Obamney 2012 - Barack Obama And Mitt Romney Are Essentially The Same Candidate

[EasyEJL]

no need to call names hahaha even though it is need at times. But yes, they are here illegally, they do not get treated like legals. The problem is the political correctness in this damn country. You cant even call illegal immigrants, illegal immigrants anymore.

they are "undocumented democrats"

Invalid Link Removed

 

[southpaw23]

so those that are illegal are subject to the same rights and privileges that citizens are?

please note, I am the son of an immigrant

No. Case in point and let's try using some "context" here which I know is sinful. Take for example, Jan Brewer's approach in Arizona, where she instructed law enforcement to stop people and ask for ID's, which would seem logical if you were ONLY stopping illegals, but that wasn't the case as US citizens were being asked to produce paperwork based on their racial makeup. Again, note, US CITIZENS, which is why that approach was strongly rebutted and ruled against by the courts. Context, US CITIZENS, not just illegals and therein lies the issue. These are complex issues and need to treated as such, the world we live in is quite different than when the founded fathers declared that everyone has the right to carry around a musket.

Now Easy is the same guy who rants about twitter accounts, hailed George Zimmerman as being a hero, posts youtube videos and infowars articles from a guy who writes blogs from his mother's basement, but when you mention the voter fraud that was "recorded" in Oregon, with a poll worker being arrested...SILENCE. His opinion is quite predictable as is the fact that he's found a home for it here.

 

[ax1]

And the landscape of this country is quite different, both culturally and politically. Evolve...or don't.

It's a pity that you're so uneducated you refuse to acknowledge simple truths, so rather, you opt to hitch your wagon to something written in the late 1700's. How's that working out for you? Again, evolve or don't, or rather get a passport see the rest of the world from your tiny little lens. I've read your posts here and on FB...yawn.

So in the 1700's they wanted personal freedom, free speech and freedom of press, personal privacy, right for unwarranted search and seizure right to fair trail in front of grand jury, a right to be free from soldiers being allowed to use your house/property at their own will, shared powers to protect us from dictator ship....

But move on to the 2000's and its a hip and trendy to indefinitely detain civilians without warrent or right to trial, its hip and trendy to bully press and free speech, its hip and trendy to violate the rights of american civilians, its hip and trendy to allow a single man to have the power to decide to attack other countries who pose no threat to us, its hip and trendy to allow military to control our lives and take our resources in a time of war and peace, TSA is hip and trendy, groping genitals is hip and trendy.....

Tyranny is Hip and Trendy, you go southpaw....freedom is so 1700's.

 

[southpaw23]

sensitivity for people who illegally crossed the border? sensitivity for people who have no right to be on US soil? **** them nasty dirty beaners.

And f*ck angry uneducated white guys who had limited choices in life. Note, I'm neither latin or black.

 

[southpaw23]

So in the 1700's they wanted personal freedom, free speech and freedom of press, personal privacy, right for unwarranted search and seizure right to fair trail in front of grand jury, a right to be free from soldiers being allowed to use your house/property at their own will, shared powers to protect us from dictator ship....

But move on to the 2000's and its a hip and trendy to indefinitely detain civilians without warrent or right to trial, its hip and trendy to bully press and free speech, its hip and trendy to violate the rights of american civilians, its hip and trendy to allow a single man attack other countries who pose no threat to us, its hip and trendy to allow military to control our lives and take our resources in a time of war and peace, TSA is hip and trendy, groping genitals is hip and trendy.....

Tyranny is Hip and Trendy, you go southpaw....freedom is so 1700's.

My freedoms aren't restricted, neither was my education. I'm a homeowner, no mortgage. Never asked for nor received a handout, neither has any of my friends, all of whom paid their way through top tier schools and are now working in their areas of expertise. None of my friends have been kidnapped in the middle of the night and dragged away to Siberia. But, yeah, I see your point.

Also, it's a broad assertion to state that most people who voted for Obama want handouts. I work with a client who runs and owns his own investment firm, makes over 250K a year, and guess who he voted for? I guess he needed more handouts...scratches head.

 

[ax1]

sensitivity for people who illegally crossed the border? sensitivity for people who have no right to be on US soil? **** them nasty dirty beaners.

I bet sensitivity diminishes real quick if you give these illegal's union pay and full health benefits. When they (the sensitive ones) are paying $8 for a single banana, sensitivity changes real, real quick in most people.

 

[Geoforce]

This has been a sad 24 hours. Back in 2004 I wanted George W. Bush out in the worst way, and was literally depressed at the time of his reelection. Guess what...in 2004 I was right.

This year, although I literally and truly disliked Romney I felt we were at a stage where Obama needed to go. (Come January, all of those of you who work will understand why.) The campaign that Obama ran was horribly dishonest (push grandma over a cliff, Romney and the women dying of cancer, etc...), and to top it off the media completely covered the Benghazi story so that it had no impact (thank you CBS and the 6 week lag time on the video). As of last night I knew pretty early it was going to be a long night. Once NC and Va were still hanging on, it was all but over. With that said, I hope that those of you who voted in the exact Legislature and Executive that we had previously are happy with the gridlock we had previously. Nothing will get done, and to make it worse Obamacare is here for good. Say hello to major financial concerns for the small businesses that Obama touts, and more major layoffs, never mind the tax hikes. There are times I am proud of this country, and now is not it.

I say all this as a libertarian, who has no tie to either party. It is truly a sad day when a good majority continually wants handouts rather than try to build the economy. We are growing at a measly 2%, and our yearly deficits are over $1 trillion. I just had a conversation with one of the Economics teachers that I work with and asked him to "prophesize" where our deficit will be in 4 years. His response at least $20 trillion if we are lucky.

Well done Obama voters.....truly well done

The problem (as is shown by the title of the thread) is the Republicans haven't provided a true different choice. The party had a real shot to move toward fiscal responsibility and loosen up socially. The Republican brand doesn't have a backbone to stand on when it comes to fiscal responsibility. This is the same brand that gave us actual money in the form of stimulus checks, passed Medicare part D, No Child Left Behind, War in Iraq etc. Romney a fiscal conservative? Since when, 2012 primary?! Are we supposed to ignore the rest of his history? Ignoring reform after our crony financial system almost melted down completely as an issue?

