with this type of post. The Carter/Iran thing is given no more credence than the Hillary Clinton/Benghazi thing. The ability to win an election on a Swift Boat or Willie Horton type attack is now regarded as crying wolf.
The Supreme Court probably ruled the way it did because of the concern that Roberts has for his legacy. Despite being very conservative to the point of extremism, he knows that history will regard the decisions of the court as being on his head. That is probably why he went against conservatives for Health Care. He knows that it will eventually win, and he doesn't want to be on the side of a Dred Scott type decision. The recent Kennedy vote was simply because they brought a stupid case to court that he couldn't abide, although his leanings are against the healthcare law. They needed a legitimate case.
I don't know that impeachment of justices is an answer. They aren't like a President. They can be dismissed for bad behavior. It's just that nobody has ever determined what that might be. The right wing has always been against the Supreme Court. In the fifties, I saw more Impeach Earl Warren billboards than Burma Shave signs. The reality is that the Republicans did not want Roberts and the court to rule against the ACA. It would have taken away one of their key motivators (repeal healthcare) which means their soldiers would not have been so active. Indeed, the motivation would have been for those who needed healthcare to take to the streets to vote against those who had repealed healthcare. This way, the Republicans still have their carrot, and only nuts want what will happen to the industry if it were to be repealed.
At the federal level, Article II of the United States Constitution (Section 4) states that "The President, Vice President, and all civil Officers of the United States shall be removed from Office on Impeachment for, and Conviction of, Treason, Bribery, or other High Crimes and Misdemeanors."
syb I think you are a great poster and 'probably' a fine person. I'm willing to agree to disagree with you that we will 'probably' never see eye to eye on bHo and that's fine with me. I have better things to spend my time on on a rare weekday Holiday from a job that barely supports me than argue with anyone.
Now that we are finished with the political posts, I will just point to the type of things that strategists of both major parties are watching. I do see some discussion, but little attempt to do much about this. These are a few statistics from presidential elections from 1980 to 2012.
88 55 36
86 66 34
85 65 40
87 41 39
83 46 44
81 55 42
77 58 41
74 55 43
72 59 39
The first number is the percentage of voters that were white. The second is the percentage attained by the Republican candidate. The third is the percentage attained by the Democratic candidate. Since 1980, the white vote had gone to the Republican candidate in every election.
The thing that is of concern to Republican strategists is the fact that the percentage of the electorate that is white has been declining at a rate of about two percent in every election. There is concern that it could be below seventy percent in 2016.
If the percentage of white participation had been 72% in 1980, Reagan would never have been elected. It will take a strong candidate to overcome the problem that has been generated by the changing demographics of the nation.
I heard a radio report that said that over half of the enrollment of the Garland Elementary schools is now Hispanic. Texas isn't that far from being a "minority/majority state." This is what strategists will be dealing with for the next several years.
88 55 36
86 66 34
85 65 40
87 41 39
83 46 44
81 55 42
77 58 41
74 55 43
72 59 39
The first number is the percentage of voters that were white. The second is the percentage attained by the Republican candidate. The third is the percentage attained by the Democratic candidate. Since 1980, the white vote had gone to the Republican candidate in every election.
The thing that is of concern to Republican strategists is the fact that the percentage of the electorate that is white has been declining at a rate of about two percent in every election. There is concern that it could be below seventy percent in 2016.
If the percentage of white participation had been 72% in 1980, Reagan would never have been elected. It will take a strong candidate to overcome the problem that has been generated by the changing demographics of the nation.
I heard a radio report that said that over half of the enrollment of the Garland Elementary schools is now Hispanic. Texas isn't that far from being a "minority/majority state." This is what strategists will be dealing with for the next several years.
I am a Native Oklahoman, a Native American (Haskell County where I was born lay in the Americas) and I'm of Sub Saharan African descent. And I have the DNA ethnicity lab results to prove it from Genelex Labs in Seattle.
No one is more disappointed than I. The Berlin Wall fell. I have long hoped a mix would come along and turn out to be the best leader this country has ever seen. This is a disappointment on steroids.
A bigger disappointment is Black America, giving this guy a second round, even though Black America is in depression with no hope.
A black American aunt once told me the Africans one day would catch on to the Dems. I'm sure beginning to wonder. At least J. C. Watts and I got it.
No one is more disappointed than I. The Berlin Wall fell. I have long hoped a mix would come along and turn out to be the best leader this country has ever seen. This is a disappointment on steroids.
