Obama '08?

Ain't gonna happen. That's simply the fact. The more Democrats in office, the better off the country will be.

That's great ! I hadn't seen it yet.

Liberal talking point BS!

Unlike several, this a comment worth responding to.

Yes, liability insurance is required by the states. It should be, as most of us don't have the asssets to reliably self insure ourselves. I don't think it has ever been plausibly argued that that shouldn't be the case. What I said, or intended to say was that requiring liabililty insurance to protect others from our own negligence is in no way analogous to a requirement that we carry medical insurance. Note that we have options to pay for collision, comprehensive, medical, and uninsured motorists. We are not required to carry hospital insurance for damage sustained in traffic accidents.

If the states want to require we carry medical liability insurance to cover damages in case we infect someone with, say smallpox, that might be acceptable.

I'm sure the economy will be huge re Nov 2012.. But I also think Fear of Tea Baggers in power will be huge. Or so I hope. (Though I am figuring Romney to get the nomination, but maybe not)

You are looking at health problems with myopia. When there are outbreaks of disease or bacteria, they must be treated whether they have insurance or not. If they don't have health insurance, everybody else who has insurance pays for those without when they visit hospitals.

If there's an outbreak of tb or salmonella, do we just let those patients a) get free service in our hospitals, or b) let them get sick and die?

You have absolutely not idea of the topic, do you?

I'm sure ad hominems works great for you, because two people gave you a thumbs up. They're just as ignorant.

Well, here's one to the King of the ad hominem: maybe you need to go back and take reading 095. Anything below 100 is remedial, of course.

When any of my posts has ad hominems, I explain the reasons behind it.

I've explained why congress is ignorant (and others on a2k), and the reasons why I arrived at that conclusion. Big difference - that is absent in your posts about me.

William Kristol is out today suggesting that Joe Biden may not run for reelection as Vice President. He may be wearying of the job. With Hillary Clinton suggesting that she might give up her position as Secretary of State, Biden might be interested in that. He has long had an interest in foreign affairs.
Some believe that Obama faces a tough reelection campaign and Biden doesn't bring much to the ticket.
Andrew Cuomo (NY Gov) is mentioned as a successor. Or perhaps a southerner.
The best choice for the Dems, in my mind, would be Hillary Clinton, particularly if Biden's nomination could be approved early enough to allow Clinton to campaign 24/7 in the spring of 2012.
Neither Clinton nor Biden are likely, because of their age, to aspire for higher office in 2016.

rjb, Sounds like a good choice while looking at the GOP field of candidates.

Obama-Hillary in 2012 would be so cool. Can you imagine the effect on gungasnake and H2O man? They'll be frothing at the mouth for months. Their poor little heads will explode, I can't wait to see it. Their blood pressure will go up so much they'll both have major heart attacks by September at the latest. Go, DNC, do it.

I wonder if Hillary would really accept the offer. She has lived in the White House and likely understands the real nature of the VP job. Moreover, the best she could hope for is a #2 role in the (usually difficult) second term of an embattled Administration with a Congress likely controlled by the opposition. Worse, Obama is starting to look like a loser. Invitations to jump onboard a sinking ship are often turned down.

I have a different take on Obama; his approval ratings have been going up lately, and I suspect the No Party shenanigans will show more upswing for Obama in the coming months.

I'm no Obama supporter by any stretch, but I'd still love to be in San Francisco on Nov. 6, 2012 to see georgeob's head explode when Obama is announced as the winner.

I generally don't make specific predictions for such uncertain events. Until a few weeks ago I expected and assumed Obama would win a second term, merely hoping for Republican control of the Senate. Now I have come to believe he will likely lose. The magic appears to have faded as the hopeful illusions attached to the bright, articulate public figure are supplemented and replaced by the reality of the cautious, tentative officeholder who only rarely comes down from the vacuous generalities and political maneuvering that appear to be his constant preoccupation. He did his first two years "leading from behind" as one of his spokesmen put it. Now he doesn't attempt to lead at all.

I think it will be downhill for him over the remaining 16 months. This, of course is only my opinion based on observation and intuition. I'm sure you and Cyclo can dredge up some polls that appear to contradict my perceptions. 4% shifts in poll results over a period of months are commonplace, and 4% is more than enough for a decisive change (in either direction).

Do come to San Francisco. We can both watch to see whose head explodes..