It IS a FAILURE.....kinda like his Presidency, but hey you believe what you want. I really Don't care

but the fact remains Romney (from the one party system) invented Romneycare and then lost his bid to become President!

What is amazing is Obama follows the GOP platform and the GOP complain! Romneycare, Middle East war, can't win. Do you think your candidate wouldn't have pushed his own invention? Get real.

frank, please, how is "Romneycare" the "GOP Platform?"

And Obama never followed any GOP platform, ever.
Get real.

Romney was a squish republican establishment candidate who gave us the second go round of Der Leader.
Any other candidate could have used Obamacare against Barry, but not Romney.

Romney even said he thought individual states should have a say if they wanted universal health care or not, he would not do that on a national scale.

It was wrong to do at a state level and wrong to do on a national level, but to say that the base is or ever was for Romneycare is being disingenuous.

I had my own problems with going to war in the mid east as trying to push a democracy on a society that is not civil is a no win situation. That being said, once we were there, we needed to complete the task and STAY there to do that.

Der Leader could not wait to pull out troops and did is so fast, against pretty much every commander's advice on the ground, that a massive void was there and because of Barry, ISIS came to power.
I recall him saying that ISIS was like a JV team trying to play the Lakers. How wrong can your guy be?

Tell that to the 100s of dead French people.

So you think Romney would look good complaining about Obama doing something he once did. That explains a lot about you.

Who destabilized the region?
Why did they do it?

They did it because their daddy didn't have the balls to complete the job when he should have .

so I kid/provoke a little, but not a lot.

Platform...I'll take the word back. But after about a month in office, folks around here decided Bush never existed and Obama owned the war(s). And real conservatives wanted us to mind our own business and stop being the world's policeman, blah blah blah.

They demanded to know when was O gonna give us the change he promised, when would we get out? We get out, the same people demand to know why we left. Should have gone in full force they say.

Can't have it both ways.

Bush goes after Saddam? YAY! never mind he was no threat to us. Years later still clinging to unfound WMD's, which had nothing to do with the actual attack on our soil. Obama goes after Bin Laden, the right guy? Well, zero credit Not like he shot him by himself, the military did it. A conservative Prez would have been hailed a hero.

Tell that to the thousands of Americans who died in New York!

Can't have it both ways.

As for Romney...insatiable ego, wins here for Gov and immediately started plotting to be President. If elected, he'd be gunning for Emperor of the Milky Way, then Master of the Universe. But he' would and has said anything to anyone to get elected, despite being a member of the Party of Morality (yup, that was me being provocative. It's fun.). So he says "states's issues", and you believe him. OK. But Mitt truly believed that it would end up cheaper for taxpayers to pay some more for insurance for all than to keep paying for emergency room visits for the sniffles...may actually be right about that... but for some it's about philosophy, others prefer results.

Dogma vs reality.

Ironically, if Mitt had won, we likely would have chartered the same course, but without the bile being spilled about the POTUS. Just look at the post Bush years, we stayed on much the same course since then. No bile before O at Bush either. Just the Dem who was the same as George and Mitt. Party over country? Very helpful, thanks. Obama cures cancer for pennies a day? Your teabaggers wouldn't fund it.

Sometimes we vote for our personal "lesser of two evils". Obama is not my guy, but the options were worse to me. As it turned out, Congress hated him the last 6 years and yet he almost never vetoed anything! Mainstream GOP have had basically 16 consecutive years in office. Time for them to stop crying and hating, and start the dialogue again.

oh one more thing.

The massive void was from the massive holes in the borders left after President Chaney/Bush took out the guy controlling the lunatics.

they did it for oil and no-bid contracts for President Chaney and pals.

no frank,

The massive void was from pulling out all our troops quickly and leaving nothing behind.
Ok, you want to blame it on Bush, then your guy has to fill this massive holes when he takes over the job of the presidency, instead he turns tail. How do you explain the president IGNORING the boots on the ground saying that was the wrong thing to do? He did what he wanted, because he has no idea how to handle the enemy AND he thinks he is always the smartest guy in the room.

The problem with our big government is that each branch is not checking the other, but going along with more big government.