At the same time they are aligned with losing social issues-support for gay marriage is rising, support for legalization of marijuana rising. They are anti-science and at times appear to be anti-intelligence! (see Republicans try to ban critical thinking in Texas). These are positions where the country is moving AWAY from Republicans positions, not toward...and they aren't going back. I know some Republicans long for the 1950 type way of life, but that was over 60 years ago. I think it's safe to say we aren't returning.

I really thought the Republicans in 08 had a chance to move towards a more Libertarian slant. To loosen the tie on some social issues (which they were already losing) and to regain fiscal responsibility. Instead they doubled down on insanity (Michelle Bachmann anyone? Legitimate rape anyone? Rape a gift from God anyone?).

Now the Republican party again has a chance to reinvent itself and represent a true change. Will they step up to the plate? I have my doubts, but my hopes are strong. I don't see how they can't think their party is in jeopardy when they lose to an incumbent with the type of numbers Obama has. The old angry white guy coalition is dying off. They either need to reinvent or just get used to being out of power.

 

[southpaw23]

no need to call names hahaha even though it is need at times. But yes, they are here illegally, they do not get treated like legals. The problem is the political correctness in this damn country. You cant even call illegal immigrants, illegal immigrants anymore.

Don't ask him to stop. That's who is he at his core. He just happens to get a pass here. An uneducated guy, who hitches his wagon to simple arguments.

 

[ax1]

My freedoms aren't restricted, neither was my education. I'm a homeowner, no mortgage. Never asked for nor received a handout, neither has any of my friends, all of whom paid their way through top tier schools and are now working in their areas of expertise. None of my friends have been kidnapped in the middle of the night and dragged away to Siberia. But, yeah, I see your point.

Also, it's a broad assertion to state that most people who voted for Obama want handouts. I work with a client who runs and owns his own investment firm, makes over 250K a month, and guess who he voted for? I guess he needed more handouts...scratches head.

Your freedom is just an illusion. Your just property of the state.

 

[EasyEJL]

No. Case in point and let's try using some "context" here which I know is sinful. Take for example, Jan Brewer's approach in Arizona, where she instructed law enforcement to stop people and ask for ID's, which would seem logical if you were ONLY stopping illegals, but that wasn't the case as US citizens were being asked to produce paperwork based on their racial makeup. Again, note, US CITIZENS, which is why that approach was strongly rebutted and ruled against by the courts. Context, US CITIZENS, not just illegals and therein lies the issue. These are complex issues and need to treated as such, the world we live in is quite different than when the founded fathers declared that everyone has the right to carry around a musket.

Now Easy is the same guy who rants about twitter accounts, hailed George Zimmerman as being a hero, posts youtube videos and infowars articles from a guy who writes blogs from his mother's basement, but when you mention the voter fraud that was "recorded" in Oregon, with a poll worker being arrested...SILENCE. His opinion is quite predictable as is the fact that he's found a home for it here.

yawn, your lies are predictable. Law enforcement was not instructed to stop people and ask for ids. People who were ARRRESTED for other reasons could be asked to show id if the officer felt it was likely. And if a state doesn't issue drivers licenses to illegals, than showing a drivers licnense from that state would satisfy it. Note that the courts did not knock that part down, i'm not sure where you get that wacky info from. The courts ruled that there would be able to be further suits on that in the future if after it was enacted there was evidence that it was being used unfairly.

the rest of your lies are about as good, I don't post any youtubes or read infowards, and george zimmerman wasn't a hero just not a villian either until due process proves him so. The color of his skin vs the color of the other person's skin has nothing to do with innocence or guilt, but the media let by liberal douches similar to yourself tried to make it so.

So voter fraud was committed and someone was arrested? Thats exactly what should happen. I'm not exactly sure what in your warped up liberal mind I should be saying about that. Thats part of the point of ID laws as well, so that fraudulent votes don't happen, and that people who try to are arrested and charged with a crime.

 

[southpaw23]

yawn, your lies are predictable. Law enforcement was not instructed to stop people and ask for ids. People who were ARRRESTED for other reasons could be asked to show id if the officer felt it was likely. And if a state doesn't issue drivers licenses to illegals, than showing a drivers licnense from that state would satisfy it. Note that the courts did not knock that part down, i'm not sure where you get that wacky info from. The courts ruled that there would be able to be further suits on that in the future if after it was enacted there was evidence that it was being used unfairly.

the rest of your lies are about as good, I don't post any youtubes or read infowards, and george zimmerman wasn't a hero just not a villian either until due process proves him so. The color of his skin vs the color of the other person's skin has nothing to do with innocence or guilt, but the media let by liberal douches similar to yourself tried to make it so.

So voter fraud was committed and someone was arrested? Thats exactly what should happen. I'm not exactly sure what in your warped up liberal mind I should be saying about that. Thats part of the point of ID laws as well, so that fraudulent votes don't happen, and that people who try to are arrested and charged with a crime.

Oh, but you're concerned with Twitter accounts? I get it. When does the Instagram revolution begin? You should check out linkedin, you never know what they're up to over there. Pay special attention to the last paragraph.

