The hypocrisy/inconsistency is dizzying, isn't it?

and the "bailout" is another catnip phrase for the teabaggers (though teabaggers unwittingly- or wittingly-support Republicans whose policies would make the need for another bailout more likely)

BTW I have a feeling that everybody is going to look back on the implementation of Obamacare in a few years and wonder what all the fuss was about.

Exactly

Republicans- clueless as ever- keep operating under the misguided belief that if they say things "just right" or they hold their press conferences with a few women in the background (or sometimes, like with Ayotte, let her actually speak at the podium) that that will blind women completely to their actual anti-women policies (or lack thereof).

Most people need somebody to show and tell them why they should vote for one party/one candidate or another. It's just not enough for people to hear "pretty words". People- to the extent they pay attention to politics- need to be feeling some positive benefits of government policies (or at least no negative effects) or the words they hear are simply meaningless. There are some people whom are fooled, of course, and will vote against their own best interests but they may find out that they were wrong next time they try to go get their birth control filled or are faced with a complicated pregnancy or become victims of rape or incest and find that they can't get an abortion because of the policies that the GOP pushes.

Another thing Republicans like to do is talk about how "upset" they are about how bad the economy is and tell women (and other groups) how this means that they should dump the Democrats and vote for them even though they have no viable plans or ideas for making things better. In fact, the policies they push (or their tendency to not do anything and grind all Congressional business to a halt) are all aimed at making things worse, not better.

That's basically the truth of it

That and they also don't want anything or anybody ruining their ability to undermine government whenever and however they can. As far as "vote-pandering" goes, I guess the idea that there are people- primarily in the Democratic Party- that actually care about people and want to help then is completely foreign to them? What kind of homes did they grow up in? I thought that Jesus was all about helping people and stuff?

Wonder what SCOTUS thought of Bush's "Free Speech Zones"?

Creating a "buffer zone" around places where violence has been proven to have occurred in the past seems to be a reasonable step towards ensuring a person's safety. If all abortion opponents ever did was engage in "civil discussion" with women attempting to exercise their right to make decisions about their reproductive lives and with providers attempting to provide them with it, then there probably wouldn't be the need for such measures but we know how out of hand the anti-abortion crowd can get. Additionally, we already have restrictions on polling booths and nobody has ever challenged them- and those restrictions have nothing to do with violence, of course.

Behind 1 or 2 pts and she's "toast"?

I don't buy that we are living in a "police state"

Can't deny that there are some really crazy things going on with some cops out there and we really need to take a long, hard look at police tactics and procedures and clean things up. However, if you're talking about average citizens living in a totalitarian sort of "police state", I disagree that we are there. There are abuses and overreaches and we need to scale back the breadth and scope of our surveillance state and some other disturbing trends but I fail to see the comparison between USA 2014 and Nazi Germany, the USSR, or even modern day China or North Korea. Last I checked, most of us are able to go about our daily business without worrying too much about being hauled off to jails for years on end without a trial, randomly executed, and/or being sent to "re-education" centers.

I agree

What happened to "Don't Sweat The Small Stuff"? This is the big problem that I have with guns and making them legal to carry EVERYWHERE- they can turn a stressful/annoying situation like this into a lethal one, which couldn't happen without being able to take guns everywhere one goes. This isn't to say that the guy who pulled the trigger doesn't have a screw loose or that his gun had a mind of its own but if he didn't have a gun with him, there wouldn't be any temptation to use it and the worst that might have happened is a scuffle, maybe a bloody nose but since the gun was there and he was upset and out of control..................*sigh*

These people are really good at spinning things around

to make themselves seem like "victims" It really just irritates me to no end how they do this- and people still take them seriously.

But he is always "leading from behind"!

whatever the hell that means.

However, whatever he is doing is certainly better and more effective than whatever the hell Bush/Cheney were doing. From what I understand, we actually had a good opportunity to improve our relationship with Iran post-9/11 as Iran reportedly gave us intel to use against AQ and the "moderates" there were gaining influence in their government but then Bush and his speechwriter decided to make them part of his so-called "Axis of Evil", which pretty much seemed to piss away any goodwill that was apparently fostered with them post-9/11. Plus, I'm sure us invading Iraq in 2003 pushed them even further towards the need/desire to obtain nuclear weapons since we showed the world not only that our "leaders" are willing to manufacture or distort "evidence" of possessing WMDs to invade another country (which, incidentally, happened to be its regional neighbor) but that we would NOT invade countries whom openly flaunted that they possess WMDs (i.e. North Korea).

Has anybody found an Obamacare "horror story"

That has actually turned out to be true yet?