How can we blame _____ on Obama?

[Bob Juch]

You know, sometimes I think Republicans just sit in rooms playing a game called, “How can we blame _____ on Obama.” I truly believe that if President Obama cured cancer, Republicans would say he was trying to kill the cancer treatment industry.

Jeb Bush becomes the most recent Republican to make a completely absurd accusation. Bush accused the president of closing the U.S. embassy to the Vatican out of spite due to some Catholics opposing the Affordable Care Act.

Bush Tweeted:

Why would our President close our Embassy to the Vatican? Hopefully, it is not retribution for Catholic organizations opposing Obamacare.

Yes, Bush more or less accused President Obama of closing one of our embassies to “get revenge” on a few Catholics who don’t support his healthcare law.

Because that makes perfect sense, right? A United States President would go to the trouble of closing down an embassy just because he had his feelings hurt. I guess because Republicans are so small and petty with their attacks toward the president, they’re projecting that same immaturity onto Obama — feeling that he behaves in the same juvenile ways.

Oh, by the way, the embassy isn’t even closing. They’re simply moving it to a large U.S. compound in Rome that’s expected to save around $1.4 million annually.

Despite the fact that President Obama is not actually closing the embassy (they’re simply moving it) the National Republican Senatorial Committee still ran a petition this week which claims that President Obama is going to close the embassy to the Vatican.

The NRSC’s spokesperson said, “This certainly isn’t the first time that the Obama Administration has been perceived as taking actions hostile toward religion and religious freedom.”

And they were being serious.

Even if the Obama administration was actually closing the Vatican embassy, how is that in any way an attack on “religious freedom”? Either way, it doesn’t matter – the embassy isn’t being closed, just moved.

If Republicans want to be taken seriously, they need to start behaving in a manner that warrants such treatment. They can’t artificially create these “scandals,” then expect most Americans to trust any of them. I guess it’s why their party clearly panders to the most uneducated and easily manipulated among us.

This is just another example of Republicans blatantly making an issue up out of thin air to entice their base’s outrage toward the president. Simply pathetic, but sadly it’s to be expected.

[flockofseagulls104]

You know, sometimes I think Republicans just sit in rooms playing a game called, “How can we blame _____ on Obama.” I truly believe that if President Obama cured cancer, Republicans would say he was trying to kill the cancer treatment industry.

Jeb Bush becomes the most recent Republican to make a completely absurd accusation. Bush accused the president of closing the U.S. embassy to the Vatican out of spite due to some Catholics opposing the Affordable Care Act.

Bush Tweeted:

Why would our President close our Embassy to the Vatican? Hopefully, it is not retribution for Catholic organizations opposing Obamacare.

Yes, Bush more or less accused President Obama of closing one of our embassies to “get revenge” on a few Catholics who don’t support his healthcare law.

Because that makes perfect sense, right? A United States President would go to the trouble of closing down an embassy just because he had his feelings hurt. I guess because Republicans are so small and petty with their attacks toward the president, they’re projecting that same immaturity onto Obama — feeling that he behaves in the same juvenile ways.

Oh, by the way, the embassy isn’t even closing. They’re simply moving it to a large U.S. compound in Rome that’s expected to save around $1.4 million annually.

Despite the fact that President Obama is not actually closing the embassy (they’re simply moving it) the National Republican Senatorial Committee still ran a petition this week which claims that President Obama is going to close the embassy to the Vatican.

The NRSC’s spokesperson said, “This certainly isn’t the first time that the Obama Administration has been perceived as taking actions hostile toward religion and religious freedom.”

And they were being serious.

Even if the Obama administration was actually closing the Vatican embassy, how is that in any way an attack on “religious freedom”? Either way, it doesn’t matter – the embassy isn’t being closed, just moved.

If Republicans want to be taken seriously, they need to start behaving in a manner that warrants such treatment. They can’t artificially create these “scandals,” then expect most Americans to trust any of them. I guess it’s why their party clearly panders to the most uneducated and easily manipulated among us.

This is just another example of Republicans blatantly making an issue up out of thin air to entice their base’s outrage toward the president. Simply pathetic, but sadly it’s to be expected.

For people like you, the repubs will never be taken seriously. Your whole existence is based on mocking, demonizing and marginalizing any opposition to your ideology.

This post, again, I'm sure based on talking points provided to you, is rather ironic based on the fact that your party and your leader is still blaming things on the previous administration and is the most finger pointing group of &$*&( I've ever seen.