[h=3]Hearings and rulings[/h] Hearings on three of the seven lawsuits were held on July 15 and 22, 2010, before U.S. District Judge Invalid Link Removed.[SUP]Invalid Link Removed[/SUP][SUP]Invalid Link Removed[/SUP][SUP]Invalid Link Removed[/SUP] Judge Bolton asked pointed questions of each side during both hearings, but gave no indication of how or when she would rule.[SUP]Invalid Link Removed[/SUP][SUP]Invalid Link Removed[/SUP][SUP]Invalid Link Removed[/SUP]
On July 28, 2010, Judge Bolton issued a ruling on the Justice Department suit, Invalid Link Removed, granting a Invalid Link Removed that blocked the most key and controversial portions of SB 1070 from going into effect.[SUP]Invalid Link Removed[/SUP][SUP]Invalid Link Removed[/SUP][SUP]Invalid Link Removed[/SUP] These included requiring police to check the immigration status of those arrested or stopped, which the judge ruled would overwhelm the federal government handling of immigration cases, and could mean that legal immigrants would be wrongly arrested.[SUP]Invalid Link Removed[/SUP] Judge Bolton wrote that "Federal resources will be taxed and diverted from federal enforcement priorities as a result of the increase in requests for immigration status determination that will flow from Arizona."[SUP]Invalid Link Removed[/SUP] Her ruling was not a final decision, but rather was based on the belief that the Justice Department was likely, but not certain, to win a full later trial in federal court on these aspects.[SUP]Invalid Link Removed[/SUP] Judge Bolton made no rulings in the other six lawsuits.[SUP]Invalid Link Removed[/SUP] Governor Brewer said that the injunction would be appealed,[SUP]Invalid Link Removed[/SUP] and on July 29 this was done in the Invalid Link Removed in Invalid Link Removed.[SUP]Invalid Link Removed[/SUP][SUP]Invalid Link Removed[/SUP] State Senator Pearce predicted that the legal battle would eventually end up in the Supreme Court and likely be upheld by a 5–4 margin.[SUP]Invalid Link Removed[/SUP][SUP]Invalid Link Removed[/SUP]
Judge Bolton's ruling let a number of other aspects of the law take effect on July 29, including the ability to prevent state officials from maintaining "Invalid Link Removed" policies and allowing civil suits against those policies, the mandating that state officials work with federal officials on matters related to illegal immigration, and the prohibition against stopping a vehicle in traffic to pick up day laborers.[SUP]Invalid Link Removed[/SUP][SUP]Invalid Link Removed[/SUP] These parts of the law were not challenged by the Justice Department, but were in some of the other suits.[SUP]Invalid Link Removed[/SUP]
A three-judge panel from the Ninth Circuit heard arguments in the appeal case on November 1, 2010, and gave indications that it might reinstate but weaken parts of the law.[SUP]Invalid Link Removed[/SUP]
In February 2011, Arizona filed a countersuit against the federal government in the United States v. Arizona case, accusing it of failing to secure the Mexican border against large numbers of illegal immigrants.[SUP]Invalid Link Removed[/SUP] Arizona Attorney General Invalid Link Removed acknowledged that precedent surrounding Invalid Link Removed made the state's case difficult, but said, "We're asking the 9th Circuit to take a second look."[SUP]Invalid Link Removed[/SUP]
On April 11, 2011, the Ninth Circuit panel upheld the district court's ban on parts of the law taking effect, thus ruling in favor of the Obama administration and against Arizona. Judge Invalid Link Removed gave the majority opinion, in which Judge Invalid Link Removed joined; Judge Invalid Link Removed dissented in part.[SUP]Invalid Link Removed[/SUP][SUP]Invalid Link Removed[/SUP] Paez agreed with the administration's view that the state had intruded upon federal prerogatives. Noonan wrote in his concurrence: "The Arizona statute before us has become a symbol. For those sympathetic to immigrants to the United States, it is a challenge and a chilling foretaste of what other states might attempt."[SUP]Invalid Link Removed[/SUP] On May 9, 2011, Governor Brewer announced that Arizona would appeal directly to the U.S. Supreme Court rather than request a hearing Invalid Link Removed before the Ninth Circuit;[SUP]Invalid Link Removed[/SUP] that appeal was filed on August 10, 2011.[SUP]Invalid Link Removed[/SUP] In response, the Justice Department requested that the Supreme Court stay out of the case, saying that the lower courts actions were appropriate.[SUP]Invalid Link Removed[/SUP] Observers thought it likely that the Supreme Court would take up the matter,[SUP]Invalid Link Removed[/SUP] but if it declined to step in, the case most likely would be returned to the trial judge in the District Court to review the case on its merits and determine whether the temporary injunction that blocked the law's most controversial provisions should become permanent.[SUP]Invalid Link Removed[/SUP] The Supreme Court announced in December 2011 that it granted a petition for writ of certiorari, and oral arguments took place on April 25, 2012.
Bolton's court continues to oversee the other lawsuits;[SUP]Invalid Link Removed[/SUP] by early 2012 three of the seven were still active.[SUP]Invalid Link Removed[/SUP] On February 29, 2012, Bolton ruled in favor of an action led by the Mexican American Legal Defense and Educational Fund and blocked provisions of the law that allowed for the arrest of day workers who block traffic in an effort to gain employment.[SUP]Invalid Link Removed[/SUP]
[h=3]U.S. Supreme Court ruling[/h] On June 25, 2012, the U.S. Supreme Court issued a ruling in the case Invalid Link Removed. The court determined by a 5–3 majority, with Justice Invalid Link Removed writing the opinion, that Sections 3, 5(C), and 6 of SB 1070 are preempted by federal law.[SUP]Invalid Link Removed[/SUP][SUP]Invalid Link Removed[/SUP][SUP]Invalid Link Removed[/SUP] These sections make it a state misdemeanor for an immigrant not to be carrying documentation of lawful presence in the country, allow state police to arrest without a warrant in some situations, and make it unlawful under state law for an individual to apply for employment without federal work authorization.[SUP]Invalid Link Removed[/SUP][SUP]Invalid Link Removed[/SUP][SUP]Invalid Link Removed[/SUP] All justices agreed to uphold the portion of the law allowing Arizona state police to investigate the immigration status of an individual stopped, detained, or arrested if there is reasonable suspicion that individual is in the country illegally.[SUP]Invalid Link Removed[/SUP]
Justice Scalia dissented and said that he would have upheld the entire law.[SUP]Invalid Link Removed[/SUP] Justice Thomas likewise stated that he would have upheld the entire law as not preempted by federal law.[SUP]Invalid Link Removed[/SUP] Justice Alito agreed with Justices Scalia and Thomas regarding Sections 5(C) and 6, but joined with the majority in finding Section 3 preempted.[SUP]Invalid Link Removed[/SUP]
This decision is likely to affect other states that have enacted similar laws modeled after S.B. 1070 which require the use of Invalid Link Removed by state employers and contractors. The Court’s recent decisions did not overturn or change these state E-verify requirements. Multi-state employers appear to need to continue the task of navigating the patchwork of various state E-verify requirements.[SUP]Invalid Link Removed[/SUP]
[h=3]U.S. District Judge ruling[/h] On September 5, 2012, U.S. District Judge Invalid Link Removed cleared the way for police to carry out the 2010 law's requirement that officers, while enforcing other laws, may question the immigration status of those they suspect are in the country illegally. This part of the law has been called the "show me your papers" provision.[SUP]Invalid Link Removed[/SUP]

 

[ax1]

Oh, but you're concerned with Twitter accounts? I get it. When does the Instagram revolution begin? You should check out linkedin, you never know what they're up to over there. Pay special attention to the last paragraph.

