politics is usually a touchy subject

[deutshwise]

I usually hate talking about politics but I find this very true. People keep attacking Mitt Romney for being rich and how he spends his own money but no one seems to care how obama is spending tax payers money. I don't car if your a liberal or a conservative you have to agree that the guy is crazy reckless with tax payers money.

[.blank cd]

I usually hate talking about politics but I find this very true. People keep attacking Mitt Romney for being rich and how he spends his own money but no one seems to care how obama is spending tax payers money. I don't car if your a liberal or a conservative you have to agree that the guy is crazy reckless with tax payers money.
How so? Can you give examples?

[BanginJimmy]

Solyndra

[.blank cd]

Solyndra

Most economists wouldn't really consider that reckless. Any better examples? I'm really looking for deutchewise to chime in. I want to look inside his head for a minute.

[Vteckidd]

1+ trillion dollar deficits with still 8+% UE. No signs the economy is recovering.

Considering any money the feds have is "tax payer money" they have been spending it recklessly for years, including the GOP. Obama is by far the worst IMO (hes racked up more debt than any other president combined), but hes not alone. W spent a ton, Reagan, etc.

The problem i have is that at least with Bush we had 7 3/4 years of superior economic status, Clinton economy was booming, reagan got us out of the carter recession years. Obamas spending hasnt really improved anything , UE isnt good, economy is stagnate, consumer confidence sucks, housing is shitty.

At least for the money he spent it would be nice to see some sectors improve.

[ahabion]

At least for the money he spent it would be nice to see some sectors improve.

Uhh... Welfare saw an improvement in enrollments! Give the POTUS some credit.

[ahabion]

Most economists wouldn't really consider that reckless. Any better examples? I'm really looking for deutchewise to chime in. I want to look inside his head for a minute.

Lack of a balanced budget (or any real and sensible budget)? Biting the hands that feed them ('rich' people paying majority of the tax bill). Obamacare. GM bailout. Stimulus. Ca$h for Clunkers. Buying a bus.

I'm sure there's plenty more... just can't think of any others right now.

[.blank cd]

Lack of a balanced budget (or any real and sensible budget)?Off topic, citation needed.


Biting the hands that feed them ('rich' people paying majority of the tax bill).Rhetoric, still paying disproportionately less, also has nothing to do with spending...


Obamacare. GM bailout. Stimulus. Ca$h for Clunkers.Obamacare--The other side is selling the same thing. You would have ended up with one or the other, the cost isnt really out of line for what it is, I dont think we can really consider that reckless based on the facts. Bailouts and stimulus or ARRA--Agruably prevented a global economic meltdown. I say arguably because we have not yet experienced a global economic meltdown and we dont know what would have really happened had we not bailed out banks, other than what analysts have predicted.


I'm sure there's plenty more... just can't think of any others right now.I keep hearing all this "obama is a reckless spender" rhetoric, yet no one cant point to any specific thing, other than ARRA and the balance of our foreign military engagements, nor anything out of the ordinary for any president before him

[deutshwise]

Most economists wouldn't really consider that reckless. Any better examples? I'm really looking for deutchewise to chime in. I want to look inside his head for a minute.
GM, solyndra, no balanced budget, cash for clunkers, stimulus money. He promised very clearly, Pass my stimulus and unemployement will not go over 8%. but ohh wait unemployment did go over 8% and has been over 8% ever since

[.blank cd]

GM, solyndra, no balanced budget, cash for clunkers, stimulus money. He promised very clearly, Pass my stimulus and unemployement will not go over 8%. but ohh wait unemployment did go over 8% and has been over 8% ever since

I'm still not seeing how Obama was more reckless with spending than any other president before. Like I said before with the stimulus, it was a response to an inherited economic crisis, proposed by the president before him, which would have been passed no matter who was in office, and a third of it was in the form of tax cuts, not an expenditure. The stimulus is usually built into the numbers they use to make it seem like he's spent more than he actually has.

