or Connect
AppleInsider › Forums › Other Discussion › AppleOutsider › PoliticalOutsider › The Case for Obama's Reelection
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

The Case for Obama's Reelection - Page 2

post #41 of 66
Quote:
Originally Posted by SDW2001 View Post

 

MJ stated it better than I.  A choice will be made regardless.  If you choose not to vote, that's certainly your right.  I certainly don't think it accomplishes anything other than making one possibly feel good about himself.  

 

Millions of people will make a choice that affects billions, given the current size and scope of our the government. I assure you, I do not make these kinds of decision to feel good about myself.

 

 

Quote:

Are we just talking about the Federal Government, or are we talking about ALL government?  As MJ points out, other than trying to change the system from within, there aren't many good options.

 

When I talk about government, I'm usually referring to government in general.

 

Some people believe there are really only 2 options: "give me liberty or give me death".

Malo periculosam, libertatem quam quietam servitutem.

(I prefer the tumult of liberty to the quiet of servitude.)

Reply

Malo periculosam, libertatem quam quietam servitutem.

(I prefer the tumult of liberty to the quiet of servitude.)

Reply
post #42 of 66
Quote:
Originally Posted by jazzguru View Post

I agree - we should seek to understand what our options are and consider each of them thoughtfully. But we're dealing with subjective terms like "better" and "good". These mean different things to each individual. From my perspective, any perceived benefit of a Romney presidency over an Obama presidency is so insignificant, so trivial, that the option is undesirable to me.

 

Also agreed. And each individual must determine whether continually voting for the "lesser of two evils" is an effective way to "move the needle". From my perspective, it isn't. At least it hasn't been in my brief lifetime.

 

Fair enough. And, as I said, you may well be right.

 

 

Quote:
Originally Posted by jazzguru View Post

I take "within" - in the context of voting - to mean voting for leaders and hoping they will wield the massive amount of power the government has acquired for "good", or relinquish that power back to the people. It takes a very strong, principled, and yes "good" person to withstand the temptation to use that power for personal gain. Frankly, I don't think I completely trust any mortal man with that responsibility - not even Ron Paul, not even myself.

 

I agree actually. Lord Acton once said that "power corrupts and absolute power corrupts absolutely". I think the evidence of history bears this out to be mostly, if not entirely true.

 

All that said, what other options are we left with? I listed a couple. I don't advocate the first. The second is probably best. But it is long row to hoe. We need to bear that in mind.

 

 

Quote:
Originally Posted by jazzguru View Post

So...where does that leave me? Asking a lot of questions and continuing to seek knowledge. :-)

 

But what can you do you help others see things as you do in order to change society to a place where more people respect liberty, property and people's basic, natural God-given rights?

The state is nothing more than a criminal gang writ large.

Reply

The state is nothing more than a criminal gang writ large.

Reply
post #43 of 66
Quote:
Originally Posted by MJ1970 View Post

All that said, what other options are we left with? I listed a couple. I don't advocate the first. The second is probably best. But it is long row to hoe. We need to bear that in mind.

 

Besides the options already discussed? Nothing comes to mind, at the moment. But that doesn't mean there aren't other options. That's why I continue asking questions and self-educating. For example, I recently learned about the concept of "panarchy". Simply put, it's the idea of competing governments within the same geographical area. I find it fascinating and want to learn more about it.

 

 

Quote:
But what can you do you help others see things as you do in order to change society to a place where more people respect liberty, property and people's basic, natural God-given rights?

 

That is an excellent question, and I think the answer is different for each individual based on their talents, interests, and available time and resources. But I think it ultimately boils down to the open exchange of ideas and liberty-minded people expressing libertarian ideas whenever there is an opportunity.

 

I think I'm still trying to answer that question for myself, but I have done a few things.

 

I do have my own political/current events blog with about 200 followers and frequently discuss these kinds of issues with people around the Internet (including here in PO). I also have discussions with family and friends when the opportunity arises.

 

I've also toyed with the idea of collaborating on podcasts or YouTube videos with other liberty-minded folks and getting more into citizen journalism and activism.