Whats wrong with the last paragraph?

 

[southpaw23]

Whats wrong with the last paragraph?

Because when you pull over a US Citizen of hispanic descent, for something like a broken tail light in order to use that as an EXCUSE to ask for papers, it's open to widespread abuses and broad interpretation. Now before you claim that's my opinion, take a look at the quotes attributed to some of their local law enforcement, many of whom have gone on record and stated that they believe it to be a dangerous practice. Again, not my words....THEIRS. Wouldn't they be considered experts in their own field?

 

[ax1]

Because when pull over a US Citizen of hispanic descent, for something like a broken tail light in order to use that as an EXCUSE to ask for papers, it's open to widespread abuses and broad interpretation. Now before you claim that's my opinion, take a look at the quotes attributed to some of their local law enforcement, many of whom have gone on record and stated that they believe it to be a dangerous practice. Again, not my words....THEIRS. Wouldn't they be considered experts in their own field?

I see what you are saying. That can be touchy since those who stay legal get offended. I think it should be just you need a license to drive, and you need to be legal citizen to obtain a license and that should take care of it if someone gets pulled over.

 

[ax1]

Now the Republican party again has a chance to reinvent itself and represent a true change. Will they step up to the plate? I have my doubts, but my hopes are strong. I don't see how they can't think their party is in jeopardy when they lose to an incumbent with the type of numbers Obama has. The old angry white guy coalition is dying off. They either need to reinvent or just get used to being out of power.

As long as someone steps up to the plate within a party, their #1 allegiance will always be the party and not the people. They you have to look at who finances the party (and I know you know this) and thats why you never get any change between dems and repubs.

I dont want to see any party reinvent itself, I want abolishment of the idea of "party" as they ultimately become thugs and people vote with blind faith.

 

[AE14]

My freedoms aren't restricted, neither was my education. I'm a homeowner, no mortgage. Never asked for nor received a handout, neither has any of my friends, all of whom paid their way through top tier schools and are now working in their areas of expertise. None of my friends have been kidnapped in the middle of the night and dragged away to Siberia. But, yeah, I see your point.

Also, it's a broad assertion to state that most people who voted for Obama want handouts. I work with a client who runs and owns his own investment firm, makes over 250K a year, and guess who he voted for? I guess he needed more handouts...scratches head.

lets talk percentages. Do you think that your client is that vast majority of Obama supporters? Or is it the millions on entitlements? Just curious

Also, the Obama campaign was brilliant in their manipulation of women. The right never made roe v. wade an issue (outside of Akin/Murdock who are a$$es). Yet, women by the droves voted (as the obama ad stated) like their lady parts depended on it.

 

[Geoforce]

As long as someone steps up to the plate within a party, their #1 allegiance will always be the party and not the people. They you have to look at who finances the party (and I know you know this) and thats why you never get any change between dems and repubs.

I dont want to see any party reinvent itself, I want abolishment of the idea of "party" as they ultimately become thugs and people vote with blind faith.

This would be even better agreed.

 

[southpaw23]

lets talk percentages. Do you think that your client is that vast majority of Obama supporters? Or is it the millions on entitlements? Just curious

Also, the Obama campaign was brilliant in their manipulation of women. The right never made roe v. wade an issue (outside of Akin/Murdock who are a$$es). Yet, women by the droves voted (as the obama ad stated) like their lady parts depended on it.

Let's take a look at the actual facts, not conjecture. The guy who ran as a moderate in Massachusetts, was on record as saying that he wouldn't tamper with Roe V Wade, having stated this as governor. Now fast forward to the presidential candidate, who once again went on record and stated that he NOW opposes Roe V Wade and would like to see it repealed, in ADDITION to stating that he wanted to defund planned parenthood. Why did he pivot all of a sudden from his earlier stance? It's obvious that he was trying to appeal to the extreme wing of the party. When you've gone on record as saying that you believe a woman's reproductive choices should be legislated, i.e. overturning Roe V. Wade and defunding planned parenthood, ideology aside, it turns out women listen. Imagine that.

The demographics that broke for Obama, were women in big numbers, a huge disparity among latin voters, and college educated white males. Romney received the older white voters and blue collar workers. That party has marginalized its own base. It's no longer a party of moderates and has been that way for years. They'll turn on Colin Powell, when he's no longer useful to them. Now they're blaming Christie for comical reasons.

 

[AE14]

Let's take a look at the actual facts, not conjecture. The guy who ran as a moderate in Massachusetts, was on record as saying that he wouldn't tamper with Roe V Wade, having stated this as governor. Now fast forward to the presidential candidate, who once again went on record and stated that he NOW opposes Roe V Wade and would like to see it repealed, in ADDITION to stating that he wanted to defund planned parenthood. Why did he pivot all of a sudden from his earlier stance? It's obvious, that he was trying to appeal to the extreme wing of the party. When you've gone on record as saying that you believe a woman's reproductive choices should be legislated, i.e. overturning Roe V. Wade and defunding planned parenthood, ideology aside, it turns out women listen. Imagine that.

The demographics that broke for Obama, were women in big numbers, a huge disparity among latin voters, and college educated white males. Romney received the older white voters and blue collar workers. That party has marginalized its own base. It's no longer a party of moderates and has been that way for year. They'll turn on Colin Powell, when he's no longer useful to them. Now they're blaming Christie for comical reasons.

no disrespect SP, but this did not answer anything that I commented on. I agree that Romney changed frequently, but so has obama. Take a look at candidate Obama's stance on gay marriage.....then look what happened after crazy uncle Joe rolled the gay marriage bus over him.

They both lied, however, Obama did it better, did it to women and they bought it hook line and sinker.

 

[southpaw23]

no disrespect SP, but this did not answer anything that I commented on. I agree that Romney changed frequently, but so has obama. Take a look at candidate Obama's stance on gay marriage.....then look what happened after crazy uncle Joe rolled the gay marriage bus over him.

