Obama Appointees Face Extensive Vetting

Washington Post: An Army Of Lawyers Are Examining Potential Picks With Unprecedented Scrutiny

(Washingtonpost.com)  This story was written by Philip Rucker.

---

There was a time when smoking marijuana during college threatened your hopes of landing a top presidential appointment. Then came the nanny questions: Are your domestic workers legal? Did you pay their employment taxes?

Now, as President-elect Barack Obama assembles his administration, an army of lawyers volunteering on his transition team are vetting his potential picks with unprecedented scrutiny of their personal, financial and professional backgrounds.

Embarrassing e-mails, text messages, diary entries and Facebook profiles? Gifts worth more than $50, other than those from relatives and long-standing friends? Family members with connections to Fannie Mae, Freddie Mac, AIG or any other company receiving a federal bailout?

Obama is conducting the vetting process much the way he managed his campaign: methodically, thoroughly and on a prodigious scale. He did not wait until he won the election to vet his favored picks. Soon after he clinched the Democratic nomination, lawyers quietly prepared dossiers of about 150 contenders for senior positions -- often without the candidates themselves knowing -- said a senior Obama transition adviser who spoke on the condition of anonymity.

"You start with public sources: You go on Google, Nexis and other public record databases," the adviser said.

Now Obama is asking contenders to complete a far-reaching questionnaire and furnish detailed personal and financial records dating back a decade.

"Now you're going to the next level and really trying to understand if there are any potential issues in nominating and confirming this person for the job," the adviser said. "The real purpose of vetting is to understand the person's ability to perform the job and be confirmed for the position. We also want to avoid surprises."

The vetting process extends beyond a 63-item questionnaire Obama is requiring of top candidates. For the roughly 800 executive posts that require Senate confirmation, nominees must undergo an FBI background check and file records with the Office of Government Ethics.

For the president-elect, vetting candidates and selecting nominees is his first test of leadership, said Dina Habib Powell, a former director of presidential personnel in the Bush White House.

"The decisions that [Obama] makes in appointing individuals to serve in these critical roles will have an impact on his entire presidency," Powell said.

Obama's scrutiny is so intense that some top candidates hired personal attorneys in the spring and summer to "pre-vet" them in advance of submitting information to Obama's team. The lawyers scoured tax returns for any errors or details that could jeopardize their chances, said a Washington lawyer who is involved in Obama's vetting process and played a similar role for President Bill Clinton's transition.

"Sometimes they will have us go through their tax return and say, 'I did X, Y and Z, my accountant recommended it, but do you think that was kosher? Do you think that would raise red flags?' " said the lawyer, who has pre-vetted some clients and agreed to describe the process only if he and his clients would not be identified.

"It has become a nightmare," E. Pendleton James, who managed personnel for President Ronald Reagan's transition, said of the questionnaire. "I don't know how anybody with some self-esteem can subject themselves to all of these questionnaires. . . . Every candidate who fills out the form is deathly afraid of making a mistake. If he or she does make an innocent mistake, that can be used as a political weapon in the confirmation process to question your integrity."

Inquiries into candidates' backgrounds grow deeper as each administration's scandals add new thresholds. In the 1980s, a history of marijuana use killed some nominations. During the past decade, scandals about domestic workers clouded transitions. Clinton's nominee for attorney general, Zoe Baird, withdrew from consideration when it became public that she and her husband had hired a Peruvian couple living in the country illegally as a babysitter and chauffeur. Eight years later, Bush's nominee for secretary of labor, Linda Chavez, withdrew after she was found to have provided haven to an illegal immigrant from Guatemala.

Obama's questionnaire has four questions about domestic workers.

"If you looked at the questionnaires that they used back in 1976 and 1980, they would be very tiny compared to this questionnaire," said Michael S. Berman, a lawyer and lobbyist who worked on the Jimmy Carter and Bill Clinton transitions. "Over time, in each transition, whether Democratic or Republican, some new issue will arise, some question that hasn't been asked before that causes consternation, so you simply add that in."