 

In the world of government/politics, I actually attended my local GOP district meeting and was elected as an alternate delegate to the state convention with the intention of voting for Ron Paul. However, after learning about some underhanded and downright fraudulent tactics by my state GOP leadership as they attempted to shut down any attempts by Ron Paul supporters to have any kind of representation or influence in the process, I chose not to attend the state convention and will not participate in or support the Republican Party again.

 

I am, of course, open to suggestions. :-)

Malo periculosam, libertatem quam quietam servitutem.

(I prefer the tumult of liberty to the quiet of servitude.)

Reply

Malo periculosam, libertatem quam quietam servitutem.

(I prefer the tumult of liberty to the quiet of servitude.)

Reply
post #44 of 66
Quote:
Originally Posted by jazzguru View Post

Besides the options already discussed? Nothing comes to mind, at the moment. But that doesn't mean there aren't other options. That's why I continue asking questions and self-educating. For example, I recently learned about the concept of "panarchy". Simply put, it's the idea of competing governments within the same geographical area. I find it fascinating and want to learn more about it.

 

And that's great. If there are other options, I'd love to hear them.

 

 

Quote:
Originally Posted by jazzguru View Post

That is an excellent question, and I think the answer is different for each individual based on their talents, interests, and available time and resources. But I think it ultimately boils down to the open exchange of ideas and liberty-minded people expressing libertarian ideas whenever there is an opportunity.

 

I think I'm still trying to answer that question for myself, but I have done a few things.

 

I do have my own political/current events blog with about 200 followers and frequently discuss these kinds of issues with people around the Internet (including here in PO). I also have discussions with family and friends when the opportunity arises.

 

I've also toyed with the idea of collaborating on podcasts or YouTube videos with other liberty-minded folks and getting more into citizen journalism and activism.

 

In the world of government/politics, I actually attended my local GOP district meeting and was elected as an alternate delegate to the state convention with the intention of voting for Ron Paul. However, after learning about some underhanded and downright fraudulent tactics by my state GOP leadership as they attempted to shut down any attempts by Ron Paul supporters to have any kind of representation or influence in the process, I chose not to attend the state convention and will not participate in or support the Republican Party again.

 

I am, of course, open to suggestions. :-)

 

All those sound like good ideas and actions.

 

Ultimately I think that, right now (and maybe always) we're working the realm of ideas, thoughts, attitudes, perspectives and worldviews. This is a very challenging area as many people have a difficult time changing these. People are often resistant to new ideas especially those viewed as radical compared to current understandings. People are often emotionally and deeply invested in what they current think and believe. To change risks admitting they might have been wrong which is a threat to pride and ego. These are very difficult things. There are some people (smarter than you or I I'll bet) that spent their lives doing this.


Edited by MJ1970 - 8/15/12 at 10:06am

The state is nothing more than a criminal gang writ large.

Reply

The state is nothing more than a criminal gang writ large.

Reply
post #45 of 66
Obama deserves re-election because he is the ONLY American leader who has continued to work for ALL Americans and for ALL OF America. This is demonstrated daily by his continuing to listen to and try to find balance and equality for both democratic AND republican wishes. In the negotiations, acts, laws, and policies that he proposes/approves, he regularly gives up part of what he/democrats want, and gives republicans some of what they want. Because he knows how to SHARE. Obama is the consummate equalizer.

He was put into power to implement his clearly stated democratic beliefs. So his policies have been true to those democratic beliefs. YET, in a measure of conciliation, he continues to allow republican ideas/wishes into his policies. It's easy to be stubborn and staunch, as the GOP have been. But it takes courage and true political skill to assuage the fears of your opponents.

No GOP politician has done this during the last 3.5 years (they fight to keep every morsel of chocolate for themselves). And nearly no-one in Congress has done this either (democratic or republican). This behavior, the ability and willingness to find a "middle ground", is the crux of politics -- and an essential trait for every leader and politician.

Obama is the only American leader who fights for both democratic and republican ideas, even when he does not agree with many of those republican ideas. He is the only present American leader who fights for and offers acceptable "middle ground" policies, in spite of the GOP's stance to "not budge an inch".