They both lied, however, Obama did it better, did it to women and they bought it hook line and sinker.

Here's how I judge the two. Yes, all politicians lie, that much is clear. The question is, can someone come to evolve on a given issue, or are they lying. In contrast with Romney, let's say Obama lied. Although, I believe he evolved on the subject of gay marriage. That aside. Romney, took various positions on EVERY single issue, EVERY ONE. Not one...ALL OF THEM.

As governor he signed into a law a ban on assault weapons. As a presidential candidate he said that he wouldn't do that, doesn't take a genius to figure out why he changed his position. On healthcare, he went to Israel and once again went on the record and stated that he believed Israel to have one, if not the best model for healthcare in the world AKA socialized medicine. He then adopted some of that into what eventually became the Massachusetts healthcare program. But the presidential candidate, NOW disavows his own son. He lost Ohio because he bet it all on lying about Jeep shipping jobs overseas, which forced the GM to come out and release a statement saying that it was a flat out lie. His economic plan? A 5 point PowerPoint presentation devoid of credible math. In the debates, he said it's not a 5 trillion dollar tax cut. Break out the calculators, a broad 20% tax cuts equates to 5 to 8 trillion dollars. Now how do you drive revenue at the same time? Well, you obviously have to make substantial cuts to programs. Question becomes...which ones? Education? Medicare? He wouldn't say. Now you're still not driving enough revenue to offset the debt, so let's talk about deductions. Once again which ones? He wouldn't say. The mortgage deduction for example? He wouldn't say. Now when you look at the math, it doesn't nearly come close to making a dent in the deficit. Your plan MUST include both, making cuts over a prolonged period of time, while generating revenue (raising taxes on those making over 250k). You may not like that plan, but it's a plan. Romney's plan? NO DETAILS OFFERED ON ANYTHING.

 

[Clemenza]

no disrespect SP, but this did not answer anything that I commented on. I agree that Romney changed frequently, but so has obama. Take a look at candidate Obama's stance on gay marriage.....then look what happened after crazy uncle Joe rolled the gay marriage bus over him.

They both lied, however, Obama did it better, did it to women and they bought it hook line and sinker.

Obama actually changes his accent depending on the audience he's speaking to. It's actually mind boggling how people do not see through this.

Substance has gone out the window.

 

[southpaw23]

Lol. Twitter accounts, youtube videos, Alex Jones and now "accents." But the word "substance" is tossed about. You couldn't make this stuff up.

 

[ax1]

Lol. Twitter accounts, youtube videos, Alex Jones and now "accents." But the word "substance" is tossed about. You couldn't make this stuff up.

Whats funny is that every news source you probably watch, every journalist you listen too uses youtube in some way or another.

 

[southpaw23]

He also is really good at manipulating his audience into make them think what he wants them to think. How he uses his words, even though he lies through his teeth.

He's David Copperfield and Paranormal Activity 14 mixed together with Palpatine.

 

[southpaw23]

Whats funny is that every news source you probably watch, every journalist you listen too uses youtube in some way or another.

What's funnier is you actually THINK YOU KNOW WHAT I WATCH. Which I can guarantee you, is NONE of your obvious guesses.

 

[Clemenza]

Lol. Twitter accounts, youtube videos, Alex Jones and now "accents." You couldn't make this stuff up.

You're obviously an apparatchik for the democratic party, or just a member of the Obama Youth... So any truth said that paints Obama in a negative light you will dismiss or call a lie. You should try getting a job with msnbc or the associated press.

I on the other hand am an independent minded conservative. Animal rights nut who is also a member of the NRA... Environmentalist and conservationist who believes in drilling for oil and drives an SUV. Fiscal conservative who believes a nation should take care of the handicapped and those who physically cannot take care of themselves . I also believe in free enterprise with common sense regulating. A God fearing Christian who believes in freedom of religion and not freedom from religion. So as you can see Im very independant and can think for myself without being hypocritical in my beliefs or falling in line lock stop and barrel with the views of the republican party.

Romney as a politician is not my favorite choice. But as a man, he is someone that traditional America, including myself, would strive to be like and look up to. A very decent man, with a great family, religious without pushing his beliefs on others, missionary and bishop for his church, moral, immensely successful, and has achieved in his life more than most of us combined.

Besides winning a presidential election, what has Barack Obama achieved in his life?

The man sat in a church and befriended a pastor who hates America, hates whites and Jews. Those are his actions not as a politician, but as a man. This is okay with you?

 

[AE14]

Here's how I judge the two. Yes, all politicians lie, that much is clear. The question is, can someone come to evolve on a given issue, or are they lying. In contrast with Romney, let's say Obama lied. Although, I believe he evolved on the subject of gay marriage. That aside. Romney, took various positions on EVERY single issue, EVERY ONE. Not one...ALL OF THEM.

As governor he signed into a law a ban on assault weapons. As a presidential candidate he said that he wouldn't do that, doesn't take a genius to figure out why he changed his position. On healthcare, he went to Israel and once again went on the record and stated that he believed Israel to have one, if not the best model for healthcare in the world AKA socialized medicine. He then adopted some of that into what eventually became the Massachusetts healthcare program. But the presidential candidate, NOW disavows his own son. He lost Ohio because he bet it all on lying about Jeep shipping jobs overseas, which forced the GM to come out and release a statement saying that it was a flat out lie. His economic plan? A 5 point PowerPoint presentation devoid of credible math. In the debates, he said it's not a 5 trillion dollar tax cut. Break out the calculators, a broad 20% tax cuts equates to 5 to 8 trillion dollars. Now how do you drive revenue at the same time? Well, you obviously have to make substantial cuts to programs. Question becomes...which ones? Education? Medicare? He wouldn't say. Now you're still not driving enough revenue to offset the debt, so let's talk about deductions. Once again which ones? He wouldn't say. The mortgage deduction for example? He wouldn't say. Now when you look at the math, it doesn't nearly come close to making a dent in the deficit. Your plan MUST include both, making cuts over a prolonged period of time, while generating revenue (raising taxes on those making over 250k). You may not like that plan, but it's a plan. Romney's plan? NO DETAILS OFFERED ON ANYTHING.

