Pure Commentary, that’s It

Mike, you can edit and add comments to the end of this if you’d like….

I make no pretense in my posts. They’re opinionated. I make no pretense in my political persuasion. I’m a conservative. I was born and raised a Southern Democrat. That might be termed a mostly MOR Republican nowadays. Whatever it was, I know this for sure, my family, who considered themselves to be good patriots and believers in God and country…would have taken aim with their long rifles at this current gang of politicians…on both sides.

We don’t have a lot of choice on who to vote for again if you’re looking for a “good” candidate. They all have weaknesses. But we do have a choice of someone who would make a difference…but this isn’t really an endorsement of either.

I’m sick of voting for the lesser of two evils. I believe that this country is in dire need of a rebirth of the founders. None, including the “champion” of the Constitution, Ron Paul, deserve to be elected to the office of President. This, of course, being based on the definition of a “good” candidate.

There are lots of faults with all of them, but they all sacrifice the fate of the country for the good of the campaign. I am but one vote, however, my one vote cannot be bought, it can only be earned. It can only be earned by what I hear and see of a record. That record has to be how that person has performed. OK, just this one time I’m gonna comment on them….

Obama….epic fail…the Presidency is not a training ground, especially this day and time.

Romney…fail…the Republican version of Obama

Santorum….fail…he is not a leader, he is a conservative. He has been a Congressman and a Senator, but not in a leadership position. He also will be a tipping point for those who support the “separation of church and state” ideal, they will walk away. Don’t believe he can convince the Reagan Dems.

Paul….fail…wonderful man, believes in the authority of the Constitution to a point. His Libertarian values step in the way of law, and his foreign affairs stance will get us in trouble. This is not the America of the founders.

Gingrich….almost fail…lot of baggage, and Romney put a bitterness in him. His record is conservative, he is the only elected official to ever serve on the national stage, balance a national budget, had a healthy economy, worked with Reagan, (even though folks doubt that) and has big plans. So did 2 other Presidents in my lifetime…JFK and Reagan, both imperfect, Kennedy a womanizer and Reagan divorced. However, he is much better than John McCain…heck, all of them but Obama is.

Again, don’t take my word for it, get off your proverbial butts and look up their records….

Here is where the rubber hits the road. This country is in a much worse place than when JFK or Reagan was in office. We started going downhill with the first Bush, and have been creeping toward a New World Order and socialism ever since. It may be a path that we cannot stop, but it can be slowed down or averted if we make the right choice in 2012. Obama is not it. He may be a rock star, he may be the choice of a dumbstruck youth, but he isn’t it.

Mitt Romney may stall the fall, but he has an awful track record. Rick Santorum will have us in a war with Syria or Iran immediately. Ron Paul, I’m not even sure. My hope right now is that the country recovers from this insane political yardstick it uses to measure candidates and takes a hard look at Newt. If not, we cannot afford to lose to Obama, nor let the congress fall back into socialist hands.

Let the stupid argue with the stupid. You cannot argue with an idiot, especially if he thinks you’re a bigger idiot than he is. There is no discourse between the parties as was with Kennedy, Reagan, and even Clinton. There must be a turning of the way. For the future of the children and grand children, there must be a turning of the way.

Long gone is logic and reason, it must be taken back by a moral force the strength of the first patriots. This political correctness must end, it’s destroying the very fabric of this country. Like it or not, America became America because of headstrong positions on God and country. We lost that path. You must ask yourself when you prepare to pull the voting lever, who will best take this country in the way of the Constitution, or a more “modern” USA? Pick very carefully, we have had about 24 years of this modern USA. We are in danger of losing American identity, morals, ideals and the very freedoms that members of my family and your family fought on foreign soil to protect. How much are you willing to risk those things on the same, or another Rock Star?

You may be an original “Southern Democrat”, and if you are, you can send me an email. We’ll talk of the Tea Party meetings, and plans to stock up on shotgun shells to repel all these “revenuers” coming for our rights…because if you don’t pay attention this election cycle when you vote, they’ll be coming.

Goodbye, First Amendment: ‘Trespass Bill’ will make protest illegal

Don’t you just love the way they pass unconstitutional laws to change the Bill of Rights instead of amending the Constitution as it calls for. I might add, the Republicans voted this thru the House…..they control it, now it’s the Senate’s turn.