To put it more simply (in case someone misunderstood me): Obama is willing to share the playground (i.e., the country, economy, future, obligations, pains, hard choices, and rewards) with everyone who has a birthright to it....... even though he's surrounded by bully GOPs who want to keep the playground only for their own kind. Obama is fighting to keep it open for anyone.

That's why, in this ugly political environment, he alone deserves to be re-elected.
The Truth is difficult to see, and more difficult to say — My God
Reply
The Truth is difficult to see, and more difficult to say — My God
Reply
post #46 of 66

The above post is a prime example of argumentum ad hominem. The first half targets the author of the OP, the second half targets the GOP. Not a compelling case for Obama's reelection, IMO.

Malo periculosam, libertatem quam quietam servitutem.

(I prefer the tumult of liberty to the quiet of servitude.)

Reply

Malo periculosam, libertatem quam quietam servitutem.

(I prefer the tumult of liberty to the quiet of servitude.)

Reply
post #47 of 66
Quote:
Originally Posted by Uplift Humanity View Post

IT IS CLEAR few of you (especially the OP) are interested in hearing any REASONS (i.e., reasoned arguments) discussing what Obama did well, why he had difficulty accomplishing what he set out to do, and why/whether he should be re-elected.

The OP seems to be a troll...Please get psychological help. Your hatred is driven by deeply rooted problems, perhaps from your childhood. It's embarrassing to see that our society is now filled with so many unintelligent bullies who MUST GET THEIR WAY to be happy.
YOU PEOPLE NEVER LEARNED TO COMPROMISE, TO SHARE A BOX OF CHOCOLATES WITH YOUR PLAYMATES. YOU WANT IT ALL FOR YOURSELF. THIS IS ALSO WHAT WE SEE IN THE GOP AND CONGRESS TODAY -- NO WILLINGNESS TO COMPROMISE....... EVEN FOR THE SAKE OF OUR NATION (they only want the full box of chocolates, even if it destroys their playground and nation).
If true, you should be able to start the discussion (your search) by stating ONE important accomplishment from Obama. So, I CHALLENGE you to start this debate by telling us one serious (non-silly) accomplishment by President Obama.

 

How nice of you to elevate the discussion by your comments above.

 

 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Uplift Humanity View Post

Obama deserves re-election because he is the ONLY American leader who has continued to work for ALL Americans and for ALL OF America. This is demonstrated daily by his continuing to listen to and try to find balance and equality for both democratic AND republican wishes. In the negotiations, acts, laws, and policies that he proposes/approves, he regularly gives up part of what he/democrats want, and gives republicans some of what they want. Because he knows how to SHARE. Obama is the consummate equalizer. Obama deserves re-election because he is the ONLY American leader who has continued to work for ALL Americans and for ALL OF America.YET, in a measure of conciliation, he continues to allow republican ideas/wishes into his policies. Obama is the only American leader who fights for both democratic and republican ideas, even when he does not agree with many of those republican ideas. He is the only present American leader who fights for and offers acceptable "middle ground" policies, in spite of the GOP's stance to "not budge an inch". To put it more simply (in case someone misunderstood me): Obama is willing to share the playground (i.e., the country, economy, future, obligations, pains, hard choices, and rewards) with everyone who has a birthright to it....... even though he's surrounded by bully GOPs who want to keep the playground only for their own kind. Obama is fighting to keep it open for anyone.

 

This, of course, is your opinion and one filled with lies, perhaps based on your bias.


Edited by MJ1970 - 8/15/12 at 11:12am

The state is nothing more than a criminal gang writ large.

Reply

The state is nothing more than a criminal gang writ large.

Reply
post #48 of 66
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Uplift Humanity View Post