Again... With you on Romney. However, you very conveniently neglect toe took Obama outside of just evolving. Have you ever seen the Obama speeches that deal directly with his racist background? How about his 2008 candidate promises about unemployment and the deficit. We're those lies of evolution?

Fact is, Obama won with a dirtier campaign. Regardless of who won.....we all lost last night. Now after all the billions have be spent on campaigns in all races we are exactly where we were 2 days ago. Pure gridlock... Well done America.

 

[ax1]

What's funnier is you actually THINK YOU KNOW WHAT I WATCH. Which I can guarantee you, is NONE of your obvious guesses.

Yes, your 'well educated" people, most of them go on youtube to either give or seek information.

 

[southpaw23]

You're obviously an apparatchik for the democratic party, or just a member of the Obama Youth... So any truth said that paints Obama in a negative light you will dismiss or call a lie. You should try getting a job with msnbc or the associated press.

I on the other hand am an independent minded conservative. Animal rights nut who is also a member of the NRA... Environmentalist and conservationist who believes in drilling for oil and drives an SUV. Fiscal conservative who believes a nation should take care of the handicapped and those who physically cannot take care of themselves . I also believe in free enterprise with common sense regulating. A God fearing Christian who believes in freedom of religion and not freedom from religion. So as you can see Im very independant and can think for myself without being hypocritical in my beliefs or falling in line lock stop and barrel with the views of the republican party.

Romney as a politician is not my favorite choice. But as a man, he is someone that traditional America, including myself, would strive to be like and look up to. A very decent man, with a great family, religious without pushing his beliefs on others, missionary and bishop for his church, moral, immensely successful, and has achieved in his life more than most of us combined.

Besides winning a presidential election, what has Barack Obama achieved in his life?

The man sat in a church and befriended a pastor who hates America, hates whites and Jews. Those are his actions not as a politician, but as a man. This is okay with you?

Mitt Romney is successful, no doubt. He was also born successful. Reminds me of the saying, born on third base, thinks he hit a triple. As far as success is concerned, it's quite subject, despite your blanket opinions to the contraryt. I'd say earning an education, multiple degrees, paying off a mortgage and working in the career of your "choice," all this in your late 20's is the definition of successful. But what do I know.

In terms of what Obama has achieved? I don't know, he's been first in a lot of areas in his life, from President of the Harvard Law Review to becoming the first minority president. I'd say that's a pretty hefty achievement. I'd say writing a book, making millions off of it and paying off your school loans (without help mind you) is the definition of success. I don't care who his pastor is. I have friends who are attorneys that think some conservative blue collar workers are morons. Do I agree? Eh...whatever.

 

[EasyEJL]

Because when you pull over a US Citizen of hispanic descent, for something like a broken tail light in order to use that as an EXCUSE to ask for papers, it's open to widespread abuses and broad interpretation. Now before you claim that's my opinion, take a look at the quotes attributed to some of their local law enforcement, many of whom have gone on record and stated that they believe it to be a dangerous practice. Again, not my words....THEIRS. Wouldn't they be considered experts in their own field?

All I see is that again, you are a moron, and as I said, the show me your papers part was upheld, unlike what your "educated intelligent" ****tard mouth put out.

 

[ax1]

In terms of what Obama has achieved? I don't know, he's been first in a lot of areas in his life, from President of the Harvard Law Review to becoming the first minority president. I'd say that's a pretty hefty achievement. I'd say writing a book, making millions off of it and paying off your school loans (without help mind you) is the definition of success. I don't care who his pastor is. I have friends who are attorneys that think some conservative blue collar workers are morons. Do I agree? Eh...whatever.

How did he get into Harvard? And why did he sign an excecutive order sealing all his records, all his past from the public? Id love to see what his grades were.

Being a Harvard Graduate of constitutional law doesnt impress me when all his policies have ripped our human values and rights as citizens and have murdered tens of thousands in other countries such as Lybia. Obama is a serial killer.

Being a Harvard Graduate at least he knows that he broke his oath of office and should be impeached and tried for violating the constitution, human rights and war crimes.

 

[southpaw23]

Again... With you on Romney. However, you very conveniently neglect toe took Obama outside of just evolving. Have you ever seen the Obama speeches that deal directly with his racist background? How about his 2008 candidate promises about unemployment and the deficit. We're those lies of evolution?

Fact is, Obama won with a dirtier campaign. Regardless of who won.....we all lost last night. Now after all the billions have be spent on campaigns in all races we are exactly where we were 2 days ago. Pure gridlock... Well done America.

Racist? :/ Please. I don't feel like I've lost anything. You may feel that way, that's your right. I'm okay and so is my family, as are my friends, and none of us require handouts. We're all doing okay. If you want to speak about gridlock, then talk about John Boehner and the boys holding the budget hostage by drawing a line in the sand on tax cuts, the same Bush tax cuts that did NADA.

 

[EasyEJL]

He lost Ohio because he bet it all on lying about Jeep shipping jobs overseas, which forced the GM to come out and release a statement saying that it was a flat out lie.

yes, the GM who owes his job to Obama, and the continuation of to Obama staying in office. No conflict of interest there. Its funny Fiat has said they have been considering moving Jeep production, and they have majority ownership, regardless of what the GM wants.

His economic plan? A 5 point PowerPoint presentation devoid of credible math. In the debates, he said it's not a 5 trillion dollar tax cut. Break out the calculators, a broad 20% tax cuts equates to 5 to 8 trillion dollars. Now how do you drive revenue at the same time? Well, you obviously have to make substantial cuts to programs. Question becomes...which ones? Education? Medicare? He wouldn't say. Now you're still not driving enough revenue to offset the debt, so let's talk about deductions. Once again which ones? He wouldn't say. The mortgage deduction for example? He wouldn't say. Now when you look at the math, it doesn't nearly come close to making a dent in the deficit. Your plan MUST include both, making cuts over a prolonged period of time, while generating revenue (raising taxes on those making over 250k). You may not like that plan, but it's a plan. Romney's plan? NO DETAILS OFFERED ON ANYTHING.

Obama's economic plan? none whatsoever. At best "we'll keep doing the same failed policies that have generated no growth or change in real unemployment since I took office.