Just when you thought the government couldn’t ruin the First Amendment any further: The House of Representatives approved a bill on Monday that outlaws protests in instances where some government officials are nearby, whether or not you even know it. (The 1st amendment guarantees the right to peacefully protest)

The US House of Representatives voted 388-to-3 in favor of H.R. 347 late Monday, a bill which is being dubbed the Federal Restricted Buildings and Grounds Improvement Act of 2011. In the bill, Congress officially makes it illegal to trespass on the grounds of the White House, which, on the surface, seems not just harmless and necessary, but somewhat shocking that such a rule isn’t already on the books. The wording in the bill, however, extends to allow the government to go after much more than tourists that transverse the wrought iron White House fence.

Under the act, the government is also given the power to bring charges against Americans engaged in political protest anywhere in the country.

Under current law, White House trespassers are prosecuted under a local ordinance, a Washington, DC legislation that can bring misdemeanor charges for anyone trying to get close to the president without authorization. Under H.R. 347, a federal law will formally be applied to such instances, but will also allow the government to bring charges to protesters, demonstrators and activists at political events and other outings across America.

The new legislation allows prosecutors to charge anyone who enters a building without permission or with the intent to disrupt a government function with a federal offense if Secret Service is on the scene, but the law stretches to include not just the president’s palatial Pennsylvania Avenue home. Under the law, any building or grounds where the president is visiting — even temporarily — is covered, as is any building or grounds “restricted in conjunction with an event designated as a special event of national significance.”

It’s not just the president who would be spared from protesters, either.

Read more

An Alternative Apology to President Karzai of Afghanistan on behalf of America

The GOP’s worst enemy – Themselves

I read this column from George Will, and I continually read things from Charles Krauthammer, Ann Coulter and try to listen to some of the more conservative hosts on a more left leaning Fox News. (Yes, haven’t you noticed?) While I agree with some of the points that George Will makes in this post, the media and the elitists in DC are what’s killing the nominees. Who is running, and where were their ideal candidates when everyone was wading into the race? Why isn’t Chris Christie in the race, or Junior Bush? Do they have skeletons that would be pounced upon? Would they be drug through the mud with yet unproven accusations like have happened to Herman Cain and Newt Gingrich? Would they suffer the same stupidity of the polling calling Mitt the frontrunner before the start of the contest just because he has money? I think he answered where his position was in final debate. How many of you remember this chilling retort to CNN’s John King? “You have the right to ask the questions the way you want to, and I have the right to answer them the way I want to.” Never mind that he didn’t answer the question at all, but he kept repeating the same stuff he has been saying at every debate. “I am an outsider, I have been a business executive and I know what I’m talking about.” 

Really? What about the people? Do they really care what we talk about? We keep voting things down and  activist judges keep putting them back in. Who gave the solution for that? We keep hearing Obamby say that oil is trading on the world market and he can’t do anything about it. Who gave a solution to that? I’ll give you a clue…it wasn’t Romney. It wasn’t Santorium, and golly gee, it wasn’t Mr. Liberty, Ron Paul. But I won’t say it, because the man with the solutions is 3 time womanizer, a DC insider, an old curmegeon who all his friends dislike, a man who gives solutions instead of the same crap over and over. But I know you don’t want to hear that his record speaks for itself, he wasn’t fired from Congress, he wasn’t convicted of anything he was accused of…and yet is the only presidential candidate who has actually done what this country needs done to it again…and the elites are afraid of him. Why? Because he will mess up their apple carts. Because he can do what Mitt won’t do, Rick Santorum or Ron Paul can’t do, and that is get things done in Washington. Mitt will be a Republican Obama, Rick Santorum will have another war going, as well as alienating the country because of his strong moral beliefs (not that it isn’t bad) and Ron Paul will not be able to get a bill out of his office. (Really, look how many he’s done in Congress)

Now, I guess you figured who that is I’m talking about, and I don’t care whether you agree with me or not. Look at the freaking records. Don’t keep listening to these commentators and elitists. They’re going to cause us to get another John McCain against Barack Obama. They’ve hammered the candidates enough so that Obama is rising in popularity again. But I digress…here is the article from George Will…I have to make notes in red…

Two miscast candidates
By George Will

 

 

 

 