A bigger disappointment is Black America, giving this guy a second round, even though Black America is in depression with no hope.
A black American aunt once told me the Africans one day would catch on to the Dems. I'm sure beginning to wonder. At least J. C. Watts and I got it.
I think you are making his election too simple. First, the percentage of white Americans who voted for Obama was 43% in 08 and 39% in 2012. So, there was considerable white support. But, the rest of the demographics were also stronger for Obama. Men tend to vote Republican, failing only in 08 in the past forty years. Women voted 55-45 for Obama in 2012. Hispanics voted 71-27, and Asians voted 73-26. The Republicans only seem to be able to carry the white males. It isn't that African-Americans voted for one of their own. They have voted 88-91% Democratic since about 1980.
Is that an extreme. There is one group that is more extreme. In a Pew Report in 2009, they found that only six percent (6%) of all scientists are Republicans. Fifty-five percent are Democrats. Thirty-two percent are Independents. I doubt that most scientists are really Democrats as much as I suspect that they oppose a party that denies evolution, global warming, stem cell research, etc.
It's not all about who is supporting Democrats. It is more about who the Republicans have offended. You don't get 70% numbers by offering support. You get those numbers in resistance to something.
Is that an extreme. There is one group that is more extreme. In a Pew Report in 2009, they found that only six percent (6%) of all scientists are Republicans. Fifty-five percent are Democrats. Thirty-two percent are Independents. I doubt that most scientists are really Democrats as much as I suspect that they oppose a party that denies evolution, global warming, stem cell research, etc.
It's not all about who is supporting Democrats. It is more about who the Republicans have offended. You don't get 70% numbers by offering support. You get those numbers in resistance to something.
I don't think you understand how much voter fraud that occurred allowing that to happen. It's the Chicago way.
Not worth the trouble Plaino; he has all the statistics and we all know how reliable those are...
As a former Republican in the tradition of Theodore Roosevelt and Eisenhower, I rather hope that the Republican Party continues with this type of delusion.. I do want this Republican Party to be totally destroyed and rebuilt in the image of Roosevelt and Eisenhower, and, Lincoln, of course. By denying the facts about the direction of the party and the isolation that it is creating by generating so many different enemies, the demise of this party is assured.
The accusations of voter fraud simply haven't turned out to be anything. I think they have proven fewer than four or five. But, it continuing to attack various minorities, it is becoming the party of the white male, a declining demographic. The day that you can win elections by dominating the white male vote is over. It is fairly certain that the African-American, Asian-American, and Hispanic vote will be heavily anti-Republican for years to come. But, the Republicans haven't won the female vote since 1988.
But, keep on focusing on trying to keep Mickey Mouse from voting.
Anybody who voted against Ronald Reagan twice, doesn't understand what being a Republican is about. When it was the party of Roosevelt and Eisenhower, the country wasn't committing slow financial suicide by building an unpayable debt. And all of the social issues that now separate the GOP and the Dems, all of them, had the right and common sense policies that are advocated now by social conservatives.
There was no gay marriage. There was no murder of unborn infants. There was prayer in school and a healthy nationwide fear of God. It was legal to post the ten commandments in any public building or property. They are still posted in the Supreme Court, who banned that elsewhere. When the idiocy, arrogance and tyranny of the activist US Supreme Court decided over time that the worst forms of porn were free speech, but prayer in schools was illegal, the country changed. It wasn't a good change. We suffered our first loss in war. Selfishness became the motto of the left.
When I was an elementary aged student in Tulsa in the 50s, the biggest problems a teacher faced was gum chewing in class and breaking up a very rare disagreement on the playground. When I was in the second grade, we had daily scripture in my public school. It was the first time I ever heard John 3:16. Sybarite, your pluralism includes any idiot idea, except something biblically based. That's a violation of free speech somehow. A teacher even mentioning the possibility that our origins might include special creation, is grounds for being fired.
Fighting against those trends, and especially the tyranny of the black robes that are most responsible for their coming about, isn't just good and right. It's noble.
There was no gay marriage. There was no murder of unborn infants. There was prayer in school and a healthy nationwide fear of God. It was legal to post the ten commandments in any public building or property. They are still posted in the Supreme Court, who banned that elsewhere. When the idiocy, arrogance and tyranny of the activist US Supreme Court decided over time that the worst forms of porn were free speech, but prayer in schools was illegal, the country changed. It wasn't a good change. We suffered our first loss in war. Selfishness became the motto of the left.
