Obama's Pastor is having a problem...

[OklahomaTuba]

Seems "Them Jews" won't let him talk to Obama...


Asked if he had spoken to the President, Wright said: "Them Jews aren't going to let him talk to me. I told my baby daughter, that he'll talk to me in five years when he's a lame duck, or in eight years when he's out of office. ...

"They will not let him to talk to somebody who calls a spade what it is. ... I said from the beginning: He's a politician; I'm a pastor. He's got to do what politicians do."
http://www.dailypress.com/news/dp-local_wright_0610jun10,0,7603283.story

[JohnnyMack]

Jeremiah is a lot of things. Stupid isn't one of them.

[OklahomaTuba]

He may not be stupid, but he is a racist and a bigot, and very close to our Squanderer in Chief it seems (more so than he wants us to believe)....

"Of course I voted for him; he's my son. I'm proud of him," Wright said.

[Condescending Sooner]

He also assumes Obama will win a second term. That looks unlikely at this point.

[XingTheRubicon]

Maybe we shouldn't elect anyone who announces their presidential candidacy in the middle of their first term as a junior senator.

[Curly Bill]

Maybe we shouldn't elect anyone who announces their presidential candidacy in the middle of their first term as a junior senator.

There's no doubt we shouldn't have, but peeps are stupid that way. :(

[soonervegas]

He also assumes Obama will win a second term. That looks unlikely at this point.

Yes, let's usher in the Palin Presidency as soon as possible. What data do you have to back up that Obama will not win a 2nd term? Fox news?

He may not, but making that statement as this point is beyond a joke.

[Curly Bill]

Yes, let's usher in the Palin Presidency as soon as possible. What data do you have to back up that Obama will not win a 2nd term? Fox news?

He may not, but making that statement as this point is beyond a joke.

It looks like his opinion to me. Why so hot and bothered Momma Obama?

[JLEW1818]

i love ****s

[stoops the eternal pimp]

****s?

[KC//CRIMSON]

He also assumes Obama will win a second term. That looks unlikely at this point.


Hmmm, let's see here: With an average approval rating of 60% to 65% during one of the worst times in US history, I'd say he has a better chance than anyone at this point. (although making any speculation this early in the ballgame now is just plain silly) And just for schits and giggles, that AR is three times higher than Dubya's departing AR.

[Dio]

Wasn't HW's AR at 90% right after the Gulf War? And then he got Perot'd in '92

Waaaaaay to early to call, either way.

[Condescending Sooner]

Yes, let's usher in the Palin Presidency as soon as possible. What data do you have to back up that Obama will not win a 2nd term? Fox news?

He may not, but making that statement as this point is beyond a joke.


Wow sorry Mrs. Obama, didn't mean to get your panties all in a wad.

Not many presidents get re-elected when the economy is in the toilet.

[XingTheRubicon]

Wow sorry Mrs. Obama, didn't mean to get your panties all in a wad.

Not many presidents get re-elected when the economy is in the toilet.

psssst...the obamanians tend to sprinkle glitter in their hair and think the economy is turning the corner.

[yermom]

Wow sorry Mrs. Obama, didn't mean to get your panties all in a wad.

Not many presidents get re-elected when the economy is in the toilet.

tell that to FDR :)

[OU_Sooners75]

There's no doubt we shouldn't have, but peeps are stupid that way. :(


Maybe we should actually elect someone that is not a politician?

[OU_Sooners75]

Wow sorry Mrs. Obama, didn't mean to get your panties all in a wad.

Not many presidents get re-elected when the economy is in the toilet.

I think it has happened before.

I think FDR got re-elected, what 3 times?

[RUSH LIMBAUGH is my clone!]

tell that to FDR :)Good thing we have nukes, now, to speed up the World War that will be necessary to finally stimulate the economy.

[Crucifax Autumn]

I wish I had some nukes to stimulate MY economy!

[Pricetag]

He also assumes Obama will win a second term. That looks unlikely at this point.
The Republicans are such a cluster **** right now that I think he has a very good chance at re-election, no matter what happens with the economy. They better have been at work fixing themselves since the election. It's going to take all four years for them to even have a chance.

[yermom]

Good thing we have nukes, now, to speed up the World War that will be necessary to finally stimulate the economy.

the difference is that instead of hanging back and setting up our infrastructure and making $$$ off the war for a few years first, we are already fighting in it

[RUSH LIMBAUGH is my clone!]

the difference is that instead of hanging back and setting up our infrastructure and making $$$ off the war for a few years first, we are already fighting in ithttp://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7miRCLeFSJo

[OU_Sooners75]

The Republicans are such a cluster **** right now that I think he has a very good chance at re-election, no matter what happens with the economy. They better have been at work fixing themselves since the election. It's going to take all four years for them to even have a chance.


Not just the republicans my friend.

Politics as a whole in this nation is a cluster ****er right now.

1. Congress needs term limits.
2. Congress and Executive branch higher ups (including POTUS) needs a pay cut and change how they get paid.

I think if we can set limits on how long they can serve, then things will ultimately get better.

Set the Senate term limits to 2 terms (12 years max). Then that person must sit out for 10 years before being eligible again for the US Congress. In that 10 year window, they cannot run for the House of Representatives.

Set the House term limits to 3 (12 years max). Same as the Senate, they must sit out for 10 years before being eligible again for the US Congress. In that 10 year window, they cannot run for the Senate.

However, in that 10 years, or in their Congressional terms, they can run for POTUS.

The congress members and their staffs used to get a per diem for every day they were at work, not an actual paycheck for 12 months. Did you know the US taxpayers pay just our elected Congress over 88 million dollars a year in their salaries. This does not include the Presidents salary, the Supreme Court (or any other US court) salaries. And this does not include the staffs of these elected or appointed peoples salaries.

Why should someone that volunteers public service get paid over $165,000/year, as a first time elected or appointed official?

If we put a per diem for days they are at work, say something like $400/day on these people...and that is all they get paid, then we would save quite a bit of money as taxpayers! A congressional session last just barely under a calendar year. These elected officials take 4 -1 month long breaks in each session, so lets just use 8 months of work that they actually do each year.

That is roughly 160 work days per session. They make over $1,035/day for days that they actually work. :confused: Why does an elected official deserve that much?

With that said, a $400/day per diem, for actual work, would mean that these people would have to actually hold personal jobs. They would get paid 2.58125 times less ($64K/year). Meaning we would save ourselves (the US taxpayer) over $54million/year on just the elected congressional payroll.

Sorry for getting off track...but it boggles my mind how much actual power these individuals in congress have and how much money they make.

If our Head of State cannot serve as POTUS for more than 2 terms, then our congress should not be able to serve more than 2 or 3 terms either.

[RUSH LIMBAUGH is my clone!]

The Dems now have the Powa they desperately want, and have figured out how to keep it indefinitely(corruption, fraud, and criminal behavior) They aren't going to give it up peacefully, IMHO.

[OklahomaTuba]

The Dems now have the Powa they desperately want, and have figured out how to keep it indefinitely(corruption, fraud, and criminal behavior) They aren't going to give it up peacefully, IMHO.
What'e the over/under that the Squanderer-In-Chief has nationalized a good 25% of this nations economy by years end?????