Thank you for the blessings PB. God bless you also.

Larry O'Donnell hosting for Chris Matthews on Hardball just pointed out that the birthers have produced a Kenyan birth certificate for the President. However, he also pointed out that the document cites the wrong title of the country at the time and reports a birth city which was not part of Kenya at the time.

Happy 47th Birthday Mr. President.

It happens to all of us, but we never would like to publicly project how we may look in eight years, but Here's an image of how Obama may age in office:







TIS

i thought his ears would grow smaller or something? lol

Hi Bam,

Actually I always thought your ears look bigger as you grow older.



TIS

Like this?

Wow... this guy must be REALLY old!!

On average, ears grow one-hundredth of an inch every year.

Ears look bigger because as we get older our faces lose musculature which, if not covered with alot of fat, thins our faces.

Buddha got fatter in the face, but that didnt stop his ears.

Dont bother them with the details.

No, actually the big statue of him was done after several months on Pilates. He had actually lost weight.

White House ready to drop ‘public option’?
HHS official: Insurance cooperatives would be an acceptable alternative

8/16/09 updated 1 hour, 10 minutes ago
WASHINGTON - Bowing to Republican pressure and an uneasy public, President Barack Obama's administration signaled Sunday it is ready to abandon the idea of giving Americans the option of government-run insurance as part of a new health care system.

Facing mounting opposition to the overhaul, administration officials left open the chance for a compromise with Republicans that would include health insurance cooperatives instead of a government-run plan. Such a concession would likely enrage his liberal supporters but could deliver Obama a much-needed win on a top domestic priority opposed by GOP lawmakers.

Officials from both political parties reached across the aisle in an effort to find compromises on proposals they left behind when they returned to their districts for an August recess. Obama had wanted the government to run a health insurance organization to help cover the nation's almost 50 million uninsured, but didn't include it as one of his three core principles of reform.

Here's how everything gets fixed for 120 million dollars.
There are 40 million people in the U.S. over 50. Give them 3 million dollars each with the following stipulations:

1. They must retire. This creates conservatively 20 million job openings. Unemployment is fixed.

2. They must pay off their mortgages and credit cards up to $600,000. Banking crisis fixed.

3. If they do not own homes they must buy one. Housing crisis fixed.

4. They must trade in their cars and buy new american cars with low gas mileage.
Auto crisis fixed, and global warming is slowed.

Once on medicare they must buy really good supplemental insurance. Portion of health care fixed.

if only it was that simple

Fail plan is fail.

Good plan in THEORY, DT, until the following happens:

1. The corporation they work for decides that this is a wonderful way to downsize, and refuses to fill the positions.

2. Knowing the greedy nature of men, they immediately blow $500K on strippers and booze instead of paying down debt.

3. Chevy Malibu Hybrid be damned! These guys are over 50! They want a 'vette!!!

SB, to enforce the plan there would obviously have to be death panels.

I think that would be a minimum requirement.

Gentlemen of the Board: How long must we endure these "slings and arrows of outrageous fortune", these slurs upon our good nature? Where does it all end? In the words of Shakespeare, we must "take up arms against a sea of troubles and by opposing end them."

I know a place in Vegas where we can meet and plan our strategy. Tuesday nights, drinks are half-price and lap dances are free. RSVP.

I'm in.

40M x 3M = 120M?

We can always just print moar money, amirite?

Liberal math "skills."

Man carrying assault weapon attends Obama protest

PHOENIX – About a dozen people carrying guns, including one with a military-style rifle, milled among protesters outside the convention center where President Barack Obama was giving a speech Monday — the latest incident in which protesters have openly displayed firearms near the president.

Gun-rights advocates say they're exercising their constitutional right to bear arms and protest, while those who argue for more gun control say it could be a disaster waiting to happen.

Phoenix police said the gun-toters at Monday's event, including the man carrying an AR-15 semi-automatic rifle slung over his shoulder, didn't need permits. No crimes were committed, and no one was arrested.

The man with the rifle declined to be identified but told The Arizona Republic that he was carrying the assault weapon because he could. "In Arizona, I still have some freedoms," he said.

Phoenix police Detective J. Oliver, who monitored the man at the downtown protest, said police also wanted to make sure no one decided to harm him.

"Just by his presence and people seeing the rifle and people knowing the president was in town, it sparked a lot of emotions," Oliver said. "We were keeping peace on both ends."

Last week, during Obama's health care town hall in Portsmouth, N.H., a man carrying a sign reading "It is time to water the tree of liberty" stood outside with a pistol strapped to his leg.

"It's a political statement," he told The Boston Globe. "If you don't use your rights, then you lose your rights."

Police asked the man to move away from school property, but he was not arrested.