Personal information obtained through the vetting process does not automatically disqualify a candidate from a political appointment, but the transition team uses the information to judge a person's fitness for the office and likelihood of being confirmed.

The questionnaire does not directly ask about drug use -- which Obama himself admitted to in his 1995 memoir -- but it includes a question seeking any information that would be "a possible source of embarrassment."

Some officials who vetted nominees for previous administrations said Obama's standards are so onerous he risks turning away the best candidates.

"It takes major talent to do this work," said a senior Pentagon official who has worked on transitions for four Republican presidents. "With two wars going on and several major acquisition programs, they need the best people they can find in the Untied States today, and you've got to be careful not to be so stringent that you eliminate those people. If you get too difficult, people will say, 'No, thank you.' "

For vetters, there is a mantra: "Vetters never think that no one else will find something out," the Obama adviser said. "We know that if we found it, someone else will find it."

Tom C. Korologos, a D.C. lobbyist and former ambassador to Belgium, has vetted and prepared more than 300 nominees for confirmation hearings, beginning during President Richard M. Nixon's transition. He begins each session by asking the candidate a simple question:

"What is there in your background that you have done that's going to come up in the hearing and embarrass the president and embarrass you? I'm not telling you to tell me what it is. What I'm telling you is to get the answer in your head, because it's going to come up."

When Korologos vetted Nelson Rockefeller before his selection as President Gerald R. Ford's vice president, Rockefeller was reluctant to make his financial history public.

"'I've got something to worry about,'" Korologos recalled Rockefeller telling him.

"His concern was that when it became public, he wasn't going to be as rich as everybody thought he was," Korologos said. "He was going to be embarrassed among his peers that he didn't have all the billions people thought."

To prepare Donald H. Rumsfeld for his confirmation hearing to become defense secretary, Korologos held a "murder board."

"I'd ask the rottenest questions in the world," Korologos said. "My goal was to have him at the end say, 'You [expletive], you were much harder on me than the committee was.'"

[olivia4441]

have no doubts that you, as well as all your authors, are anxious to see changes promised by our beloved comrade, the Next President to be implemented. So I decided to suggest the following ditty to your and your readers attention as a brief summary of incoming events.

Promise of Change

Life will be better,
Economy will be stronger,
Our necks will be thinner,
But miraculously will grow longer.

It is a very adequate translation of a ditty popular in Russia in Stalin''s time (before WWII). Many people got 10 years in prison camps just for quietly singing it to family or friends (stooges were around quite often).

That is the material for another prophesy after January 20th.

With best wishes,

Vetting? Hasn''t anyone vetted Obama?

[olivia4441]

Of all the reasons why America voted the way it did on November 4, one factor stands out: young people and first-time voters turned out and voted overwhelmingly for Barack Obama.

MSNBC''s exit polling, which is consistent with other exit polling, showed that voters aged 18-29, who made up nearly one in five voters -- or about 25 million ballots -- went for Obama by more than two to one: 66 to 32 percent. Those voters alone well exceeded Obama''s overall popular vote advantage, which was roughly eight million. Likewise, 11 percent of voters were first-time voters, and they went for Obama at an even higher rate: 69 to 30 percent. Single (unmarried) voters, which constituted one in three voters, went for Obama 65 to 33 percent.


And, you ask them who Reid or Pelosi, and who runs Congress =and they don''t know..SAD.

[olivia4441]

Barack Obama''s communist connections didn''t matter in this election, and how the Ivory Tower paved the road to victory. (economically and politically) that couldn''t be worse.


Finally, I should add that I''ve received emails in the last couple of weeks from distraught conservative parents saddened to learn that their college-student children voted for Obama. They shouldn''t be surprised; sadly, these parents have unwittingly paid for precisely this. In the vast majority of the nation''s colleges, this is what their children are learning at a cost of the parents'' lifetime savings. I''m reminded of the statement from the late atheist philosopher Richard Rorty, who said that the job of professors like him was "to arrange things so that students who enter as bigoted, homophobic religious fundamentalists will leave college with views more like our own" and "escape the grip of their frightening, vicious, dangerous parents."