When I was an elementary aged student in Tulsa in the 50s, the biggest problems a teacher faced was gum chewing in class and breaking up a very rare disagreement on the playground. When I was in the second grade, we had daily scripture in my public school. It was the first time I ever heard John 3:16. Sybarite, your pluralism includes any idiot idea, except something biblically based. That's a violation of free speech somehow. A teacher even mentioning the possibility that our origins might include special creation, is grounds for being fired.
Fighting against those trends, and especially the tyranny of the black robes that are most responsible for their coming about, isn't just good and right. It's noble.
Plaino, this post is so irrational that it merits no response. It is nothing more than the mantra that has been taught to the far right with no truth in it.
Reagan, in addition to being rather dumb, was the one whose policies created debt. Raise expenditures, lower taxes. But, he also lied about it. He lowered taxes on everyone, but barely on the middle class. Meanwhile, he raised FICA rather significantly, in addition to raiding the trust fund. It will be interesting to see whether history eventually ranks him as the worst or second worst president. But, he is the darling to your mantra.
You probably are so narrow in your religious views that you are unaware that creationism is only a part of the theology of the religious right. Moderate Christianity and Catholicism, between them accounting for about seventy percent of US Christians and probably more like ninety percent of world Christians, openly accept evolution. The Pope just made some statement that God was not a trickster, referring to the magical tricks of creationism.
The world has moved beyond your Elmer Gantry view of religion/politics. But, you keep up your hatred. I think the 2016 election will probably have right at about thirty percent white male voters. They will probably vote about 60% Republican. It will probably be the last election that has thirty percent white male participation. That venom that you spewed so fervently has been generating more and more women and minorities on the other side, people who really have nothing in common except that they are the victims in your fantasy world. They won't be voting for Democrats, but against that venom.
I don't need to win against you. You have insulted so many others that will vote against you because you threaten them that I don't even need to be involved. You won't get the message that you can't continue what you are doing. But, I'm watching Republican strategists trying to make changes, almost hopelessly. Ask your Republican women in the Senate how they feel about the anti-abortion stance. Ask Cupp how she feels about the gay marriage stance. You are having difficulty keeping the loyalties of your own. Cupp knows that it is deadly to the party to continue the assault on gay marriage. Keep it up.
syb,
You are only partially correct as the 10 & 14 mid-terms blow your statistics and theories apart, nationally. The R's only need to field a centrist candidate with a pulse to beat Hillary who ain't Bill but smells as bad.
Oh and HAPPY INDEPENDENCE DAY!
You are only partially correct as the 10 & 14 mid-terms blow your statistics and theories apart, nationally. The R's only need to field a centrist candidate with a pulse to beat Hillary who ain't Bill but smells as bad.
Oh and HAPPY INDEPENDENCE DAY!
Democrats have enough difficulty getting their people out to vote in Presidential years. The lessons of 10 and 14 were not lost. The issues are still the same, a declining white male population.
Do the Republicans even have a centrist candidate? Thus far, nothing. It there were such a candidate, I doubt they could make it through the primaries which tend to be extremist. There is only one Republican that might possibly beat Hillary, and I'm not saying who it is. Name hasn't been mentioned yet. I think Hilary is probably a 53-45 winner over anyone, with with two percent going to some minor candidate as a protest. Senate swings back, House gets to within ten seats either way.
Do the Republicans even have a centrist candidate? Thus far, nothing. It there were such a candidate, I doubt they could make it through the primaries which tend to be extremist. There is only one Republican that might possibly beat Hillary, and I'm not saying who it is. Name hasn't been mentioned yet. I think Hilary is probably a 53-45 winner over anyone, with with two percent going to some minor candidate as a protest. Senate swings back, House gets to within ten seats either way.
Soonersincefitty
Sooner starter
The unfortunate part of the creation of schism politics is that I think it was deliberate. I'm not sure exactly who was behind it, but the loss of the White House on a semi-permanent basis in 1932 with only a war hero winning an election after that seemed to spur a search for new alliances, hence the Southern Strategy of Kevin Phillips. I don't know if there was as much bitterness about politics before 68. But, we do have deep divides. The white male is pretty isolated. Thanks to the pot stirrers, the divide is growing.
