Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Politics for Pros- moderated -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: MakeMyDay who wrote (478161)	3/23/2012 11:38:09 AM
From: Brumar89	3 Recommendations Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 793983

We need a real choice, not just a guy who'll be a little better than the guy there now. People Are Badly Misinterpreting Rick Santorum Posted by Erick Erickson ( Diary) Friday, March 23rd at 4:47AM EDT 73 Comments Much hay is being made of Rick Santorum saying he’d prefer Obama to Romney. Except that is not what he said or what he meant. Certainly he could have had a clarifying clause in his statement, but given the context, I think he was saying no more and no less than what I have been saying. I’m on record thinking it is over and Romney is the nominee, but the hand-wringing over Santorum is juvenile and reminds me again why I so dislike Team Romney. We’re going to have put up with months of Team Romney whining about things if he is the nominee. This is the latest example. What Santorum said was: “You win by giving people a choice,” Santorum said during a campaign stop in Texas. “You win by giving people the opportunity to see a different vision for our country, not someone who’s just going to be a little different than the person in there.” Santorum added: “If they’re going to be a little different, we might as well stay with what we have instead of taking a risk of what may be the Etch A Sketch candidate for the future.” I think it was clear from the context of his remarks that Santorum was not expressing his own thinking, but expressing the thinking of general election voters. And I think he is absolutely right, which is also why I think Romney makes such a bad nominee (not that I think Santorum would be any better). As I have said before conservatives may not like Barack Obama, but most other people do. And when faced with a guy you like and a guy you don’t like who says he can fix an economy that no longer needs fixing, you’re going to go with the guy you like. Right now Mitt Romney has higher negatives with independent voters than Hillary Clinton did in 2008. Add in the Etch-A-Sketch comment and he is ripe to be painted as the next iteration of the Massachusetts flip-flopper no one can trust. I think Santorum was spot on in describing how voters would see the race in November. Why would they want to give up a guy many of them like, but who don’t much care of his job performance, for a guy they don’t like whose own campaign admits is like an Etch-A-Sketch. redstate.com I think too much is being staked on the economy and gasoline prices. By hook or crook, they'll get the unemployment numbers down, the media will be blasting out stories on the miraculous economic recovery, and Obama will flood the market with oil from the SPR.

To: MakeMyDay who wrote (478161)	3/23/2012 12:42:16 PM
From: SteveinTX	2 Recommendations Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 793983

" IMHO, control of the Senate is even more important than control of the white house at this point." I have considered that as well but decided it is a dangerous argument when you view the breadth and depth of presidential powers. I don't think it would be an even trade-off, let alone a gain. Consider that this president has found or invented loopholes to consistently get around congress. When that hasn't worked he's simply ignored the law and the courts. Check through the (selected) list of presidential powers and judge if you'd trade them for a republican senate. The president can issue rules, regulations, and instructions called executive orders, which have the binding force of law upon federal agencies but do not require congressional approval. (the Senate would be no help here) The president is responsible for preparing the Budget of the United States. (or NOT preparing it) The president is Commander in Chief of the armed forces of the United States. (how's that working out for us?) The President retains the sole right to authorize the use of nuclear weapons. (a repub senate would be no help) The War Powers Act severely limits the ability of the President to conduct warfare without Congressional approval. (but who bothers to check in with congress these days?) If the president opposes a bill, he can veto it. (a republican senate can't stop a veto) Much of the legislation dealt with by Congress is drafted at the initiative of the executive branch. (see veto power above) Before taking office, the President-elect must appoint more than 6,000 new federal positions. The appointments range from top officials at U.S. government agencies, to the White House Staff, and members of the United States diplomatic corps. (do we all agree that we just love the current president's appointment choices?) The President also has the power to nominate federal judges, including members of the United States Courts of Appeals and the United States Supreme Court. (want another supreme appointment by you know who?) The president is the federal official that is primarily responsible for the relations of the United States with foreign nations. (He insults our allies and bows to our enemies - the senate can't can control failed foreign policy) I have personally concluded that ridding ourselves of Obama must be priority one. If we could get the senate as well, that would just be icing on the cake.