This has been the personal mission of many professors for decades now -- in flagrant violation of the scandalously fraudulent mission statements of the colleges where they teach. They''ve been enormously successful. The left''s gradual takeover of academia is complete -- the Long March a stunning success. Behold: the presidency of the United States of America.


The fruits of the left''s dogged work were on display on November 4, 2008. And now, alas, to paraphrase the Reverend Jeremiah Wright, America''s chickens have come home to roost.

[olivia4441]

The real Barack Obama is still unknown, supposedly. One take is that he is a smart guy who will move toward the center and govern moderately and competently. Another take is that he is the most radical person to ever hold the position of President who will take the US on a hard left course into a socialist state lacking any resemblance to the country our founders gave us.


I also have a third scenario, and it is my scariest one: he will do the latter, but make it appear like the former. That is, he will be take the US on a hard left course, but in such a way so as to not scare the Christopher Buckleys and soccer moms of the world too much, too soon.

Taxes, spending, regulation. Taxes will be increased, especially on people who pay them. Social Security taxes will be applied to all income levels. The Death Tax will be restored in full, and then some. We might get totally new taxes, such as a national sales tax, a value added tax, or a wealth tax. Spending will go up, perhaps dramatically, on everything but Defense. New regulations will be imposed on everything from investment banking and hedge funds to work rules and insurance mandates.

[olivia4441]

Spending increases will be under the guise of getting us out of economic trouble. And how much worse could he look than the Republicans who passed a $150 billion stimulus (when Obama at the time was proposing only $120 billion) and an $850 billion bailout supported by both Bush and McCain? We are already talking in increments of trillions.


The details of spending (i.e., funding the left), regulation and judicial appointments will all be beneath the radar. No one but insiders, wonks and pundits pay attention to such things. A smart administration (and one run by Rahm Emanuel is smart) can get away with almost anything here. Leftist organizations like ACORN, Planned Parenthood and legal aid societies don''t need the amounts of money that earn the notice of Joe Six-Pack. Regulations that apply only to corporations are usually just too hard to follow, and who cares about corporations anyway? Almost anything goes, regulation-wise. Law schools have been pumping out so many leftists that there will be plenty to choose from, all well-credentialed, ABA approved and with no smoking-gun scary rulings in their past.


President Obama will not have to appoint Bill Ayers to be Education Secretary to get a Bill Ayer''s agenda. The National Education Association, for example, is full of Bill Ayers, but ones with no histories of setting bombs or admitting to being communists. We''ll get the communist agenda, but without the fireworks.

[olivia4441]

We must oppose appeasement of dictators, including anything being done that could strengthen the Castro regime in its final stage of power. We must advocate a strong foreign policy to protect the homeland from terror, something that the current President has accomplished with far greater success than has any other. We must push for a robust economy, an objective best achieved by providing targeted economic incentives for job creation, or as they''re commonly referred to: "tax cuts." They''re what led us away from recession in 2001 as well as what ushered in the Reagan boom.


We must oppose anyone who tries to stand in the way of what''s best for the nation and argue against those who oppose methods that have been tested and proven time and time again. But we must not make caricatures of our opponents when engaging in serious discussion, for to do so is only to make caricatures of ourselves.


The struggle ahead is serious and conservative values, when properly articulated, always win the day. Let us engage in the national discussion with an approach that is respectful and loyal. Most of all, let us do so effectively. The future of the nation is at stake.

[marcodele]

I don''t know why Obama is making such a big deal out of his appointees. Bush just called his frat buddies and his Daddy and it was all set.

[cariboubarbi]

Olivia4441


Your cutting and pasting skills are fantastic!

Congratulations!

[credibility2]

Isn''t this a tad bit hypocritical and disingenuous for this to be happening while the same never occurred while he was running and should have?

