Re: Go vote tomorrow
posted at 11/6/2012 2:08 PM EST
In response to Neal Page's comment:
In response to PatsEng's comment:
In response to Neal Page's comment:
Yeah, filibustering Congress per John Bohener's own words, which intelligent people didn't need anyway. I knew it from day 1. I am an American first and political party guy way down near the bottom of my list. It's not about the party/shouldn't be.
Plain as day. Stall in Congress, block any kind of progress, all for political reasons on the backs of Americans out of work.
I am assuming you think Romney didn't call your or me (the people who don't make more than 250K in this country) "entitled" too? He did. It's documented proof. That should be more than enough for anyone who doesn't make 250K+ to not vote for him. He got caught.
As for Obama, other foreign policy successes include letting NATO handle Libya, ridding the world of Gadahfi, etc. Fact is, his tactics and being pragmatic in those decisions have worked. You not giving credit where credit is due is weak and reeks of party loyalty.
Also, Iraq's economy is progressing and their lives are better which has more do with the war in Iraq's success (even if way over budget) than Obama, but still, he's been in charge of monitoring that as Commander In Chief. Another success to talk about.
Obama is channeling Harry Truman in this area as for as a Democrat in office who didn't take crap, but also strategically dealt with the crap effectively behind the scenes.
It's been better than I expected. Yes. Give credit where the credit is due or it looks like you're a brainwashed Tea Partier.
We're a long way from the days of the Bill Weld Republicans, so if you really enjoy being a part of a party that is funded mostly by crooks who could less about you and your future , using 30 year old rhetoric hoping you buy into it in 2012, and being led by bible thumpers with IQs of 6, then congratulations, because that is what controls the Republican Party right now.
Why do you think Gary Johnson, who was a Republican, became a Liberatarian? It wasn't JUST to run for president. It's because he can't associate himself with morons anymore.
The fact is any president needs to show leadership and that's what Obama does do, so give credit where credit is due. He doesn't care about polls. That's a good leader.
Rusty I'm an independant and don't care who's with what party but really did you make some of these statements? Obama locked out part of the Congress during the health care bill and told people not to read it and just sign it, they could read it after. That's not being a leader one bit. A leader pulls the sides together not tries to force them to be separate to his whim.
Romney also never said that you were entitled if you made under $250k he said 47% (which oddly enough is the amount of people not paying taxes). So no if you pay taxes he did not say that you were entitled. At least you coudl present the facts properly if you want to appear to remain unbiased.
BTW Obama is closer to Carter then Truman. Just spend more and let the tires spin to get no where. We are worse off then we were 4 years ago with more debt. He is anything but Truman
Carter couldn't make a decision. Not even remotely close, dude.
Romney said 47% of the population is "entitled" did he not? Why would ANYONE running for president call any part of the population "entitled" when trying to earn votes?
Yes, I question the logic and decision making of that particular candidate. Yes. Are you seriously trying to spin Romney's intent with the 47% line? Really?
I didn't spin anything you made a false claim and I corrected it. He said 47% referring to the 47% who don't pay taxes. You claimed anyone not making $250k which is closer to 90% of the country. Past that I couldn't care less if it was Romney or Obama but both have lied repeatedly in this campaign, such as Obama's claim of positive job growth of 5mil. Well that's not actually true since he needed 8mil jobs just to keep up with population growth to remain stagnant. Since he created less jobs then population growth then he had negative job growth during his presidency.
Additionally, Obama said that you couldn't change the way things were done from the inside. Frankly I'd rather have a person believing half the country is freeloading then a president who doesn't think they could change anything and just wants to collect a pay check.
Face it both sides made gafts and I didn't vote for either but don't claim unbiased then post false information towards the one you're supporting.
Oh btw you want to talk about not making a decision, did Obama ever set a budget once? That's one of the most basic things you could do is set a budget and he didn't purpose 1 during his presidency, just made claims that no matter what he'd purpose the Republicans would shoot it down. I don't care if they did or didn't but at least make a decision and purpose one