|HubPages Device ID||This is used to identify particular browsers or devices when the access the service, and is used for security reasons.|
|Login||This is necessary to sign in to the HubPages Service.|
|HubPages Traffic Pixel||This is used to collect data on traffic to articles and other pages on our site. Unless you are signed in to a HubPages account, all personally identifiable information is anonymized.|
|Remarketing Pixels||We may use remarketing pixels from advertising networks such as Google AdWords, Bing Ads, and Facebook in order to advertise the HubPages Service to people that have visited our sites.|
|Conversion Tracking Pixels||We may use conversion tracking pixels from advertising networks such as Google AdWords, Bing Ads, and Facebook in order to identify when an advertisements has successfully resulted in the desired action, such as signing up for the HubPages Service or publishing an article on the HubPages Service.|
In light of the decision to let the Bush-era tax cuts for the wealthy continue, and the criticism from Obama of those progressives opposed to letting them continue, perhaps Obama needs a reminder of who got him where he is.
I think a challenge in 2012 from the likes of Russ Feingold, Alan Grayson, or some other progressive firebrand is in order?
What about the rest of you?
Oh Absolutely, they should run as a third party candidate.
Woohoo, did someone say Ross Perot?
If you want to ensure a victory for Sarah Palin, sure.
Fortunately, though, the disgruntled far-left will not be strong enough to mount a challenge to Obama, and Obama will win reelection fairly handily.
I think he definitely helped himself out with this tax cut comprimise. Only the far left is really angry enough to mount a challenge. However their numbers are small. That issue will be settled in the Primaries. Once he wins the nod, there is no way the far left will vote for anyone other than the DNC candidate.
If he continues to compromise, I think you might be correct.
A primary challenge of Obama will do nothing good. A progressive raid of the GOP is a much better idea: http://progressivesforronpaul.blogspot.com/
Two words: Al Franken.
The perfect candidate to lead the progressive charge.
Nah. One schizo party at a time. It's the GOP's turn in 2012.
The progressives and Ron Paul share a few issues in common, but the philosophy's as a whole are miles apart.
And I'm telling you---something about Ron Paul is off. He's still a Republican, you know.
He speaks at pro-life rallies......How is that "for freedom"?
Yeah, life, and the freedom to enjoy it.....sounds like a real schmuck to me....
Well, not exactly...
Apparently, my womb is property of the State.
And the law on the books that says this is located where?
If you ban a woman from exercising choice over her own body you are saying her body does not belong to her.
But there is no such ban, so your point would be.....?
Isn't it strange how they complain about the oppression thats NOT taking place and ignore the real threat to their freedom?
Oh it's real.
Your guys are making sure of it...little by little, just as they are dismantling our gvt--little by little.
Perhaps it's because you are not a woman, that you don't understand, so I won't bother to explain it to you...after all, erections are so important, tax dollars are paying for them!!--So you have NO idea how I feel, since you BAN funding a procedure for me. Now you are working on banning the procedure alltogether. You don't fool anyone with your games.
It's nothing new, really. The founding fathers thought of me as property, and could legally beat me.
It's not a stretch that you now want to control my sexuality, as if YOU were my daddy.
LMC, I couldn't care less about your sexuality. Don't flatter yourself.
And as of today, abortion is still legal. So I'm left wondering 9again) what your gripe is...
Well, maybe because they made Planned Parenthood the hostage for this last go-round of budget battles.Even though only 3% of PP is abortion, you had some nut-bag Kyle saying ON THE FLOOR OF THE SENATE that over 90% of PP is abortion!
Maybe because even in the Healthcare fight, it came down in the end, to a fight about abortion. They don't want abortions available, even when women pay with THEIR OWN MONEY.
And, it is nationwide, this push to make abortion impossible to get.
Anti-abortion bills advance in statehouses nationwide
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/03/2 … 39768.html
But, again, abortion is still legal, so your gripe is.....?
My gripe is it's legal, yet if I want one, I have to drive 60 or so miles away...probly more, to get one.
My gripe is--why is it an issue on funding the budget??????
Why is it an issue in the healthcare debate?????
It is a PRIVATE matter between me and my cervix!