This post is ridiculous! The OP claims to want facts, proofs, and reasons.
Yet he & his posse respond with nothing but Obama-bashing. IT IS CLEAR few of you (especially the OP) are interested in hearing any REASONS (i.e., reasoned arguments) discussing what Obama did well, why he had difficulty accomplishing what he set out to do, and why/whether he should be re-elected.
Any response given here to your request brings out your vitriol and CLOSE-MINDED diatribe. It's insulting for educated people to witness such childish brutish behavior, masquerading as "intelligent political discourse".
The OP seems to be a troll, who posts only to play a game (skeet shooting? buck hunting?)..... s/he is interested ONLY in shooting ANY IDEA (or anyone who says something). If anything/anyone comes before your rifle scope, all you can do is shoot it.
Please get psychological help. Your hatred is driven by deeply rooted problems, perhaps from your childhood. It's embarrassing to see that our society is now filled with so many unintelligent bullies who MUST GET THEIR WAY to be happy.
YOU PEOPLE NEVER LEARNED TO COMPROMISE, TO SHARE A BOX OF CHOCOLATES WITH YOUR PLAYMATES. YOU WANT IT ALL FOR YOURSELF. THIS IS ALSO WHAT WE SEE IN THE GOP AND CONGRESS TODAY -- NO WILLINGNESS TO COMPROMISE....... EVEN FOR THE SAKE OF OUR NATION (they only want the full box of chocolates, even if it destroys their playground and nation).
Very sad too see what "discourse" has devolved into. I hope the intelligent few left in our society stop interacting with your kind and ostracize you. That's the only way to deal with bullies and overgrown children.
To the OP, I challenge you to convince us that you are serious in your quest. If true, you should be able to start the discussion (your search) by stating ONE important accomplishment from Obama. And I don't mean silliness on your part (though that's what I expect). Any serious debater with true intellectual merit must be able to argue BOTH SIDES of an argument/topic. So, I CHALLENGE you to start this debate by telling us one serious (non-silly) accomplishment by President Obama.
Without this ability, you are standing in a moral gutter, devoid of any intellectual basis.
Now, to answer your request:
Obama deserves re-election because he is the ONLY American leader who has continued to work for ALL Americans and for ALL OF America. This is demonstrated daily by his continuing to listen to and try to find balance and equality for both democratic AND republican wishes. In the negotiations, acts, laws, and policies that he proposes/approves, he regularly gives up part of what he/democrats want, and gives republicans some of what they want. Because he knows how to SHARE. Obama is the consummate equalizer.
He was put into power to implement his clearly stated democratic beliefs. So his policies have been true to those democratic beliefs. YET, in a measure of conciliation, he continues to allow republican ideas/wishes into his policies. It's easy to be stubborn and staunch, as the GOP have been. But it takes courage and true political skill to assuage the fears of your opponents.
No GOP politician has done this during the last 3.5 years (they fight to keep every morsel of chocolate for themselves). And nearly no-one in Congress has done this either (democratic or republican). This behavior, the ability and willingness to find a "middle ground", is the crux of politics -- and an essential trait for every leader and politician.
Obama is the only American leader who fights for both democratic and republican ideas, even when he does not agree with many of those republican ideas. He is the only present American leader who fights for and offers acceptable "middle ground" policies, in spite of the GOP's stance to "not budge an inch".
To put it more simply (in case someone misunderstood me): Obama is willing to share the playground (i.e., the country, economy, future, obligations, pains, hard choices, and rewards) with everyone who has a birthright to it....... even though he's surrounded by bully GOPs who want to keep the playground only for their own kind. Obama is fighting to keep it open for anyone.
That's why, in this ugly political environment, he alone deserves to be re-elected.

 

Reported as a massive, ad-hom attack.  Enjoy being banned after two posts. 

I can only please one person per day.  Today is not your day.  Tomorrow doesn't look good either.  
Reply
I can only please one person per day.  Today is not your day.  Tomorrow doesn't look good either.  
Reply
post #49 of 66
Quote:
Originally Posted by jazzguru View Post

The above post is a prime example of argumentum ad hominem. The first half targets the author of the OP, the second half targets the GOP. Not a compelling case for Obama's reelection, IMO.

Sorry, your statement is incorrect. A basic philosophy primer can explain where it's wrong.

My previous post could have been ad hominem IFF I was trying to attack the OP's argument. However I was not (didn't even try) attacking his/her argument. I discussed only the OP's motive and subsequent behavior... specifically his (and his supporters') attack on ANYONE who disagrees with his/their ideas. Argumentum ad hominem requires an attack of his argument BY attacking him. This never occurred.



Quote:
Originally Posted by MJ1970 View Post

How nice of you to elevate the discussion by your comments above.