[Bob Juch]

You know, sometimes I think Republicans just sit in rooms playing a game called, “How can we blame _____ on Obama.” I truly believe that if President Obama cured cancer, Republicans would say he was trying to kill the cancer treatment industry.

Jeb Bush becomes the most recent Republican to make a completely absurd accusation. Bush accused the president of closing the U.S. embassy to the Vatican out of spite due to some Catholics opposing the Affordable Care Act.

Bush Tweeted:

Yes, Bush more or less accused President Obama of closing one of our embassies to “get revenge” on a few Catholics who don’t support his healthcare law.

Because that makes perfect sense, right? A United States President would go to the trouble of closing down an embassy just because he had his feelings hurt. I guess because Republicans are so small and petty with their attacks toward the president, they’re projecting that same immaturity onto Obama — feeling that he behaves in the same juvenile ways.

Oh, by the way, the embassy isn’t even closing. They’re simply moving it to a large U.S. compound in Rome that’s expected to save around $1.4 million annually.

Despite the fact that President Obama is not actually closing the embassy (they’re simply moving it) the National Republican Senatorial Committee still ran a petition this week which claims that President Obama is going to close the embassy to the Vatican.

The NRSC’s spokesperson said, “This certainly isn’t the first time that the Obama Administration has been perceived as taking actions hostile toward religion and religious freedom.”

And they were being serious.

Even if the Obama administration was actually closing the Vatican embassy, how is that in any way an attack on “religious freedom”? Either way, it doesn’t matter – the embassy isn’t being closed, just moved.

If Republicans want to be taken seriously, they need to start behaving in a manner that warrants such treatment. They can’t artificially create these “scandals,” then expect most Americans to trust any of them. I guess it’s why their party clearly panders to the most uneducated and easily manipulated among us.

This is just another example of Republicans blatantly making an issue up out of thin air to entice their base’s outrage toward the president. Simply pathetic, but sadly it’s to be expected.

For people like you, the repubs will never be taken seriously. Your whole existence is based on mocking, demonizing and marginalizing any opposition to your ideology.

This post, again, I'm sure based on talking points provided to you, is rather ironic based on the fact that your party and your leader is still blaming things on the previous administration and is the most finger pointing group of &$*&( I've ever seen.

Why would anyone take a party seriously if they keep spewing this sort of B.S.?

[silverscreenselect]

It's interesting that when polls ask people's opinions of "Obamacare," the results are always less favorable than when they ask people's opinions of the "Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act."

[flockofseagulls104]

It's interesting that when polls ask people's opinions of "Obamacare," the results are always less favorable than when they ask people's opinions of the "Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act."

Of course. But the politicians in power are those that base their policy decisions and campaign for the votes of these uninformed and clueless people. And we wonder why we're in such a dire situation. The lowest common denominator is ruling. It's not working out so well.

[flockofseagulls104]

For people like you, the repubs will never be taken seriously. Your whole existence is based on mocking, demonizing and marginalizing any opposition to your ideology.

This post, again, I'm sure based on talking points provided to you, is rather ironic based on the fact that your party and your leader is still blaming things on the previous administration and is the most finger pointing group of &$*&( I've ever seen.

Why would anyone take a party seriously if they keep spewing this sort of B.S.?

I don't take the Democrats seriously. I don't have much faith in the repubs either. But it's people like you that willingly and faithfully disseminate the BS, like you did above. They count on people like you.

[Bob Juch]

For people like you, the repubs will never be taken seriously. Your whole existence is based on mocking, demonizing and marginalizing any opposition to your ideology.

This post, again, I'm sure based on talking points provided to you, is rather ironic based on the fact that your party and your leader is still blaming things on the previous administration and is the most finger pointing group of &$*&( I've ever seen.

Why would anyone take a party seriously if they keep spewing this sort of B.S.?

I don't take the Democrats seriously. I don't have much faith in the repubs either. But it's people like you that willingly and faithfully disseminate the BS, like you did above. They count on people like you.

If the Republicans don't want the Democrats to disseminate thair B.S., then they shouldn't say it.

[flockofseagulls104]

Why would anyone take a party seriously if they keep spewing this sort of B.S.?

I don't take the Democrats seriously. I don't have much faith in the repubs either. But it's people like you that willingly and faithfully disseminate the BS, like you did above. They count on people like you.

If the Republicans don't want the Democrats to disseminate thair B.S., then they shouldn't say it.

I haven't seen you disseminate "If you like it you can keep it, period". Did I miss it? That is the definition of BS. And so is the backtracking from it. The real fun will begin when and if the Employer Mandate kicks in. Then we'll really have a BS party.