[thickredhair]

thank god mccain didn''t think that he needed to do that w/ his vp choice, lol

[hotpaulie]

It appears Obama has learned some lessons from the buddy-buddy system of the Bush administration.

[scb111_11]

I hope Bill or Hillary don''t own a GUN. That''s it, no more consideration for her as Secretary of State?

[jamshied]

OBAMA TRANSITION TEAM IS DOING THE RIGHT THING AND FOR GOOD REASONS; NUMBER ONE, THEY NEED TO FIND QUQLIFIED PEOPLE. SECOND, THEY DO NOT WANT TO GET INTO CONTRAVERSY OVER EVEN SMALL THINGS. THESE MATTERS COULD BE DISTRACTING. INSTEAD OF BEING ABLE TO CONCENTRATE ON DOING WHAT NEEDS TO BE DONE, THEY WILL LOSE ENERGY AND TIME TRYING TO DEFEND THEIR CHOICES. NOW THAT THEY HAVE PLENTY OF TIME TO VETT, THEY ARE DOING THE CLEAN UP MATTERS. THEY HAVE ALMOST 9 WEEKS TO DO THIS AND PROBABLY , THE ARE WORKING NAROUND THE CLOCK. WAY TO GO.

[qutlaw104]

What kind of back ground check did Obama have to go through. They must be giving security clearances away these days or Obama wouldn''t get one.

[melissapat]

Olivia4441

You are one crazy nut job. You sound like Ann Coulter blasting out right winged, crazy non-sense.

The American people have spoken. Obama is president. If you are this appalled with America and how they voted you must hate America and you are the Un-American in this conversation. Maybe you should leave this great country of ours since you hate it so much.

[olivia4441]

melissapat : The only crazy nut jobs are folks like you - who are accepting of all the BS rheteric and are easily brainwashed, such is your way of life. When the hammer comes down hard on your soft head no one will really will give a sh--, and you know what, that''s a good thing, why? Your ignorance is not bliss it is stupidity! LOL.

[olivia4441]

Just becase you voted the Black man in doesn''t make it right.

[scb111_11]

For the first time in my adult lifetime I am ashame of my President-Elect.

[krescera]

Remember Alberto Gonzales and the wicked ways he used to weed out Democratic guys?The AG has been demonized and hounded out of office by the same guys who are now vetting candidates in "unprecedent"manner.

[antoniof123]

I just have one thing to say Mr. President Elect Obama:

GOOD FOR YOU KEEP UP THE GOOD WORK!

[antoniof123]

Olivia4441:

The American people have spoken and they elected Obama for a change that was needed.

If you do not like it then you will have to leave because those of us who elected Obama were in the majority in fact check out the electorial college to see by how much he did it by.

Have a nice day and stop calling people names.

[melissapat]

Olivia4441

Brainwashed? From your obvious pasted posts of some other humans words, you are the one who reads something and then believes. That is brainwashing. You need to go to a facists country where leaders tell you what to do and think since you cannot think on your own..and you are Un-American.

Democrtas are free thinkers unlike you who need to be told what to think in order to think. However, what you think is complete non-sense.

[dburfears]

Alberto Gonzales? He was a perfect example of why you do vetting. So was FEMA "heckuva job Brownie", and the rest of the incompetents who bush put into power just because they were his buddies. The DOJ will take YEARS to fix after Gonzales. FEMA left Americans wondering how an incompetent fool could select another incompetent fool to run America''s disaster agency.

[dburfears]

Let the hate and fear parrots go on. Don''t dissuade them. Encourage them! They are the best argument for the end of the GOP as it has become. The purveyors of hate, racism, lies, and slander repulse the vast majority of fair minded and thinking Americans. These parrots do nothing but illustrate that the GOP has become morally and intellectually bankrupt.

So do not try to reason with them or slap them down. It is not possible to reason with hate and willful misinformation. It is not possible to silence idiocy. Let them spew their hate and ignorance for all to see. 95% of Americans see them for what they are- the backwater dead-enders that populate the Rush Limbaugh audience and believe everything Sean Hannity and Fox News pour into their empty heads.