Obama has only vetoed 6 bills to his desk because the establishment squishes on the republican side say "well, if we pass X and Obama doesn't like X, then he will veto it." So they give him something he will sign, and Obama is not a compromiser, so he gets what he wants and signs it. That is what infuriates the base and conservatives and the tea party (or tea baggers as you and your petulant president like to call them). The other massive problem is that laws are being passed by the bureaucracy, which no one votes for and they are not accountable for anything.

frank, I am guessing you voted for a socialist twice. Was it because he was the lesser of 2 evils, or is it because he had a "D" next to his name on the ballot and you can't help yourself? Many dems I know voted once for Obama, then see they got burned and then learned....but then they weren't "off the reservation" lefties either.

Getting O.B.L. was 10 years in the making and great, he was killed on Obama's watch. Bully for the military heroes. What has he done to combat ISIS, now that he has allowed them to fester and spread with his failed foreign policy?

I call my guys out when I see the B.S. Romney was never my guy, when he got the nomination I bemoaned the fight it would be to get him elected. Bush was not very good either and I can point to many things he did that sickened me. Boehner, McCain, McConell, all sell outs.

But what I always notice, is that hard left liberals never take an objective look at their guy and will always back them vehemently.

rather than line item veto/agree with #90, suffice to say it's a mixed review and I'll make a few comments.

I just can't pass on 10 years in the making...getting Saddam must have eaten up 6 years worth of resources, or was that a diversion to catch Bin Laden off guard? HA!!

I have not been placing all blame on Bush, just reminding the many revisionists that no one side is pure and moral and absolved of blame. It is so lopsided here as historical truth is denied. Yes, Bush started it, and as banderl said, destabilizing the region is to blame for the rise of ISIS, and no one improved it by playing follow the leader. Why do you think Chaney and cronies desired destabilization? See #89 for my opinion. But not many, aside from you, will admit any GOP part in it. And even you sanitize it.

I am a REGISTERED independent. I have voted GOP. In the last two presidential elections, however, I could not allow Palin near the office, nor could I stomach Mitt yet again. You Pubs have a great shot at my vote again, and so far you give me a sickening display from which to choose. I just might vote for a real socialist this time to stop Hillary! At least I know even with a socialist in office, the Prez by himself can not change our basic ways, and at least Bernie is not indebted to Pharma/Oil or any other player. I guess I disagree with you on checks and balances.

I'm sorry, but I laughed at the thought of Obama being so powerful as to make the majority republicans in Congress cower in fear of upsetting him and only offering him what he wants. Part of me refuses to believe you meant that, but if you did, then I have even less respect for the GOP than before. Ever hear of an override vote? Are you really calling your party a bunch of cowards? WOW! That sure makes them an attractive choice to lead the country.

Perhaps you are not really in touch with the base of your own party? It's the very fractured nature of the GOP that has prevented them from having an identifiable cause aside from "we aren't them".

So he won't negotiate? I believe the stated goal of many well known GOP leaders and Tpartyists has been clearly stated to be "do everything to prevent reelection of Obama (3 years ago). Do not support even the greatest ideas ever if they come from Obama." Is this not true? Is this not party over country?

In this case, the party is the one that the majority of Americans voted against 5 of the last 6 times, despite weak Democrat opposition. They must heal themselves to have any credibility in preaching a better way to run the country.

For those with reading comprehension issues, I am not happy with the last 8 years either. Not defending their record, just attacking the equally or more guilty attackers...hence the lesser of two evils.

franky, brother man.

It doesn't matter what you are registered as where your mindset is.

My assuming you are a lib, comes from the fact that you voted not once, but TWICE for the most radical left wing statist that this country has ever seen.
So you saying that the GOP has a shot at your vote, is the same as tony telling me he was once a conservative.
You have the same talking points that I hear from the left. Bush is to blame for all, Palin sucks, we went to war in Iraq for Chenney, everyone is in bed with pharma/oil.
Palin? I have never seen a woman attacked so vehemently from the press, not even "Clinton's girls" (those he sexually assaulted, not his daughters) got that treatment.

If you can't see that Cruz, Paul, Carson, would be infinitely better than the dem side, I don't doubt your leanings.