Rather presumptuous of you to think I was trying to "elevate the discussion". Among present company, I know better. If through your response you had shown that you were willing to listen to -- even tolerate -- views you didn't agree with (without "shooting" at them).... things would be different. Sadly, that didn't happen.


Quote:
Originally Posted by MJ1970 View Post

This, of course, is your opinion and one filled with lies, perhaps based on your bias.

Thanks! You've proven my point ("Quick, lower your gun, Moe-Joe. We gotta reload for the next Sowshalistick attack.")



Lastly, if you represent the brightest and most open-minded of the anti-Obamaites, I truly fear where we as a nation are headed. We're already deep in a quagmire. Collective recalcitrance will not help.

IMO, this thread has no value to the community. It serves as a way for you to incite others. Most people see that, and so won't "take your bait."
The Truth is difficult to see, and more difficult to say — My God
Reply
The Truth is difficult to see, and more difficult to say — My God
Reply
post #50 of 66
Quote:
Originally Posted by Uplift Humanity View Post

Rather presumptuous of you to think I was trying to "elevate the discussion".

 

It's called be facetious. A basic look in the dictionary can help you here.

 

 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Uplift Humanity View Post

If through your response you had shown that you were willing to listen to -- even tolerate -- views you didn't agree with (without "shooting" at them).... things would be different. Sadly, that didn't happen.

 

No. I read you're view and explained what was wrong with them: They were filled with lies and half-truths. Sorry if hearing that causes you to dig your heals into the "I'm the most enlightened, rational and civil on here" idea.

 

 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Uplift Humanity View Post

Thanks! You've proven my point ("Quick, lower your gun, Moe-Joe. We gotta reload for the next Sowshalistick attack.")

 

Of course I have. :rolleyes:

 

 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Uplift Humanity View Post

Lastly, if you represent the brightest and most open-minded of the anti-Obamaites, I truly fear where we as a nation are headed.

 

And you return to your opening gambit of trying to insult those who disagree with you. You have a sum-total of 3 posts, 2 of which have contained blistering assaults and insults to other posters. I suspect it won't be long before you're banned.

 

 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Uplift Humanity View Post

IMO, this thread has no value to the community. It serves as a way for you to incite others. Most people see that, and so won't "take your bait."

 

And yet you are here...posting. Interesting that.

 

The irony and hypocrisy is strong with this one.

The state is nothing more than a criminal gang writ large.

Reply

The state is nothing more than a criminal gang writ large.

Reply
post #51 of 66
Quote:
Originally Posted by Uplift Humanity View Post


Sorry, your statement is incorrect. A basic philosophy primer can explain where it's wrong.

My previous post could have been ad hominem IFF I was trying to attack the OP's argument. However I was not (didn't even try) attacking his/her argument. I discussed only the OP's motive and subsequent behavior... specifically his (and his supporters') attack on ANYONE who disagrees with his/their ideas. Argumentum ad hominem requires an attack of his argument BY attacking him. This never occurred.

 

Ahh, so you're just trolling. Got it. Carry on.

Malo periculosam, libertatem quam quietam servitutem.

(I prefer the tumult of liberty to the quiet of servitude.)

Reply

Malo periculosam, libertatem quam quietam servitutem.

(I prefer the tumult of liberty to the quiet of servitude.)

Reply
post #52 of 66
Quote:
Originally Posted by SDW2001 View Post

Reported as a massive, ad-hom attack.  Enjoy being banned after two posts. 


When someone cannot continue an intelligent cogent argument, they resort to "reporting others". That's adult behavior! Are you disgruntled about being banned here, so now you try to do that to anyone else with whom you disagree?

As far as you claiming my post was "ad-hom", my previous post already explained why it was not ad hominem.

Bottom line is this:
(1) You made an open request for anyone to respond to your question (original post).
(2) I gave you my answer.
(3) You ignored my answer but instead tried to "report" me.
(4) Your friends/supporters tried to attack me and my arguments.

That demonstrates very clearly you are not interested in an intelligent debate. Your topic was simply "bait".