And Romney was really clear and direct as to why there were no details, although an idiot like you probably didn't understand the concepts. He expected to craft a bill working with congress and bipartisan support. Unlike Obama who acts as a dictator, Romney knows he can't give a huge detailed list of specifics to a divided congress and say "pass this" with any chance of it happening. If he starts with "here is the goal, and these are the ways i'd like the democrat leadership and republican leadership to work together to reach them" he can get a bill with broad support. And gasp, if it means he could only cut rates by 10% so what? he was setting the goal. Obama promised cutting the deficit in half I think by his second year, I can't recall. Instead its higher now. But sure, it was brilliant to vote for him again.

 

[ax1]

Racist? :/ Please. I don't feel like I lost anything. You may feel that way, that's your right. I'm okay and so is my family, as are my friends, and none of us require handouts. We're all doing okay. If you want to speak about gridlock, then talk about John Boehner and the boys holding the budget hostage by drawing a line in the sand on tax cuts, the same Bush tax cuts that did NADA.

Obama has caused the death of more black people than the KKK. He claims he went to Lybia due to "humanitarian action" and after Gaddafi went down and the same rebels he supported started rounding up Blacks across the country and slaughtering them he did and said nothing.

Whats worse than a racist is a murderer, which is what Obama is.

 

[southpaw23]

All I see is that again, you are a moron, and as I said, the show me your papers part was upheld, unlike what your "educated intelligent" ****tard mouth put out.

Says the guy who referred to a group of people as f*cking beaners in his prior statement? Lol.

Look, people like you here on this forum, that's awesome. You're viewed with respect on an online forum because you lift things up and you manage to put them down. That's astonishing. I get it. But you're clearly not the most articulate guy in the world, but again, HERE in this world, you get a pass for obvious reasons. Like I've said, your antiquated views are just that...antiquated. You should stick to supplement reviews because your depth of knowledge with respect to policy positions, ranks up there with Pedro from NDynamite.

 

[AE14]

Racist? :/ Please. I don't feel like I lost anything. You may feel that way, that's your right. I'm okay and so is my family, as are my friends, and none of us require handouts. We're all doing okay. If you want to speak about gridlock, then talk about John Boehner and the boys holding the budget hostage by drawing a line in the sand on tax cuts, the same Bush tax cuts that did NADA.

The budget hostage? Hmmmm how man democrats signed on for obamas budget? Lol

We all feel fine now.... See you when you get your first check in January.

 

[AE14]

yes, the GM who owes his job to Obama, and the continuation of to Obama staying in office. No conflict of interest there. Its funny Fiat has said they have been considering moving Jeep production, and they have majority ownership, regardless of what the GM wants.

Obama's economic plan? none whatsoever. At best "we'll keep doing the same failed policies that have generated no growth or change in real unemployment since I took office.

And Romney was really clear and direct as to why there were no details, although an idiot like you probably didn't understand the concepts. He expected to craft a bill working with congress and bipartisan support. Unlike Obama who acts as a dictator, Romney knows he can't give a huge detailed list of specifics to a divided congress and say "pass this" with any chance of it happening. If he starts with "here is the goal, and these are the ways i'd like the democrat leadership and republican leadership to work together to reach them" he can get a bill with broad support. And gasp, if it means he could only cut rates by 10% so what? he was setting the goal. Obama promised cutting the deficit in half I think by his second year, I can't recall. Instead its higher now. But sure, it was brilliant to vote for him again.

E you have it all wrong on the deficit. Obama just evolved his opinion.

 

[southpaw23]

yes, the GM who owes his job to Obama, and the continuation of to Obama staying in office. No conflict of interest there. Its funny Fiat has said they have been considering moving Jeep production, and they have majority ownership, regardless of what the GM wants.




Obama's economic plan? none whatsoever. At best "we'll keep doing the same failed policies that have generated no growth or change in real unemployment since I took office.

And Romney was really clear and direct as to why there were no details, although an idiot like you probably didn't understand the concepts. He expected to craft a bill working with congress and bipartisan support. Unlike Obama who acts as a dictator, Romney knows he can't give a huge detailed list of specifics to a divided congress and say "pass this" with any chance of it happening. If he starts with "here is the goal, and these are the ways i'd like the democrat leadership and republican leadership to work together to reach them" he can get a bill with broad support. And gasp, if it means he could only cut rates by 10% so what? he was setting the goal. Obama promised cutting the deficit in half I think by his second year, I can't recall. Instead its higher now. But sure, it was brilliant to vote for him again.

Oh, please explain to me the concepts Romney had in place and how they'd work? As for Ohio, that's your blanket explanation for EVERYTHING...CONSPIRACY. I'd love to hear your explanations on just why you think his policies would have benefited the economy, in between your soliloquies. Let's see how skilled you are when you're not reviewing fatburners.

 

[Clemenza]

Mitt Romney is successful, no doubt. He was also born successful. Reminds me of the saying, born on third base, thinks he hit a triple. As far as success is concerned, it's quite subject, despite your blanket opinions to the contraryt. I'd say earning an education, multiple degrees, paying off a mortgage and working in the career of your "choice," all this in your late 20's is the definition of successful. But what do I know.

In terms of what Obama has achieved? I don't know, he's been first in a lot of areas in his life, from President of the Harvard Law Review to becoming the first minority president. I'd say that's a pretty hefty achievement. I'd say writing a book, making millions off of it and paying off your school loans (without help mind you) is the definition of success. I don't care who his pastor is. I have friends who are attorneys that think some conservative blue collar workers are morons. Do I agree? Eh...whatever.

The fact that you and the voters did not care who his pastor is and that Obama sat there listening to the decisive hate, is pretty scary. When the distinction between right and wrong can no longer be seen, then all is lost. One big gray area. Anything goes. Obama sat in an anti American church and goes on to become president of that same America, and you find nothing wrong with this... Lol


I said achievements other than becoming president. We all know he was handpicked by the ones who pull the strings in order to be the puppet. This is not much of an achievement.

You say graduating from Harvard is his biggest achievement? How many college graduates are out there right now can't get a job and can't or won't start a business. College graduates are a dime a dozen. Show me the ones who have a job or started a business. Did Obama ever even have a real job in the private sector?

Write a book? Every politician and his mother have written books. Big deal.

