Imperial presidents aside, history shows that most presidents are lucky if they legislate one major change that is beneficial to the country. Two major changes that stand the test of time is almost unheard of. No other presidency was more imperial than is Hussein’s —— evidenced by his czars and czarinas, executive orders, questionable bureaucratic regulations along with outright bureaucratic maleficence —— yet the Affordable Care Act is his only piece of major legislation, and that is in trouble in Congress, in a majority of state legislatures, in the courts, and with the American people. Congress is guilty of the economic larceny; raising the debt ceiling, bailouts, stimulus packages, and so on. Hussein is a member of the gang to be sure, but he could not have pulled off the stickups on his own if Congress opposed them. Other than burying future generations under a mountain of debt none of the economic stuff will last forever. Remember that every member of Congress represents their state or a district in their state, but the myth says the president represents all Americans. More to the point in the coming election he is a monumental bust from the Left’s point of view. Had Hussein been for the American people he would have vetoed everything except the socialized medicine bill which defines him. Put all of the players in their proper roles and you’ll see why Hussein’s presidency has been a nightmare to a majority of Americans. So if presidents are lucky when they set one major change in motion it must follow that wannabe presidents should be one issue candidates. In that sense Ron Paul is the only candidate who qualifies. I’m not saying that candidates should only talk about one issue. Nobody is going to stop politicians from going on and on about every topic they think will win a voting bloc. It is voters who should ask themselves “What is the one thing that defines this guy?” In order to answer that question voters must be smart enough not to fall for grandiloquence like “Hope and Change,” or any of the “I’m the one because —— .” Politicians engaging in a little horn blowing is standard political fare; it is also hot air erupting from Democrats and Republicans with more regularity than Old Faithful. Oddly enough, Ron Paul does not talk about the one winning issue that defines him in my opinion —— HR 1146: http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/z?c112:h1146: Ron Paul first introduced HR 1146 in the late 1990s. He reintroduced it in every Congress since then. No Speaker of the House would allow the bill to come to the floor; nevertheless, I am convinced Mr. Paul will get this country out of the United Nations, and the United Nations out of the this country, at the first opportunity. President Ron Paul is that opportunity. Anything Paul talks about is the same crap the other candidates talk about. Not one of the issues in this campaign is a defining issue on par with withdrawing from the United Nations. NOTE: Repealing the XVI Amendment is another issue that would define a sincere candidate. Sadly, not even the tax-cutters say they would do it. Hell, they don’t even mention it. In truth, Democrats and Republicans see the tax on income as their best shot at saving the world with everybody else’s money. Here is where it gets interesting out there on the fringes of fantasy land: Some PUMAs hope that Obama will follow in Lyndon B. Johnson's footsteps and not seek the Democratic presidential nomination this year. And this: Petitions are being circulated to encourage Clinton to resign as secretary of state and run for president; write-in efforts are under way to put her name at the top of the ballot. And this: Lately, some have also suggested teaming GOP presidential candidate Ron Paul and Clinton through an alternative third party, Americans Elect, that plans to use the Internet to field a presidential ticket in 2012. Clinton backers want her to seek the presidency Posted Saturday, Jan. 14, 2012 By Anna M. Tinsley http://www.star-telegram.com/2012/01/14/3660253/clinton-backers-want-her-to-seek.html If I have Ron Paul figured correctly he would drop the UN like a used condom, while Hillary Clinton is a UN-loving traitor who would betray this country to the International community one millisecond after she is sworn in. Does anyone except loony birds think Clinton would put Ron Paul one heartbeat away from dumping the UN? The political scene gets better for me because I haven’t had so much fun since Dukakis rode around in a tank: http://iconicphotos.wordpress.com/2009/07/18/dukakis-in-tank/ Watching the Democrat party go bananas again is just the beginning of the good times: Cheerleaders for former Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin are eagerly awaiting her keynote speech Feb. 11 at the Conservative Political Action Conference in Washington, D.C., hoping against all odds she’ll shake up the GOP field and announce a run — for president. And this: “Certainly she has a large devoted core group of followers who have written in her name in Iowa and elsewhere,” Rasmussen said. Sarah’s rogue run? By Chris Cassidy | Sunday, January 15, 2012 http://www.bostonherald.com/news/us_politics/view/20220115sarahs_rogue_run/ Sarah was always my first choice. Frankly, I do not think she will run, but there could be a stampede to nominate her in an open convention. If not, it’s a helluva lot easier to write-in Sarah Louise Palin than it is to write-in Barack Hussein Obama should he do the honorable thing and step down. Finally, if it should come to a showdown you cannot name two women more different than Sarah and Clinton. The real fun will begin should all of those establishment Republicans have to decide between supporting their party’s nominee, or getting another four years of Hussein in Hillary Clinton’s body.