You came to this forum (whose primary purpose is Apple-related issues), and you started a purely political (some would say heated) thread topic. Then when people respond to your question, you either denigrate them, chastise them, or report them. It's now clear to me that you had no intention of carrying on a civil informed discussion.

Now I understand why others have created script-bots to hide your posts. Thanks for showing me your character..
The Truth is difficult to see, and more difficult to say — My God
Reply
The Truth is difficult to see, and more difficult to say — My God
Reply
post #53 of 66
Quote:
Originally Posted by Uplift Humanity View Post

That's adult behavior!

 

And the irony continues. lol.gif

 

 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Uplift Humanity View Post

Are you disgruntled about being banned here

 

Hmmm...that looks like a clue to me.

 

 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Uplift Humanity View Post

(4) Your friends/supporters tried to attack me and my arguments.

 

Who is that?

 

 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Uplift Humanity View Post

You came to this forum (whose primary purpose is Apple-related issues), and you started a purely political (some would say heated) thread topic.

 

This area of the forum is for political discussions.

 

 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Uplift Humanity View Post

It's now clear to me that you had no intention of carrying on a civil informed discussion.

 

And still more irony.

 

 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Uplift Humanity View Post

Now I understand why others have created script-bots to hide your posts. Thanks for showing me your character..

 

And probably another clue.

The state is nothing more than a criminal gang writ large.

Reply

The state is nothing more than a criminal gang writ large.

Reply
post #54 of 66
Quote:
Originally Posted by MJ1970 View Post

Hmmm...that looks like a clue to me.

 

And probably another clue.

 

I noticed the same things. I think the individual using this account is trying to bait SDW into another infraction and get him permanently banned.

Malo periculosam, libertatem quam quietam servitutem.

(I prefer the tumult of liberty to the quiet of servitude.)

Reply

Malo periculosam, libertatem quam quietam servitutem.

(I prefer the tumult of liberty to the quiet of servitude.)

Reply
post #55 of 66
Quote:
Originally Posted by SDW2001 View Post

 

That's nothing more than litany of legislation Many have been a disaster or ineffective, such as the stimulus bill, Dodd-Frank, Budget Control Act and Obamacare.  I'm asking what are his accomplishments.  What results can you point to?  

Lets start with the first one on the list and work our way down if you are serious-

 

 

I think it is an accomplishment. Bush previously vetoed it, Obama signed it into law. Why do you not like the law?

We are nurturing a nightmare that will haunt our children, and kill theirs.
Reply
We are nurturing a nightmare that will haunt our children, and kill theirs.
Reply
post #56 of 66
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by jazzguru View Post

 

I noticed the same things. I think the individual using this account is trying to bait SDW into another infraction and get him permanently banned.

 

Probably true.  Not biting, though.  

 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Hands Sandon View Post

Lets start with the first one on the list and work our way down if you are serious-

 

 

I think it is an accomplishment. Bush previously vetoed it, Obama signed it into law. Why do you not like the law?

 

It's purely political.  Gender discrimination is already illegal under several federal, state and local statutes.  Also, read up on the bill.  It has its negatives.  And even assuming you think it's all good, how did it help the economy?  Shouldn't the President be running on it? It's a reason to reelect him?  You do realize that he didn't initiate the legislation, correct? 

I can only please one person per day.  Today is not your day.  Tomorrow doesn't look good either.  
Reply
I can only please one person per day.  Today is not your day.  Tomorrow doesn't look good either.  
Reply
post #57 of 66
Quote:
Originally Posted by SDW2001 View Post

It's purely political.  Gender discrimination is already illegal under several federal, state and local statutes.  Also, read up on the bill.  It has its negatives.  And even assuming you think it's all good, how did it help the economy?  Shouldn't the President be running on it? It's a reason to reelect him?  You do realize that he didn't initiate the legislation, correct? 

It's not just for women, it covers- race, colour, religion, sex, national origin, age, or disability.

 

I don't suppose the people who will benefit from the law will consider it "purely political". Yes, it is a reason to reelect him (not that I will vote for him personally, even though I legally could).

 

Does Romney support the bill? EDIT- He says he won't repeal it. Ryan though would.

 

It may not create jobs, who knows maybe it will even harm jobs, but I doubt it. More people are likely to be attracted to the US for work and a good life if they think they won't be discriminated against.