 

http://www.JewishWorldReview.com

The Midwest begins on the western slopes of the Allegheny Mountains, around Rick Santorum’s Pittsburgh, birthplace of the Ohio River, the original highway into the Midwest. Pittsburgh fueled the Whiskey Rebellion of 1794, an early eruption of Western resentment of the overbearing East, which taxed the whiskey that Westerners made from their grain. Santorum the Midwesterner, after victories in Iowa, Minnesota and Missouri, is wagering more of his political capital on the region.
Rather than wait for the congenial calendar of Super Tuesday (March 6), featuring five culturally conservative states (Georgia, Tennessee, Virginia, Oklahoma, Idaho), he is contesting Michigan, which votes Tuesday, and Ohio. But instead of keeping his Rust Belt focus on his blue-collar roots and economic program for reviving manufacturing, he has opened multiple fronts in the culture wars.
By doing so — questioning much prenatal testing, disdaining Barack Obama’s environmentalism as “phony theology,” calling involvement of even state governments in public education “anachronistic,” reiterating that abortion should be illegal even in cases of rape and incest, explaining the proper purpose of sex (procreation) — Santorum has eclipsed Newt Gingrich, his rival for the support of social conservatives. But in doing so Santorum has made his Catholicism more central and problematic in this nomination contest than Romney’s Mormonism has been.
The problem is not that the phenomena that trouble Santorum are unserious. The use of prenatal testing for search-and-destroy missions against Down syndrome and other handicapped babies is barbaric. Obama’s stealthy pursuit of a national curriculum for kindergarten through 12th grade is ill-advised and illegal. And no domestic problem — not even the unsustainable entitlement state — is more urgent and intractable than that of family disintegration.
The entitlement state can be reformed by various known — if currently politically impossible — policy choices. But no one really knows the causes of family disintegration, so it is unclear whether those causes can be combated by government measures.

 

We do know the social pathologies flowing from the fact that now more than 50 percent of all babies born to women under age 30 are born to unmarried mothers. These pathologies, related to a constantly renewed cohort of adolescent males without fathers at home, include disorderly neighborhoods, schools that cannot teach, mass incarceration and the intergenerational transmission of poverty. We do not know how to address this with government policies, even though the nation has worried about it for almost 50 years.
In 1965, Daniel Patrick Moynihan, then in President Lyndon Johnson’s administration, published his report on the black family’s “crisis,” which was that 24 percent of black children were then born to unmarried women. Today, 73 percent are. Forty-one percent of all children are now born to unmarried women.
Moynihan, a social scientist in politics, proposed various family policies but also noted this: When the medieval invention of distilling was combined with Britain’s 18th-century surplus of grain, the result was cheap gin — and appalling pockets of social regression. The most effective response to which was not this or that government policy, it was John Wesley — Methodism. Which brings us back to Santorum.
He is an engagingly happy warrior, except when he is not. Then he is an angry prophet of a dystopian future in which, he has warned, people will be “holed up in their homes afraid to go outside at night.” He has the right forebodings but might have the wrong profession. Presidential candidates do not thrive as apostles of social regeneration; they are expected to be as sunny as Ronald Reagan was as he assured voters that they were as virtuous as their government was tedious.
Today’s Republican contest has become a binary choice between two similarly miscast candidates. Mitt Romney cannot convince voters that he understands the difference between business and politics, between being a CEO and the president. To bring economic rationality to an underperforming economic entity requires understanding a market segment. To bring confidence to a discouraged nation requires celebrating its history and sketching an inspiring destiny this history has presaged.
Romney is right about the futility of many current policies, but being offended by irrationality is insufficient. Santorum is right to be alarmed by many cultural trends but implies that religion must be the nexus between politics and cultural reform. Romney is not attracting people who want rationality leavened by romance. Santorum is repelling people who want politics unmediated by theology.
Neither Romney nor Santorum looks like a formidable candidate for November.

So, what is the result, a brokered convention to name a Christie, Bush III or someone the people didn’t nominate from the field. Then, you are for sure asking for a revolt from the people…and 4 more guaranteed years of Obama.

 

 

Timothy Geithner to Paul Ryan: White House Has No ‘Definitive Solution’ to Debt Crisis…And We Don’t Want Yours

Treasury Secretary Timothy Geithner told the House Budget Committee Thursday that President Obama’s fiscal year 2013 budget – “the most expensive in United States history” – would “put the U.S. on an ‘unsustainable’ course if enacted,” reports The Washington Free Beacon.

Geithner also told Committee chairman Paul Ryan (R-WI) that although the Obama administration doesn’t have a “definitive solution” to the debt crisis, it definitely knows it doesn’t like the Republican alternative.