The more they write and talk the more they look like fools. So encourage them to continue proving what blind followers of a failed GOP really stand for: Hate and ignorance. In the end, all their frothing at the mouth will accomplish is a "New GOP" that will regularly win Arkansas, Mississippi, Alabama, West Virginia, Kentucky, Tennessee, South Carolina, Utah, Idaho, Alaska, and Oklahoma. Wow. Impressive.

[melissapat]

You are correct oldguy4truth.

Olivia4441 obviously reads Coulter and listens to Hannity, O''reilt, and pill popper Limbaugh all in one day then posts everything.

Olivia4441 is an Un-American, facist, nut case. They need to go away if they hate the Obama and the people who voted for him which is the vast majority of Pro-Americans. They obviously hate America.

[oldguy4truth]

Let the hate and fear parrots go on. Don''''t dissuade them. Encourage them! They are the best argument for the end of the GOP as it has become. The purveyors of hate, racism, lies, and slander repulse the vast majority of fair minded and thinking Americans. These parrots do nothing but illustrate that the GOP has become morally and intellectually bankrupt.

Agreed. Excuse my previous anger, It is a "hot button" issue for me when people questions one''s patriatism.

[nwihoosier]

Peace and Love
Can''t you people play nice?
Peace and Love

[kazoodan]

I have no doubt that you, as well as all your friends, are anxious to see changes promised by our beloved comrade, the Next President to be implemented. So I decided to suggest the following ditty to your and your readers attention as a brief summary of incoming events.

Promise of Change

Life will be better,
Economy will be stronger,
Our necks will be thinner,
But miraculously will grow longer.

It is a very adequate translation of a ditty popular in Russia in Stalin''''s time (before WWII). Many people got 10 years in prison camps just for quietly singing it to family or friends (stooges were around quite often).

That is the material for another prophesy after January 20th.

With best wishes,

Vetting? Has anyone really vetted Obama??

Posted by Olivia4441 at 09:53 AM : Nov 18, 2008

You forgot to attribute this to Dr. Leon Iofin.

Are you a plagiarist?

[kazoodan]

The real Barack Obama is still unknown, supposedly. One take is that he is a smart guy who will move toward the center and govern moderately and competently. Another take is that he is the most radical person to ever hold the position of President who will take the US on a hard left course into a socialist state lacking any resemblance to the country our founders gave us.


I also have a third scenario, and it is my scariest one: he will do the latter, but make it appear like the former. That is, he will be take the US on a hard left course, but in such a way so as to not scare the Christopher Buckleys and soccer moms of the world too much, too soon.

Taxes, spending, regulation. Taxes will be increased, especially on people who pay them. Social Security taxes will be applied to all income levels. The Death Tax will be restored in full, and then some. We might get totally new taxes, such as a national sales tax, a value added tax, or a wealth tax. Spending will go up, perhaps dramatically, on everything but Defense. New regulations will be imposed on everything from investment banking and hedge funds to work rules and insurance mandates.


Posted by Olivia4441 at 10:01 AM : Nov 18, 2008

Attributed to Randall Hoven

Gee, Olivia, not an original thought to be had by you, huh?

[pfness]

I just think it is appalling that 53% of Americans voted for Obama an 46% of Americans voted for McCain and then there are people saying that "AMERICA" voted for Obama...no, just 53% of about 300 million.
Here in Indiana the whole election map showed red on election night EXCEPT East Chicago area and the Indianapolis area. What really happened was that the huge cities hijacked the electoral votes from rest of Indiana. Huge masses of people in large cities got swooned into idealist oratory at big rallies, the rest of us did not.
America''s 53% voted to have a black president for historical purposes. I think they should have waited for a candidate with better credentials. Just like they voted for President Bush to have a deal like what the Adam''s had...a father and son being presidents. Now how well did THAT work out for us? To do things like this just to get a historical event in the record books is a poor showing of the intelligence of Americans. JFK would be turning over in his grave to see what the Democrat party has become and what it is leading America into.