And you are correct with the repub establishment and the "we aren't them" platform. These fools that run the show in D.C. have no platform, they like big government too, they just think they can manage it better than the democrats. This is a fight similar to the one that Reagan encountered and his desire to take the party back from within.
The establishment rinos in D.C. are scared to death of Obama.. they have less spine than he does and they don't know or are too afraid of a media backlash to fight him. They talked a big game when they were up for elections and then reverted right back to "playing ball."
You find it laughable, I find it infuriating.
I have ZERO respect for the establishment leaders and I do consider them cowards. That is why, when these hacks go after Cruz, or Carson, or Paul or Rubio, Lee, Cotton, etc, THOSE are the guys who I look to for leadership in the future- because they scare the entrenched rinos, and don't think they don't make the democrats piss their pants.

You forget the absolute pasting that the democrats took in the house (65 seats?) and the senate and then the governorships and the state houses in the last 2 elections. The country is leaning conservative not liberal.

At the national level, the dems have won 5 of 6 as you say. But I blame that on putting up lame republican candidates. Romney, McCain, Bush, Dole, Bush1. There has not been a conservative on the ticket since Reagan. Reagan was not all that long ago and the absolute landslides that he amassed in 2 elections was incredible.

If another conservative runs and can espouse what conservatism means (it is actually a way of life) and be unapologetic about it, he will trounce Hillary.

And for the record, I hoped that Obama failed at everything he did, right off the bat. I read both his books, listened to his rhetoric and knew that this man would take the U.S. and lurch so far left and away from the Constitution as to make it more difficult for our posterity to realize the American dream.

I hoped I was wrong, but I wasn't.

Everyone you mentioned buckles and gives in to the RINO's. Who are you kidding?

As for "leadership"...there is none in the GOP. They don't even know what to stand for except opposing the Kenyan King, abortion, gays and marijuana legislation. Even in direct opposition to what Americans want and deem as viable they standfast with their bigoted playbook.

The Dems don't have to do anything or offer up a moderate candidate because they can sit on the sidelines and watch the GOP clowncar implode under the sheer weight of it's stupidity. They don't have to even try, that's how bad the GOP is sucking. Even the Koch Brothers are licking their wounds and keeping their powder dry because all of their cash can't buy them an idiot that 5% of America can support.

Once again you've shown everyone paying attention that you're a bootlicking, non-critical thinking, unable to actually do something for yourself individual. The people you support will NEVER win because they're quitters. Everyone sees them for what they are. Water carrying the wrong messages that nobody can support but you go on with your little self as we all watch you flame out.

Get the hot dogs and marshmallows guys...this one is stupid enough to burn for more than one of the idiots and we'll eat for months!

Your future looks rather bleak.

I'm between a rock, a hard place, a cliff, and a fiery pit of doom.

I don't want to vote for ANY of the offerings, be it rep or dem.

(Hillary is the fiery pit of doom, btw...)

I heard she has a confederate flag tattoo on her azz... 😟

Did you see her boobs?

Bill and Chelsea?

Anyone crediting Rush with anything substantial and comparing Ted Cruz to Reagan is hard to take very seriously.

That said the Republicans have one thing going for them. I don't think Hillary is electable and when the Dems nominate her their base will be complacent while she acts as a lightning rod to energize the Republican base. If the GOP runs their own lightning rod that cancels things out.

The Republicans have a gap to cover in national elections. They can get local or regional folks elected but their extreme/absolute views on some major issues are problematic nationally.

Hillary will help them bridge the gap and make for a tight election whomever the GOP runs. If the GOP ran a moderate in the general they could win. If they run one of the current leaders in the clown car like Trump or Cruz they will lose a close one.

If the Dems ran the right person they could win in a landslide. They will run Hillary and it will be close. Hillary is the only one that could make the GOP win but the GOP will have to play the game and pick someone electable themselves. If both parties run an unelectable, Hillary wins simply by infrastructure alone.

The cool thing is the strategy can be obvious but the electorate wild card can make it un reachable. We are in for wacko vs hilldog. Get out the popcorn, build your bunker, buy your food stores, and hope General Sherman is on your side this time.

All hail Putin.

The end .... and stuff.

and anyone again pushing a moderate squish, saying they are the only ones that can win, is hard to take seriously.

Remember how Romney was the only one that could defeat Obama, and then McCain before him? They were the "electable" ones, what happened there?

The history books are just filled with the "great moderates" in the past aren't they?