Read more

U.S. schoolchildren now subjected to sack lunch searches by government agents

First it was the TSA searching your underpants at the airport, claiming to be protecting you from “terrorists.” Now a local elementary school in North Carolina is searching the homemade lunches of schoolchildren with the goal of forcing children to ditch their nutritious, home-made meals and learn to consume pasteurized, homogenized USDA-approved cow’s milk and chemically-laced processed meats that promote cancer.

This is what happened, as reported in the Carolina Journal yesterday:

“A preschooler at West Hoke Elementary School ate three chicken nuggets for lunch Jan. 30 because a state employee told her the lunch her mother packed was not nutritious.” (http://www.carolinajournal.com/exclusives/homemade-lunch-replaced-wit…)

The paper goes on to report:

“The girl’s turkey and cheese sandwich, banana, potato chips, and apple juice did not meet U.S. Department of Agriculture guidelines, according to the interpretation of the agent who was inspecting all lunch boxes in her More at Four classroom that day.”

Hold on a sec there, partner. There are AGENTS inspecting lunch boxes of schoolchildren?

Read more

Barbara Boxer: Insurance rights trumps religious rights

“Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof;…….”

Senator Boxer warned yesterday that if the HHS contraception mandate was repealed it would set a dangerous precedence of religious rights trumping the right to be insured.

On MSNBC’s Politics Nation with Al Sharpton last night, Boxer affirmed that under the proposed amendment proposed by Sen. Roy Blunt, an employer would not be forced by the government to pay for medical practices against his religion.

“I mean, are they serious? Sharpton exclaimed, “How do you make a law where an employer can decide his own religious beliefs violate your right to be insured?”

“Oh Absolutely,” Boxer said, “Let’s use an example, let’s say somebody believes that medicine doesn’t cure anybody of a disease but prayer does and then they decide no medicine.

“No medicine!” she exclaimed, “Under the Blunt amendment, they could do just that.”

Washington Examiner

Navy Seals Say False Flag to be Blamed on Iran May Happen at Anytime: Ed Asner

Appearing on the Alex Jones Show on Monday, Emmy Award-winning actor Ed Asner said Navy Seals have told him military action against Iran is forthcoming and will be preceded by a false flag attack.

Asner told Alex and his nationally syndicated radio show audience that the Seals are attempting to alert the American people about the prospect of a false flag operation and “more foreign escapades” before the establishment media “starts brainwashing us.”

Asner said Iran is being set-up for military action that will occur during the summer or fall and create an October surprise prior to the election.

Asner said it is up to the American people to recognize and prevent an imminent false flag operation and stop another disastrous war before it gets started. He said the Navy Seals are now coming forward because they are worried that an Iran false flag attack “runs the danger” of creating a “world-wide conflict if it gets out of hand.”

False flag attacks designed to initiate conflict and war have been used numerous times by governments as a foreign policy tactic. During the Asner interview, Alex mentioned Dick Cheney’s effort to start a war with Iran.

“There was a dozen ideas proffered about how to trigger a war,” said Pulitzer Prize-winning New Yorker reporter Seymour Hersh in 2008. “The one that interested me the most was why don’t we build — we in our shipyard — build four or five boats that look like Iranian PT boats. Put Navy seals on them with a lot of arms. And next time one of our boats goes to the Straits of Hormuz, start a shoot-up.”

The Gulf of Tonkin pretext established a pattern of “continuous government lies passed on by pliant mass media,” write Jeff Cohen and Norman Solomon.

Read more and watch the video here

Tennessee Legislative Alert: They’re Laughing At Us!

The very people who are supposed to represent us are not only refusing to do their job to re-present our ideas in Nashville, not only refusing to do the right thing, not only working to be complicit with the evils coming out of Washington DC, but they are outright laughing at the people of Tennessee.

The subcommittee of the Tennessee House Judiciary Committee had the chance to do the right thing on Wednesday to protect Tennesseans from unconstitutional encroachments (arresting of US citizens by the military in the US with indefinite detention, without trial)  of the federal government and resist the evil indefinite detention provisions of the National Defense Authorization Act by voting for HB2619/SB2669.

Instead they chose to laugh at us, and stall.