[wango2007-2009]

This vetting won''t do any good as all the political toadies Obama is hiring all have skeletons in their closets.

After all, Obama in his book admitted doing grass and cocaine... that makes Obama a major hypocrite.

[old300d]

This is a good thing ! Some of those Obama lovers creep me out !

No doubt they are a sorted group ! ! !

[cheteunice]

He will do vetting as effectively as he did with Rev. Wright all those years?

[oldguy4truth]

Loyalty to the messiah can never be a question.

Hail Rush.

[flreason]

Unfortunately, the vetting is a necessary evil dictate by the character assassination tactics that neocons use against anyone who opposes them. The unintended consequence of this is that you will tend to get candidates who are conformists, rather than people who challenge societal norms. Thomas Jefferson would never have survived this vetting process. Neither would Madison, or Paine, or Franklin.

Having the best and brightest doesn''t equate with the most virtuous. Even William Buckley smoked marijuana, although he took his yacht beyond the 12-mile U.S. nautical border to do it. Americans need to stop expecting their politicians to be saints. Saints tend to be intolerant, obsessive, and unbending. Those are qualities that start wars and undermine diplomacy. I''d rather have an intelligent and pragmatic sinner than a sanctimonious saint who firmly believes that his is the only way, and that anyone who disagrees is in league with the devil. We''ve seen all to well the consequences of that mind-set.

[bonncaruso]

pfness wrote: "Here in Indiana the whole election map showed red on election night EXCEPT East Chicago area and the Indianapolis area. What really happened was that the huge cities hijacked the electoral votes from rest of Indiana."

Nonsense. Obama won more votes than McCain in IN. Those people in those large cities have every much as right to vote as those in the outlying rural counties. That''s called democracy, and if you can''t live with it, then move to a banana republic!

And a 53% win is more of a mandate than Reagan had in 1980, almost identical to Bush 41s mandate in 1988, and better than either of Clinton''s or Bush 43''s wins.

[paidgopshill]

A true maverick can effectively vet someone with a casual conversation in the ten items or less line of the local supermarket!

[wango2007-2009]

I just think it is appalling that 53% of Americans voted for Obama an 46% of Americans voted for McCain and then there are people saying that "AMERICA" voted for Obama...no, just 53% of about 300 million.

Posted by pfness

--------------

You are right, excpet 300 million is the total population of the US. Only 125 million actually voted.

Of that 125 million, 59 million voted for McCain... that means 47% of America thinks Obama is the wrong person to be president.

There is no reason to back president-elect Obama. Nothing has changed, and he is still not experienced or qualified to be president.

Obama is the Jimmy Carter of the 21st Century. We will suffer through one miserable term (while he will continue to blame Bush for EVERYTHING) and then Obama will be out.

[bonncaruso]

Wango (how fitting) 2007 wrote: "There is no reason to back president-elect Obama. Nothing has changed, and he is still not experienced or qualified to be president.

Obama is the Jimmy Carter of the 21st Century. We will suffer through one miserable term (while he will continue to blame Bush for EVERYTHING) and then Obama will be out."

Sure, there is reason to support him. He won, McCain lost, by more than 8 million votes. So, get over it. This is the meaning of democracy, no matter how hard the neo-cons tried to dismantle it.

And I am sure that Obama will be re-elected in a landslide much larger than this one.

Your very behaviour is the reason why the GOP got a pasting in 2008 and will get pasted again in 2012.

[wango2007-2009]

Unfortunately, the vetting is a necessary evil dictate by the character assassination tactics that neocons use against anyone who opposes them.

Posted by flreason

--------------

This is EXACTLY how totalitarian governments get their start. They always say, "It is a neccessary evil that we violate your privacy and take away your rights to protect you."

Obama''s vetting process is not needed. It is, however, an indication of how Obama intends to intrude into the privacy of all of us.