And please show me proof that Romneys fortune was handed down to him. My job is not to defend Romney. Im giving you the facts... He worked for bain, then started his own business, bain capital and made his fortune. Yes I know we should hate him for being so greedy, but have you ever tried to start and business? Not easy, and to be successful doing so... Yes a huge achievement. One of the toughest actually.

 

[ax1]

But you're clearly not the most articulate guy in the world, but again, HERE in this world, you get a pass for obvious reasons. Like I've said, your antiquated views are just that...antiquated. You should stick to supplement reviews because your depth of knowledge with respect to policy positions, ranks up there with Pedro from NDynamite.

You gotta be kidding me man, dont go there trying to validate yourself by pulling these kinds of personality attacks especially with Easy. He puts forth time and clear detail in his responses and is extremely articulate.

 

[southpaw23]

The budget hostage? Hmmmm how man democrats signed on for obamas budget? Lol

We all feel fine now.... See you when you get your first check in January.

You make the grandest assumptions. My industry has been profitable for years, salaries have grown, hiring is up, and quarterly and year end bonuses are still in place, without cuts.

 

[southpaw23]

You gotta be kidding me man, dont go there trying to validate yourself by pulling these kinds of personality attacks especially with Easy. He puts forth time and clear detail in his responses and is extremely articulate.

Please he attacks me, BUT he gets a pass from you? You both operate in the same spaceship. Why don't you offer him the same advice tin-foil? Why don't you call him to task for referring to Mexicans as f*cking beaners? Let me guess your integrity stops at his nuts? I know where I am, this is a conservative/libertarian circle jerk. I'm still here, my points are being made.I don't mind the criticism.

 

[ax1]

The fact that you and the voters did not care who his pastor is and that Obama sat there listening to the decisive hate, is pretty scary. When the distinction between right and wrong can no longer be seen, then all is lost. One big gray area. Anything goes. Obama sat in an anti American church and goes on to become president of that same America, and you find nothing wrong with this... Lol

Ive been judged by my surroundings in the past, I can totally understand this and this is particularly important when one can effect the lives of billions across the globe.

 

[ax1]

You make the grandest assumptions. My industry has been profitable for years, salaries have grown, hiring is up, and quarterly and year end bonuses are still in place, without cuts.

Is your money worth as much as it was 4 years ago? You notice the increase in prices at the store?

Obama is doing nothing to address the private Federal Reserve issue. As a matter of fact 4 years ago he announced he want to give the Fed R more powers.

Now the Federal Reserve is pulling an infinite bailout for an undetermined amount of time. Basically every second of every day they are printing money out of thin air and every second of every day our money is devalued.

 

[southpaw23]

Is your money worth as much as it was 4 years ago? You notice the increase in prices at the store?

Obama is doing nothing to address the private Federal Reserve issue. As a matter of fact 4 years ago he announced he want to give the Fed R more powers.

Now the Federal Reserve is pulling an infinite bailout for an undetermined amount of time. Basically every second of every day they are printing money out of thin air and every second of every day our money is devalued.

For a guy who says he stands for integrity, why don't you address what I wrote up above? Let's see how that integrity door swings, then I'll come back and address the points you've brought up as noted above.

 

[ax1]

100% agree. Don't worry america will see what he will do now that he good his second term.

Now that he is not facing re-election things are really going to be fun and radical. The 1st thing he is pushing 1 day after the election is that carbon tax today which is going to effect all of us.

 

[ax1]

For a guy who says he stands for integrity, why don't you address what I wrote up above? Let's see how that integrity door swings, then I'll come back and address the points you've brought up as noted above.

Im just a tinfoil hat, youtube watching twitter following conspiracy theorist, whats the point, lol

 

[southpaw23]

Im just a tinfoil hat, youtube watching twitter following conspiracy theorist, whats the point, lol

Ah I see, so you can take me to task, which to me is reasonable, but Easy refers to Mexicans as "f*cking beaners" and you're quite okay with that. I get it. And yet, you want to talk about who went to what church, if they are racist, twitter accounts... blah, blah, blah. But referring to an entire group as f*cking beaners, that's cool with you. I guess that credibility door only swings one way eh tin-foil?

 

[ax1]

Now that he is not facing re-election things are really going to be fun and radical. The 1st thing he is pushing 1 day after the election is that carbon tax today which is going to effect all of us.

Found my source...basically Obama want to cut the deficit by adding a new tax called the Carbon Tax. They are using the politicization of Hurricane Sandy to push it though (although cabon=climate change is very debatable, Obama has his fists hammered on the idea) but regardless this will not cut emmision on the globe even if this carbon hoax was true. Cap and trade is a ponzi scheme, which Obama claims that the scheme has been demonized.

We will all be affected by this, life will incrementily continue to get harder while his bankster and corporate buddies rape the serfs.

A tax starting at $20 a metric ton of carbon dioxide equivalent and rising at about 6 percent a year could raise $154 billion by 2021, Nick Robins, an analyst at the bank in London, said today in an e-mailed research note, citing Congressional Research Service estimates. “Applied to the Congressional Budget Office’s 2012 baseline, this would halve the fiscal deficit by 2022,” Robins said.

Invalid Link Removed

 

[southpaw23]

Found my source...basically Obama want to cut the deficit by adding a new tax called the Carbon Tax. They are using the politicization of Hurricane Sandy to push it though (although cabon=climate change is very debatable, Obama has his fists hammered on the idea) but regardless this will not cut emmision on the globe even if this carbon hoax was true. Cap and trade is a ponzi scheme, which Obama claims that the scheme has been demonized.

We will all be affected by this, life will incrementily continue to get harder while his bankster and corporate buddies rape the serfs.

A tax starting at $20 a metric ton of carbon dioxide equivalent and rising at about 6 percent a year could raise $154 billion by 2021, Nick Robins, an analyst at the bank in London, said today in an e-mailed research note, citing Congressional Research Service estimates. “Applied to the Congressional Budget Office’s 2012 baseline, this would halve the fiscal deficit by 2022,” Robins said.

Invalid Link Removed

A lot of scientists seems to agree as well, it also earned him the endorsement from Bloomberg. But I see your refusal to address my earlier points. Thought you had more courage than that Tin-Foil.