 

Obama didn't have to "initiate" it, he just had to not veto it.


Edited by Hands Sandon - 8/15/12 at 5:56pm
We are nurturing a nightmare that will haunt our children, and kill theirs.
Reply
We are nurturing a nightmare that will haunt our children, and kill theirs.
Reply
post #58 of 66
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hands Sandon View Post

Yes, it is a reason to reelect him (not that I will vote for him personally, even though I legally could).

 

Actually, it is another reason to vote against him.

 

 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Hands Sandon View Post

Does Romney support the bill? EDIT- He says he won't repeal it.

 

Too bad.

 

 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Hands Sandon View Post

Ryan though would.

 

Good for him.

 

 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Hands Sandon View Post

It may not create jobs, who knows maybe it will even harm jobs, but I doubt it.

 

 

Why would you doubt it?

The state is nothing more than a criminal gang writ large.

Reply

The state is nothing more than a criminal gang writ large.

Reply
post #59 of 66
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hands Sandon View Post

It's not just for women, it covers- race, colour, religion, sex, national origin, age, or disability.

 

I don't suppose the people who will benefit from the law will consider it "purely political". Yes, it is a reason to reelect him (not that I will vote for him personally, even though I legally could).

 

Does Romney support the bill? EDIT- He says he won't repeal it. Ryan though would.

 

It may not create jobs, who knows maybe it will even harm jobs, but I doubt it. More people are likely to be attracted to the US for work and a good life if they think they won't be discriminated against.

 

Obama didn't have to "initiate" it, he just had to not veto it.

 

So a piece of legislation he did not initiate and has questionable real benefits is a good reason to reelect the President of the United States?  And who are these people who actually benefit from the law?  

I can only please one person per day.  Today is not your day.  Tomorrow doesn't look good either.  
Reply
I can only please one person per day.  Today is not your day.  Tomorrow doesn't look good either.  
Reply
post #60 of 66

Well at least Barack Obama is making the case for his own re-election...by focusing on Mitt Romney's tax returns.

 

Fascinating. The man went to the effort to actually have a press conference and didn't even once mention why he should be re-elected.

The state is nothing more than a criminal gang writ large.

Reply

The state is nothing more than a criminal gang writ large.

Reply
post #61 of 66
Quote:
Originally Posted by jazzguru View Post

There is, of course, another choice: don't vote.

 

The Only Choice on November 6th

 

 

 

That is a very poor decision. There are other candidates out there. I am voting for Gary Johnson come November 6th.

post #62 of 66

I guess you like to smoke pot a lot.
 

post #63 of 66
Quote:
Originally Posted by marvfox View Post

I guess you like to smoke pot a lot.

 

I guess you think the "War on Drugs" is working.

Malo periculosam, libertatem quam quietam servitutem.

(I prefer the tumult of liberty to the quiet of servitude.)

Reply

Malo periculosam, libertatem quam quietam servitutem.

(I prefer the tumult of liberty to the quiet of servitude.)

Reply
post #64 of 66
Quote:
Originally Posted by jazzguru View Post

I guess you think the "War on Some Drugs" is working.

 

TFTFY

The state is nothing more than a criminal gang writ large.

Reply

The state is nothing more than a criminal gang writ large.

Reply
post #65 of 66
Quote:
Originally Posted by MJ1970 View Post

 

TFTFY

 

Indeed. Apparently prescription drug abuse is perfectly fine and "legal", as more people are addicted to prescription drugs than so-called "controlled substances".

Malo periculosam, libertatem quam quietam servitutem.

(I prefer the tumult of liberty to the quiet of servitude.)

Reply

Malo periculosam, libertatem quam quietam servitutem.

(I prefer the tumult of liberty to the quiet of servitude.)

Reply
post #66 of 66
Quote:
Originally Posted by marvfox View Post

I guess you like to smoke pot a lot.
 

 

No. I hate the USA PATRIOT Act and indefinite detention.

New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: PoliticalOutsider
AppleInsider › Forums › Other Discussion › AppleOutsider › PoliticalOutsider › The Case for Obama's Reelection