Probably because there is a considerable percentage of the population that disagree with you and view abortion as the taking of a human life. If this is indeed the case, then it is not something so easily dismissed.
I realize that like most liberals you want the freedom from responsibility for your actions, but some of us have a different take....
Billy, it might be, and I don't pretend to speak for LMC, that the conservative agenda as evidenced in the budget battle is to indeed make it more difficult for a woman to obtain an abortion. And as long as it is legal, as you have pointed out, should it necessarily be as difficult to receive one? I mean legal is legal, right?
Yes, it is legal. And yes, Conservatives would prefer it was not. So if you can't change the law of the land, you can certainly throw as many road blocks in the way as you can possibly think of. And that is what appears to be happening. I certainly don't advocate abortion, but it really isn't my call - I am not pregnant, I am not a woman, and I am not the Supreme Court.
"since you BAN funding a procedure for me."
I haven't banned anything, I'm all for your right to abort any baby you feel you are saddled with.
Hell, if you want a lobotomy I'll pay for that myself.
it's against freedom if you consider the fetus not alive.
it's pro-freedom if you consider the fetus a separate life.
Thus, this IS a tricky subject for libertarians.
Calling Ron Paul a Republican is about as apt as calling Obama a hippie.
I would love to see Hillary run, but I don't think she will.
I'm with Obama...all the way.
But go for it progressives! The more voices, the better.
As long as it's not a RW operative playing the game of being a progressive.
No faces that don't have a proven record. RW'ers will do ANYTHING to win, as you know.
It may be a moot point..!
with the Republicans split between and Tea and Center, Obama may just, by a Republican split, walk right back in!
I think the progressives should run a candidate if only to spotlight that President Obama is a moderate. Americans like progressive ideas - Social Security, Medicare, Medicaid, Children's Health Insurance, Head Start, etc. The idea of progressive taxation, that the rich SHOULD pay more... polls well. Despite the fact that most Americans favor liberal ideas, a lot of those folks think they are moderate/conservative.
It makes no sense, but progressive presidential candidates do poorly. George McGovern, Walter Mondale, Michael Dukakis ring a bell? Bill Clinton was a moderate and did OK. President Obama is a moderate and he's doing alright. The republicans won't field a moderate candidate who will preserve the progressive ideals of this country. Obama will defend the programs republicans want to destroy. Since a fire-breathing liberal makes Obama more electable, I like it.
Did you know Ryan got SS benefits when his dad died? Is he a mooch?
Is Bachmann a mooch for taking a farm-subsidy?
Boehner in gvt for 20 years?
All these people who "hate" the gvt, still taking the 174K and all the bennies.....
What has happened to Integrity?
damn right he got benefits -he paid for the service so he's entitled to it.
Gee, I was under the distinct impression that Mr. Ryan did not approve of government entitlement programs.
Well, good thing he already got his SS benefits.
As if he gets his way he -- and everybody else his age and youngers -- won't be getting no more.
by Jezzzz7 years ago
The story hit the airways that Palin said that she could beat President Obama in the 2012 Presidential Election. What do you think.. Can she do it?
by Susan Reid6 years ago
Weigh in with your votes and rationale.I am reminded of a classic Bush saying here.Fool me once, shame on you.Fool me twice....We won't get fooled again!
by TMMason6 years ago
It is BS like this that is driving America to the Right. So I say.. "Go Howard and the rest of you Leant Leftists, GO GO GO! Keep running your mouths with all the hate... you are helping me to collect more partners...
by Credence224 months ago
Three months ago, if anyone would had told me that Donald Trump had a snowball's chance in hell of becoming the next President, I would have laughed myself unconscious. But today, I am not so sure. It is not so much...
by pisean2823116 years ago
what are ur views for this guys?
by Susan Reid7 years ago
After Obama's 2nd term the Democrats will have to come up with a new candidate for president.I've got my eye on Gavin Newsum.Former mayor of San Francisco, recently elected Lieutenant Governor of California.He's got age...
Copyright © 2018 HubPages Inc. and respective owners.
Other product and company names shown may be trademarks of their respective owners.
HubPages® is a registered Service Mark of HubPages, Inc.
HubPages and Hubbers (authors) may earn revenue on this page based on affiliate relationships and advertisements with partners including Amazon, Google, and others.