Van Irion, the Lead Counsel for the Liberty Legal Foundation and former congressional candidate, is one of the co-authors of HB2619 which went before the subcommittee.  He testified before the subcommittee for about an hour.  His report, along with a link to the video of the proceedings, is below:

You can watch my testimony to the TN House Judiciary subcommittee in support of HB2619 at this web site: http://tnga.granicus.com/MediaPlayer.php?view_id=143&clip_id=4855.

Here’s my synopsis: Several RINOs on the committee went into the meeting having already decided to vote against the bill. They spent an hour trying to justify this decision. Every substantive question/objection raised was answered. Yet at the end they were saying that the bill has some serious problems.

Action Items:

1.  Contact the members of the subcommittee and demand that they pass HB2619/SB2669 without weakening it in any way.  Be polite but firm and let them know that if they do not pass this bill, you will work hard to make sure that they are not in office in 2013.  Keep in mind that we are getting opposition from legislators in both political parties.

General Subcommittee of the House Judiciary Committee

Rep. Jim Coley, Chair: Republican, District 97
207 WMB, (615) 741-8201, rep.jim.coley@capitol.tn.gov

Rep. Vance Dennis, Vice-Chair: Republican, District 71
105 WMB, (615) 741-2190, rep.vance.dennis@capitol.tn.gov

Rep. Eddie Bass: Democrat, District 65
109 WMB, (615) 741-1864, rep.eddie.bass@capitol.tn.gov
(Note that Rep. Bass is a retired county sheriff himself, and has sponsored his own version of a sheriffs first bill in the past.)

Rep. Karen D. Camper: Democrat, District 87
20 LP, (615) 741-1898, rep.karen.camper@capitol.tn.gov

Rep. Jon C. Lundberg: Republican, District 1
205 WMB, (615) 741-7623, rep.jon.lundberg@capitol.tn.gov

Rep. Judd Matheny: Republican, District 47
205 WMB, (615) 741-7448, rep.judd.matheny@capitol.tn.gov

Rep. Barrett Rich: Republican, District 94
204 WMB, (615) 741-6890, rep.barrett.rich@capitol.tn.gov

Rep. Janis Baird Sontany: Democrat, District 53
32 LP, (615) 741-6861, rep.janis.sontany@capitol.tn.gov

Rep. Eric Watson: Republican, District 22
209A WMB, (615) 741-7799, rep.eric.watson@capitol.tn.gov

2.  If you can attend the subcommittee meeting on Wednesday, February 15 at 3:30 PM Central, please be in Nashville to attend.  The schedules are listed here.

3.  Contact Rep. Dunn and Sen. Campfield to thank them for sponsoring HB2619/SB2669.  Assure them that you want them to continue the fight for the rights of Tennesseans.

Rep. Bill Dunn: Republican, District 16
212 WMB, (615) 741-1721, rep.bill.dunn@capitol.tn.gov

Sen. Stacey Campfield: Republican, District 7
306 WMB, (615) 741-1766, sen.stacey.campfield@capitol.tn.gov

4.  Contact your personal state representative and senator and encourage them to co-sponsor and support HB2619/SB2669.  Let them know that if they do not support it, you will work hard to make sure they are not in office in 2013.  Remember to be polite, but firm.  You can find your the legislators for your district by clicking here and entering your street address on the left side of the screen.

5.  Contact Speaker Beth Harwell and Lt. Gov. Ron Ramsey and let them know you support HB2619/SB2669 and ask them to co-sponsor it.

Speaker Beth Harwell: Republican, District 56
107 WMB, (615) 741-0709, speaker.beth.harwell@capitol.tn.gov

Lt. Gov. Ron Ramsey: Republican, District 2
1 LP, (615) 741-4524, lt.gov.ron.ramsey@capitol.tn.gov

6. Send a link to this article to everyone you know and encourage them to call and e-mail these legislators.

Tennessee Tenth Amendment Center

20% Of Republicans favor Obama????

If this is a continuing trend, it’s very scary, and it shows just how fickle people are about the Constitution and American freedom. Folks, we need to get to work talking to people. From WND…

WASHINGTON – For critics of Barack Obama, 2012 has been portrayed as a do-or-die year for the country – an election that will determine whether America stays on the road to European-style socialism or veers right to reclaim its positions as the most vibrant economy in the world and the home of individual liberty.

But the 2012 election is looking more like a replay of 2008 than a do-over.

The latest WND/Wenzel Poll shows none of the current crop of Republican presidential candidates has solidified the base of the party, with one in five GOP voters leaning toward support of Obama in November.

