In case my comments don't make it past moderation on the Free Range Longmont blog site, I offer them here:
People didn't throw Bush out of office by electing Obama, he was on his way out anyway. They voted for Obama to prevent the despicable John McCain from taking office, though it's difficult to say how he could have been any more despicable than Obama has been, and at least he would have had some opposition from the left. Bush wasn't the worst president since Herbert Hoover, he was the worst president since Calvin Coolidge. Obama is the worst president since Herbert Hoover. It's irresponsible to say the Dems have been "played by the ever-growing fascistic and totalitarian elements in the Republican Party" – the great majority of Democratic office holders love a good fascism as much as Republicans, and that is what the rank and file needs to wake up to. And on the environment, it's one step forward, two steps back with Obama – he couldn't even wait for the dust to settle on the keystone triumph before he reversed himself (by saying the southern half is going forward, maybe he thought we'd only think he's half a jerk, but we'd need to be half as smart as we are to be hoodwinked by this ploy), apparently secure that he's the moneyed interests favored one, and that the rest of us don't have any choice and will just take it, and like it. There seems to be a news blackout on the fact that Obama actually has primary opposition – from awful candidates like Randall Terry to good ones like Darcy Richardson. Obama got just over 50% of the vote in Oklahoma. If it's such a foregone conclusion that Dubya 2.0 is going to be the candidate, why isn't this getting the coverage the Republican primary spats get in the MSM and National Propaganda Radio? http://www.uncoveredpolitics.com/2012/03/06/breaking-obama-denied-unanimous-renomination/