The whole point is: why we are giving this group of arrogant lunkheads who think they are masterminds in both parties so much power over us? Your head is in the "Democrats are good, Republicans are bad" area. The fact is that they're all bad. Where is it written that the people in the federal government are any more noble, ethical or selfless than the people who run insurance companies or healthcare companies, or pharmaceutical companies? You buy that BS, and you help disseminate it.

[silverscreenselect]

It's interesting that when polls ask people's opinions of "Obamacare," the results are always less favorable than when they ask people's opinions of the "Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act."

Of course. But the politicians in power are those that base their policy decisions and campaign for the votes of these uninformed and clueless people.

I assume you mean the uninformed and clueless people who base their support or opposition to a law based on whether the word "Obama" appears in the title. That's the electorate the Republicans are trying to appeal to.

[flockofseagulls104]

It's interesting that when polls ask people's opinions of "Obamacare," the results are always less favorable than when they ask people's opinions of the "Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act."

Of course. But the politicians in power are those that base their policy decisions and campaign for the votes of these uninformed and clueless people.

I assume you mean the uninformed and clueless people who base their support or opposition to a law based on whether the word "Obama" appears in the title. That's the electorate the Republicans are trying to appeal to.

Do you read anything I write, or do you just have your response already written out?

The Republicans are the problem. The Democrats are the problem. The ignorant people that they pander to are the problem. The concentration of power to a group of arrogant, power hungry people whose only qualification is they can get a lot of ignorant people to vote for them is the problem. The lazy, unconcerned media that lets them get away with pandering to ignorant people is the problem.

I'm convinced that the ONLY way to fix this is to elect people who will govern by Constitutional guidelines and amend the constitution so this kind of power grab by one branch of the government over the others will not occur. Washington will not fix itself, no matter who we vote in. It has to be done by the states by a convention of the states to propose amendments to the Constitution.

[Bob Juch]

Remember when Bush was president and all the liberals went insane and started militia groups with the sole goal of attacking and threatening him? Yeah, me neither.

[flockofseagulls104]

Remember when Bush was president and all the liberals went insane and started militia groups with the sole goal of attacking and threatening him? Yeah, me neither.

Liberals are insane.

[danielh41]

Remember when Bush was president and all the liberals went insane and started militia groups with the sole goal of attacking and threatening him? Yeah, me neither.

No, but I do remember some rich, fat guy with a camera making a propaganda hit piece on Bush that was hailed by other liberals. And somebody else made a movie with a simulated assassination of Bush.

The attacks of one side on another go both ways. Only those who are blind to one ideology or another refuse to see (or admit) this.

[themanintheseersuckersuit]

At times the venom accorded Bush in popular culture reached absurd — and even sick — levels. Alfred A. Knopf, for example, infamously published Nicholson Baker’s Checkpoint, a pathetic riff on shooting Bush. Gabriel Range’s unhinged 2006 “docudrama,” The Death of a President, focused on an imagined assassination of President Bush (imagine the outcry should any filmmaker today update that topos). A sick Charlie Brooker op-ed in the Guardian called for another John Wilkes Booth or Lee Harvey Oswald to kill Bush. Jonathan Chait of The New Republic more or less permanently ruined his reputation by writing an adolescent rant on “the case for Bush hatred,” one that began creepily with “I hate President George W. Bush.”

[tlynn78]

There you big sillies go again, confusing the absurdity -- I mean, issue, with facts. Tsk. Tsk.

[Bob Juch]

At times the venom accorded Bush in popular culture reached absurd — and even sick — levels. Alfred A. Knopf, for example, infamously published Nicholson Baker’s Checkpoint, a pathetic riff on shooting Bush. Gabriel Range’s unhinged 2006 “docudrama,” The Death of a President, focused on an imagined assassination of President Bush (imagine the outcry should any filmmaker today update that topos). A sick Charlie Brooker op-ed in the Guardian called for another John Wilkes Booth or Lee Harvey Oswald to kill Bush. Jonathan Chait of The New Republic more or less permanently ruined his reputation by writing an adolescent rant on “the case for Bush hatred,” one that began creepily with “I hate President George W. Bush.”

So you're equating words with actual militia groups?

[jarnon]

So you're equating words with actual militia groups?

Sarah Palin Criticized Over Gabrielle Giffords Presence on "Target List"

[Bob Juch]

So you're equating words with actual militia groups?

Sarah Palin Criticized Over Gabrielle Giffords Presence on "Target List"

And your point is?