Fred Solop, a Northern Arizona University political scientist, said the incidents in New Hampshire and Arizona could signal the beginning of a disturbing trend.

"When you start to bring guns to political rallies, it does layer on another level of concern and significance," Solop said. "It actually becomes quite scary for many people. It creates a chilling effect in the ability of our society to carry on honest communication."

He said he's never heard of someone bringing an assault weapon near a presidential event. "The larger the gun, the more menacing the situation," he said.

Phoenix was Obama's last stop on a four-day tour of western states, including Montana and Colorado.

Authorities in Montana said they received no reports of anyone carrying firearms during Obama's health care town hall near Bozeman on Friday. About 1,000 people both for and against Obama converged at a protest area near the Gallatin Field Airport hangar where the event took place. One person accused of disorderly conduct was detained and released, according to the Gallatin Airport Authority.

Heather Benjamin of Denver's Mesa County sheriff's department, the lead agency during Obama's visit there, said no one was arrested.

Arizona is an "open-carry" state, which means anyone legally allowed to have a firearm can carry it in public as long as it's visible. Only someone carrying a concealed weapon is required to have a permit.

Paul Helmke, president of the Washington, D.C.-based Brady Campaign to Prevent Gun Violence, said people should not be allowed to bring guns to events where Obama is.

"To me, this is craziness," he said. "When you bring a loaded gun, particularly a loaded assault rifle, to any political event, but particularly to one where the president is appearing, you're just making the situation dangerous for everyone."

He said people who bring guns to presidential events are distracting the Secret Service and law enforcement from protecting the president. "The more guns we see at more events like this, there's more potential for something tragic happening," he said.

Secret Service spokesman Ed Donovan said armed demonstrators in open-carry states such as Arizona and New Hampshire have little impact on security plans for the president.

"In both cases, the subject was not entering our site or otherwise attempting to," Donovan said. "They were in a designated public viewing area. The main thing to know is that they would not have been allowed inside with a weapon."

Representatives of the National Rifle Association did not return calls for comment.

This is truly scary. I do fear for our President. I heard a former exec from secret service yesterday say that, the Secret Service, because of this, obviously must put extra attention toward guarding the president. He said that other than that, the SS does have a right to widen the perimeters as to how close these people can get to the President.

My take, don't kid yourself. There is more going on here than gun rights, health care. There is a deep "hatred" for Obama, not so much because of policy, but because of race or perhaps simply because he won the election. Maybe a small minority, BUT all it takes is one wacko!

I know Obama didn't mean it as it was spun at the time, but it's obviously true, there are those who "cling to their guns"...the macho men that they are. I can therefore I will.

Btw, what does one use an automatic rifle for? Hunting??? And what law has been initiated recently, or proposed, to make these men cling to their guns so much?

TIS

The Col packs his gun wherever he goes. Sometime he "open carries" and sometimes he wears it concealed. He has a permit. Matter of fact he has permits for 3 states.

I don't see nothing wrong with the Col or any other law abiding citizen wanting to excersise their right to carry a weapon. Nothing wrong with protecting yourself.

I suppose there are way more people packin' heat than anyone knows, but what exactly are these people (law abiding as they may be) protecting themselves from, in this case???? It's a "statement" of some sort. A form of intimidation plain and simple. Perhaps 15 minutes of fame?

I would assume these people would be totally understanding knowing that it is the Secret Service's duty to keep an eye them if they are totin' guns around any President, no?

Btw, can anyone answer why one needs an automatic weapon? I don't know a lot about guns but don't think that is a hunting gun. What purpose, or in what situation would that be used?


TIS

That's EXACTLY how I feel, TIS. NO ONE needs an assault rifle of an automatic weapon to protect their home or to hunt. The idea of a middle-aged housewife blowing off steam by taking an AK-47 into the backyard for target practice sends chills up and down my spine.

I'm not looking to overturn the Second Amendment. We just have to keep in mind that the Second Amendment was drafted in 1791, not long after the Revolutionary War. It made a lot more sense when "the Redcoats were comin.'"

In short: I'm okay with hunting rifles, shotguns and even registered handguns for businessmen who can prove the need, but automatic weapons are for psychos.

I'm with you there too PB. However, I am also for a background check on these people who want guns. Is that something the gun toters feel unreasonable? I guess I don't get their "bitch". Is there a law proposed changing this? I have heard Obama say many times, he is NOT gonna take their right to bear arms away. If it's the background check that pisses them off, I say "tough."

This is why this "macho" demonstration baffles me. What IS their gripe?

TIS

FWIW, my nephews and all my in-laws were big on hunting and I am NOT against it in that respect.

He CAN'T take it away, TIS. That's what these maniacs have to understand. I'm sure Olivant could give us the background on what it would take to overturn the Second Amendment. But I'm quite sure the President can't do it on a whim.