We live in a divided America. Romney spoke of it to his mega wealthy immoral donors. (Check out the fat cat who hosted the party, it's shameful how he lives and the people who attend his orgies live) Do not forget forget about the 47%. Most people do not want the Affordable Health Care Act repealed. Facts matter. Romney does not have any policies that you can speak of. List any specific policy, just one specific thing, like one tax loophole he would close. The Economist magazine's current issue has a great article regarding this topic. Paul Kurgman also has a great article in today's paper.

The whole deficit thing is total BS. Which party sent us to war, the longest war in our history and put it on a credit card? That is absolutely unconscionable! Who wants these war's continued? Who has profited from the war's? Romney is not the answer especially when things (the economy) are getting better. Read Paul Krugman's article.

Lastly, Romney wants to cut education! Read while you still can. The national IQ of the country is 24 in the world and going down. Pretty exceptional don't you think.

People put so much coin in backing "there guy" to the fact where hatred comes from it. Support this support that...Maybe soon we will all realize thats the point. The illusion of choice. Don't participate it a two party system it simply doesn't work. Don't vote for the lesser of 2 evils. Freedom is an illusion within the constraints of society. Make your own rules, live by your own code.

tdog wrote:


Actually Tdog polls overwhelmingly show people support almost every aspect of Obamacare but not if you call it Obamacare. And as I mentioned already most provisions in the bill came from conservative proposals. So no, it was not a single party shoving it down your throat.

Do you know how the Bush tax cuts were passed? Look into it before you claim acceptance of a law has anything to do with how it was passed.

The idea that Obama hasn't reached out to the GOP is pure fox bullshit. He tried over and over, but as mitch Mcconnell said right after obama was elected the number one goal of the GOP for the next four years was to say no to everything. That is why they doubled the use of the filibuster in the last four years. Why did he sign the extension of the Bush tax cuts or the Hugh cuts in spending if he was so ideological? You will see in his second term when they are forced to say yes to something that Obama is one of the most bipartisan, moderate presidents in recent history.

Like I said though there is zero chance of a repeal of Obamacare in the next few years. Get over it.

The only problem Dan is that it actually matters. With Romney having over half his foreign policy team made up of Bush admin neocons Romney will very likely invade Iran. So it matters quite a bit.

Darxtar wrote:


No, I do't want any ideologues on the court of either side ! What we need on the court are Constitutional scholars who will interpret what the founders wrote and uphold it.

Are Kagan ad Sotomeyore (sp) strict constructionists in your opinion ? Or, do you think they'll vote down the line with Obama ? Come on now !

Darxtar wrote:


Our education system blows ! Guess what, we spend more on it than ever by a large margin. More money doesn't mean better education.

Come on, seriously man. Don't you see how the unions and the democrat party are colluding resulting in costs of education rising sky high ????? REally ? Do I have to do everyone's research here ?

My God man, THINK !

B-Rad wrote:


OMG. You get a vote ? God help us all.

Seriously, the level of ignorance displayed on this topic here is stunning. Really depressing.

FORWARD ! Right over the cliff. Yippppeeeeeeeee !

tdog wrote:


Boy, Tdog, you are right on! We spend WAY too much on education. AND, I did the research! (pat on the back for me)...check it out right here: www.census.gov/compendia/statab/2012/ranks/rank20.html

The average K-12 teacher salary in the US is $50,500 (with a high end of $63K in California and a low of $35K in S. Dakota).
A look at the median shows an even more shocking statistic...$45.5K!! All these teachers are breaking us. Plus, they're probably only paying a marginal tax rate of ONLY 25%!!! Why, we need to crack down on this.

Here in Colorado, our teachers routinely buy things for their poorer students out of their own pockets...things that the kid's family cannot afford. I think it is time to REQUIRE these "teachers" (or if you will, LEACHERS) to pay for ALL of the supplies used in their classrooms for ALL students. Why should it be only the poor cashing in on this "benefit"??? This goes on much longer and they might think of it as an "entitlement". Let's stop this nonsense and all vote for Romney! God love ya, Tdog, you have finally convinced me. All of your work has paid off. In fact, I think I will go donate this week's beer money to the Romney campaign...god knows he needs every dime.

I'm all about Romney for president - Hugh Romney that is!!!

tdog wrote:
I love the fact that you keep shining this light right back on yourself. You've shown your ignorance so many times now that I cannot help but think you're a troll (or a sneaky Obama supporter intentionally making Romney followers look like blundering imbeciles). I admit that I would find the latter to be somewhat interesting.

And I'd like to say teachers don't get paid anywhere enough. I'm not a teacher. None of my friends or family are teachers. One of the most important, potentially pivotal jobs in our culture. The pressure from every angle (parents, religion, education system, state). Hands tied to control their classrooms. Thankless and incredibly difficult in so many ways. If $45K is the median, it should be $90K. If our society is going to be bankrupt, I'd like it to be so more because we paid our teachers well than medical insurance companies bleeding us dry or the banking system finding another way to use everyone else's money to get filthy rich.

Lastly, I don't know if people realize that the real power of being President is that the President picks the Supreme Court justices. As we know these are life long positions. It does make a difference. For example, in an interview with Wolf Blitzer and Sandra Day O'Connor there was the following exchange:

"Let's look back a little bit on some history. Bush v. Gore, you remember that case in the Supreme Court," Blitzer said.

"Oh, I remember that case," O'Connor said

"Was that the right decision?" Blitzer asked.

"I don't know," O'Connor said

O'Connor is supposed to make the right decision. She can not say that she did. At least she gave a somewhat honest answer. She was a Regan appointment. She made a political decision. She was even at George Bush's house on election night. It did not matter if it was the right decision. It was the decision she was appointed to make. She did what she was supposed to do. Look at the guys Bush put in, Roberts and Alito. When ever a case involving a citizen or citizens against a corporation was before them they sided without exception for the corporation. Of course they have been a big ally for corporate interests on the Supreme Court. This is where I think Nader hurt us by even running. He knows this stuff but did not seem to care. This is why this stuff is important because there are a couple of aging judges on the court now. Ginsburg(DEM) is 78 and not in good health, and Stephen Breyer(DEM) is 72.

The GOP controls the court already. I can not imagine giving them two more seats, maybe more. All the others on the court are relatively young and will be making decisions that don't have to be the right decisions for a long time.

If Sandra Day O'Connor does not give the Presidency to George Bush we probable do not go to war in Iraq. Think of the people who would still be alive today. How much is a life worth? We also would not be living a Citizens United world. Just imagine how the would would be different if Sandra Day O'Connor was not appointed to the Supreme Court.

I have taken up too much of this already. Just needed to vent. Think it's time to listen to some Furthur.