Obama IS the new neocon. What we are seeing with the vetting of his staff is just the beginning and it will spread.

Obama''s intentions are already far worse than Bush''s actions.

[flreason]

Posted by pfness:

In a democracy, or more correctly a democratic republic, elections are decided by the popular vote...not be geographic area. The reality is that metropolitan areas have larger populations. They will also tend to have more minorities, well-educated, professional, and high-income voters. Those are the groups that are likely to support more liberal candidates. Many of those people may have left small communities themselves, but have found more opportunities and diversity in metropolitan areas.

I think it''s the height of hubris to presume to know how anyone who lived in a different time would think. My personal opinion is that JFK was intelligent enough to change with the times and that he would have seen this as a positive result of the evolution of thought moving us past our slavery legacy. However, I wouldn''t presume to speak for him.

[mugaluv]

I''m so glad you Republican sore losers have a crystal ball. If you look at it close, it will tell you what big losers and cry babies you are. Grow up and shut up.

[eclecticman1]

Firereason says it the best:

Americans need to stop expecting their politicians to be saints. Saints tend to be intolerant, obsessive, and unbending. Those are qualities that start wars and undermine diplomacy. I''''d rather have an intelligent and pragmatic sinner than a sanctimonious saint who firmly believes that his is the only way, and that anyone who disagrees is in league with the devil. We''''ve seen all to well the consequences of that mind-set.
-----------------
We call it ideology and for the past eight years we have seen it destroy this country. Obama is a pragmitist and as such he understands how the GOP is waiting to bring down his government rather than working with it to save the country.

[midwestkris]

Actually, while I didn''t like him and didn''t vote for him, I did support Bush after the 2000 electins. After all, he won..

I supported him through 911, and even thought his initial reaction in NY and his vow to go after bin Ladin and the Taliban was appropriate. I supported that military effort.

Bush LOST my support by invading Iraq, an unprovoked first strike, on faulty intel, without an exit strategy, and committed trillions of dollars to that effort at the expense of the US economy.

Obama has yet to prove himself. He has, however, proved he is worthy to take a chance on and that he has the support of the majority of the American people.

[cheteunice]

I would think that the Messiah could do vetting quite easily--even divinely!

[cheteunice]

wango2007, Obama''s side painted everyone who opposed Obama as racist regardless of why they opposed him.

[paidgopshill]

Obama is not the Messiah. We WILL continue to attack Obama as viciously as they attacked Bush.

Posted by wango2007

We lost because we weren''t conservative enough. We need to move even further to the right to help convince America that we are the mainstream. Soon, America will recognize that we as a country need more free trade, deregulation and nation building endeavors to help spread freedom and Democracy!

[wango2007-2009]

Posted by pfness:

In a democracy, or more correctly a democratic republic, elections are decided by the popular vote...not be geographic area.

----------

Not true at all. Presidential elections in the US are decided by the Electoral College, not the popular vote. It is possible to win the popular vote and not win the office if the Electoral College goes against you.

This is why "swing states" are so important. They have large numbers of Electoral College votes, so even if there is only a 1 popular vote difference between candidates, all the Electoral College votes go to the candidate who got the 1 vote edge.

Elections are not won or lost by popular vote, and that makes voting and democracy a sham in America. 538 people who compose the Electoral College decide who will be elected, not voters.

There have been 3 times in history that the Electoral College cancelled out the populat vote and the will of the people... 1876, 1888 and 2000.

[centristdem]

To those claiming here that Obama somehow isn''t "really" president because he won "only" 53%: Quite apart from the fact that you are rejecting the basis of democracy (majority rule)... did you not consider Bush "really" president when he LOST the popular vote outright in 2000? And when he won a second term by a significantly smaller margin than Obama has just won? Or, more likely, do you simply not think at all if it interferes with your hate rants?

[wdrussell1]

paidGOP your post is sarcasm, but you don''t know how close it is to what is being said.
They think America actually wants the Spanish Inquisition.