Meet the Press
Jul 2 2015, 12:23 pm ET
Republican Areas of Country Getting More Conservative
by Dante Chinni
Poll numbers show that while the nation has grown more politically "liberal" overall since 2008, as we noted here recently, some places with strong Republican voting tendencies have moved in the opposite direction, becoming more "conservative."
And the differences between those places and others could create present challenges for Republicans in 2016, making their political messaging difficult.
An analysis of Gallup polling data since 2008 shows that counties with large numbers of evangelical adherents and counties based heavily in and around Appalachia have grown slightly more conservative, moving further away from the national average in their political philosophy.
Those counties, Evangelical Hubs and Working Class Country counties as defined by the American Communities Project, vote heavily Republican and are crucial to any GOP candidate seeking the White House, particularly in primaries. Those counties are based throughout the southeast and will play a big role in the massive March 1 SEC Super Primary, as you can see on this map in light purple and dark blue.
Nationally, the percentage of people self-identifying as conservative has fallen by about three points in the Gallup data, from 38.5% in 2008 to 35.4% in 2015. But in Evangelical Hub counties the number has climbed from 47.4% to 47.7%. And in largely Appalachian Working Class Country counties the number has gone from 44.7% to 45.3%.
The growing divides highlight the challenge Republican candidates may have in winning swing voters in 2016.
The size of the "conservative" increases in those counties is small, but the larger point is those places are bucking the national trend of a decline in conservatives. Those declines carry through to most of America, particularly big city counties and suburban counties, as you can see on this chart. Suburban counties are particularly important because of the large populations they hold.
The net result is the places that are the most Republican in their voting habits are drifting further away from the American political mainstream, according to this data.
In 2008, the Evangelical Hubs were about 9 percentage points more conservative than the nation as a whole, 47.4% versus 38.5%. In 2015 they are about 12 percentage points more conservative, 47.7% versus 35.4%.
The Appalachian Working Class Country counties were about 6 percentage points more conservative than the nation in 2008, 44.7% versus 38.5%. Today they are about 10 percentage points more conservative 45.3% to 35.4%.
The growing divides highlight the challenge Republican candidates may have in winning swing voters in 2016.
In effect, the numbers suggest that Republicans will have to straddle a widening gap between their more rural base voters, who they need to win over in the primaries and turn out in November of 2016, and moderate suburban voters, who they'll need to reach out to win the general election.
It's a long list of drivers pushing these county-level political shifts. As we noted last week, you can see divides on social issues like gay marriage and marijuana legalization, but other polling suggests community-base divides also exist along issues like global warming.
In other words, any leftward shift in American politics over the last few years has not been uniform. There are still conservative bastions scattered around the country, particularly in the South, that have not joined in the larger leftward lean.
Republicans may welcome that news, but those conservative strongholds may make it more difficult for their nominee in 2016.
MOST voters vote "their wallets", social issues be damned which should help to drive out the Major perps in our current fiasco. We cannot afford another 4 years of "liberals".
I like Walker, Carson, Fiorina. We will see later this summer @ the Straw Poll if the party can get their chit together. Scratch that: The IA gop has cancelled having the Straw Poll this year (at this point at least)
I like Walker, Carson, Fiorina. We will see later this summer @ the Straw Poll if the party can get their chit together. Scratch that: The IA gop has cancelled having the Straw Poll this year (at this point at least)
Last edited:
Soonersincefitty
Sooner starter
I am reasonably concerned about the deficit.
It's 18 trillion right now...and a considerable amount of learned economists agree if it hits 22 trillion is the point of total collapse.
IE, as an international player, the US will be as relevant as the Congo.
It's 18 trillion right now...and a considerable amount of learned economists agree if it hits 22 trillion is the point of total collapse.
IE, as an international player, the US will be as relevant as the Congo.
Lairs in both parties (depending on who is in in office) always use smoke and mirrors by saying things like, "Under my leadership, the rate of increase has been reduced by 12%" In other words, instead of a 20% increase, it's a 17.6% increase. That massaging of the numbers can be applied to GDP, unemployment, you name it. People fall for it every time.
Last edited:
Here is a good example of how to lie to the sheeple.
The debt has been frozen for weeks!
http://cnsnews.com/news/article/ter...sury-says-debt-has-been-frozen-18112975000000
The debt has been frozen for weeks!
http://cnsnews.com/news/article/ter...sury-says-debt-has-been-frozen-18112975000000
Under normal circumstances, I think people do vote their wallets. Right now, I don't know that the average voter knows exactly which party would be best for his pocketbook. The economy has improved, but for whom?