The results are from the public-opinion research and media consulting company Wenzel Strategies. The poll was conducted Feb. 1-3, 2012, and has a margin of error of plus or minus 3.44 percentage points.

“The improvement in Obama’s prospects compared to the four remaining Republican challengers stems largely from two factors,” suggests pollster Fritz Wenzel. “First, Obama has largely avoided the political limelight while the GOP candidates savage each other with increasing intensity. Second, a smattering of evidence indicates that the economy is getting a little better, which helps the White House in the eyes of the voters. Secondly, the bloody fight for the Republican presidential nomination – by most estimations the nastiest GOP fight in memory – has really hurt the images of the challengers in the eyes of both Republicans and, especially, independent voters. For Republicans, each candidate carries with them now some taint that cannot be ignored.”

In every case except the match-up against Ron Paul, more than 20 percent of Republican voters said they are more likely to support Obama than the Republican challenger. And Ron Paul is close, as 19 percent of Republicans said they are more likely to support Obama than Paul.

Making the situation more bleak for opponents of Obama, independent voters are apparently quite put off with the Republican nomination fight. While polls last fall showed them leaning Republican by roughly a two-to-one margin, they are now either split evenly or favoring Obama.

“What must be particularly alarming to every Republican campaign regarding this nasty fight is that, even among those who say they think the nation is heading in the wrong direction, Obama still wins at least 20 percent support in head-to-head match-ups against the four remaining Republicans, and among those who said they were unsure about the overall direction of the nation, Obama wins by overwhelming percentages,” observes Wenzel.

Obama also has made tremendous inroads on enemy territory against each of the four Republicans, winning roughly 20 percent support among conservatives and even those who consider themselves to be very conservative. And, even against Mitt Romney, considered by many to be the most moderate of the GOP bunch, Obama defeats him by a large margin among moderate voters.

“Obama has masterfully positioned himself to lower expectations among the electorate in terms of economic progress, and has sat idly by while Republicans – mostly Romney and Newt Gingrich – destroy each other’s reputations,” said Wenzel. “While the Obama-Clinton nomination battle lasted well into the spring four years ago, it never got as nasty as this year’s fight between Romney and Gingrich, which now appears to be very personal in nature. Obama was able to recover nicely by the time the general election campaign rolled around. If either Romney or Gingrich wins the nomination – and that is a long way from being determined – it is doubtful either will recover to full strength by the fall campaign. This poll indicates that it is more the negativity of the Republican nomination fight and less the small improvement in the economy that has changed the national political landscape.”

Barack Obama

It does help Obama that the recent upbeat economic news appears to have buoyed spirit nationwide. One third of respondents – 34 percent — said Obama has exceeded expectations during his first term in office, while another 20 percent said he has performed as expected. Less than half – 47 percent – said he has fallen short of their expectations for him as president.

Among independents, 60 percent said Obama has either met or exceeded expectations. Among political moderates, 52 percent said the same thing.

Obama would defeat all of the four Republicans if the election were held today, but Ron Paul fares the best against the incumbent. Obama leads Paul, 44 percent to 40 percent, with 16 percent undecided.

“This is likely a reflection of discontent over Obama’s handling of the economy and, in particular, his outsized appetite for deficit spending,” observed Wenzel. “Paul has far and away offered the clearest and most serious plan to cut federal spending, and it appears to be recognized by these survey respondents.”

Romney also is within single digits of Obama, currently trailing, 48 percent to 41 percent. Obama leads both Gingrich and Rick Santorum Santorum by double-digits. Obama leads Gingrich, 50 percent to 36 percent, and Santorum, 49 percent to 34 percent.

Nearly one-quarter of Republicans abandon both Gingrich and Santorum, and Obama leads both men by big margins among independent voters.

See detailed results of survey questions:

Compared to how you expected him to perform as president back when he first was elected, would you say that he has exceeded your expectations or not?

If the election was today, and the candidates were Democrat Barack Obama and Republican Newt Gingrich, for whom would you vote?

If the election was today, and the candidates were Democrat Barack Obama and Republican Mitt Romney, for whom would you vote?

If the election was today, and the candidates were Democrat Barack Obama and Republican Ron Paul, for whom would you vote?

If the election was today, and the candidates were Democrat Barack Obama and Republican Rick Santorum, for whom would you vote?

If the election for president was today, would you vote for Democrat Barack Obama, would you consider voting for someone new, or would you definitely vote for someone new?