But, if you see the gendarmes at your door, you may well vote to protect yourself against their intrusion.
---why do women vote rather heavily for Democrats?
---why do African-Americans, Hispanics, and Asian-Americans vote heavily Democratic?
---are their numbers on the decline?
The tendency to focus on issues like abortion, birth control, and sonograms has led to a strong rejection of the Republican Party by young and single women. Young single women are now voting about seventy percent Democratic. Are they all planning to have an abortion? This is about their right to do what THEY think is in their best interests, not what some uninvolved party thinks about the morality. Are all young women immoral?
If you go back to 1960, African-Americans were heavily Republican. When you see seventy percent vote for one party, it is usually rejection of the other party. I doubt that you could get seventy percent of young women to agree on any subject. But, they will vote against the Republican Party. For them, this is a pocketbook issue that also involves equal pay, minimum wage, health care, and Food Stamps, all of which affect them more than they do men.
Here is an oldie but goodie. I bet few know about this. And yes.... blame Bush.
By 2004, offshoring of manufacturing jobs under Bush (mostly to China) topped nearly 3 million, thanks to another great "free trade" deal in 2000, granting Permanent Most Favored Nation Trading Status to China.
Faced with the PR crisis over lost jobs, it was suggested that employment stats could be massaged to make it appear that manufacturing job losses were less severe. How? Start counting FAST FOOD jobs as manufacturing jobs. Assemble a hamburger... ...that's manufacturing. Correct?
http://www.cbsnews.com/news/building-blue-collar-8230-burgers/
Now fast-forward to the Obama Administration... same smoke and mirrors.
http://www.ibtimes.com/obama-manufacturing-jobs-proposal-slammed-unions-1637278
By 2004, offshoring of manufacturing jobs under Bush (mostly to China) topped nearly 3 million, thanks to another great "free trade" deal in 2000, granting Permanent Most Favored Nation Trading Status to China.
Faced with the PR crisis over lost jobs, it was suggested that employment stats could be massaged to make it appear that manufacturing job losses were less severe. How? Start counting FAST FOOD jobs as manufacturing jobs. Assemble a hamburger... ...that's manufacturing. Correct?
http://www.cbsnews.com/news/building-blue-collar-8230-burgers/
Now fast-forward to the Obama Administration... same smoke and mirrors.
http://www.ibtimes.com/obama-manufacturing-jobs-proposal-slammed-unions-1637278
Last edited:
At least Bush collaborated with both parties to get stuff done rather than re-write constitutional rules and rule by fiat. It's too bad that Dodd-Frank occurred under his watch...
Soonersincefitty
Sooner starter
Golly gee willacres fellows...think it's time for term limits?
I'm effing sick and tired of these shitheads on both sides getting obscenely rich on the backs of us.
Damn it all!
"You say you want a revolution..."
I'm effing sick and tired of these shitheads on both sides getting obscenely rich on the backs of us.
Damn it all!
"You say you want a revolution..."
Soonersincefitty
Sooner starter
Go ahead and give me an FBI file...oops, too late...already got one!
Ha ha ha... yeah, your cornfield question to G-man got that one started. lol
I don't think term limits accomplishes anything. Unless you can find a way to keep lobbyists and campaign contributions from affecting votes in Congress, it makes no difference if the guy has been there two years or twenty. Everyone is term limited if you pay attention and vote on facts, not what some source manufactures. If you discover that your Congressman is nuts or a liar, why re-elect him? That is a term limit: you have two years to prove that you are sane.
The district she's from must be insane then: No other way to explain Pelosi !
Soonersincefitty
Sooner starter
Syb, damn you man, you're so quick to point out ostensibly true facts, yet you aren't nearly as expansive in giving us solutions to problems that affect and are going to affect everyone that lives in the US.
Surely you aren't just kicking the can on down the road with the mistaken notion that all's well in this cluster fudge that is the UNITED STATES OF AMERICA?
Surely you aren't just kicking the can on down the road with the mistaken notion that all's well in this cluster fudge that is the UNITED STATES OF AMERICA?
See. You are a conservative. I like Pelosi more than I like Obama. When I think of a real idiot that is a Congressman, I begin with Louis Gohmert. For a Senator, there are some nutcases, but the one that will go down in history will be Inhofe. I suspect that his name will be vilified for centuries.