The numbers seem to be telling a different story than the GOP narrative. Any examples that would show he's the biggest spending president in recent history, without using the stimulus package?

Source: http://www.forbes.com/sites/rickungar/2012/05/24/who-is-the-smallest-government-spender-since-eisenhower-would-you-believe-its-barack-obama/

http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/statements/2012/may/23/facebook-posts/viral-facebook-post-says-barack-obama-has-lowest-s/

[BanginJimmy]

Most economists wouldn't really consider that reckless. Any better examples? I'm really looking for deutchewise to chime in. I want to look inside his head for a minute.

The ones from the Bush admin that rejected Solyndra's first application based on their fundamentals would disagree.

Sent from my DROIDX using Tapatalk 2

[.blank cd]

The ones from the Bush admin that rejected Solyndra's first application based on their fundamentals would disagree.

Sent from my DROIDX using Tapatalk 2

Should we start listing things Bush spent taxpayer money on?

[geoff]

You asked for examples and got them

[.blank cd]

You asked for examples and got them

I've gotten good examples of spending started by Bush and spending that would have happened regardless of who was president. Still haven't got an example of how Obama is the most reckless spending president, especially when the facts and numbers state the complete opposite. I'm still open for the truth though, provided it comes with numbers and facts, and not just narrative. I know the UE is at 8%, it's been slowly declining since late 09. This is off topic. The topic raised by deutchewise was that Obama is crazy reckless with taxpayer money. I'm looking for examples that clearly make him a more reckless spender than the presidents before him. Some net expenditures.

[geoff]

Look at how much the deficit has risen under his presidency and his policies. Then let's look at how much was spent in the stimulus package and the results of it.im no Obama fan, but I will agree that crazy spending is something shared by conservatives and liberals.

[deutshwise]

I've gotten good examples of spending started by Bush and spending that would have happened regardless of who was president. Still haven't got an example of how Obama is the most reckless spending president, especially when the facts and numbers state the complete opposite. I'm still open for the truth though, provided it comes with numbers and facts, and not just narrative. I know the UE is at 8%, it's been slowly declining since late 09. This is off topic. The topic raised by deutchewise was that Obama is crazy reckless with taxpayer money. I'm looking for examples that clearly make him a more reckless spender than the presidents before him. Some net expenditures.
please show me these facts that state the opposite. would love to see.

[.blank cd]

Look at how much the deficit has risen under his presidency and his policies. Then let's look at how much was spent in the stimulus package and the results of it.im no Obama fan, but I will agree that crazy spending is something shared by conservatives and liberals.the stimulus package was a response to a global economic crisis and would have happened under anyone's presidency. We don't have a reference point to measure what things would be like without the ARRA. Is it considered crazy spending if it maybe prevented a global financial meltdown? The govt only owns about 10-20% of GM now. So aside from the stimulus, what else would be considered crazy spending?

[.blank cd]

please show me these facts that state the opposite. would love to see.

Did you see the post with the sources?

[deutshwise]

Did you see the post with the sources?

see no sources bra

[BanginJimmy]

Should we start listing things Bush spent taxpayer money on?


No need. Bush was just as liberal with the checkbook as Obama. That doesnt make Obama a good option though. In fact, it makes a very bad option.

Nice try at the dodge though.

[BanginJimmy]

I've gotten good examples of spending started by Bush and spending that would have happened regardless of who was president. Still haven't got an example of how Obama is the most reckless spending president, especially when the facts and numbers state the complete opposite. I'm still open for the truth though, provided it comes with numbers and facts, and not just narrative. I know the UE is at 8%, it's been slowly declining since late 09. This is off topic. The topic raised by deutchewise was that Obama is crazy reckless with taxpayer money. I'm looking for examples that clearly make him a more reckless spender than the presidents before him. Some net expenditures.


If you are talking about that 1.8% increase thats Obama tried, it was shown to be nothing more than manipulated numbers. That analysis gave Bush the credit for spending that Obama signed, then gave Obama credit for loans that were paid back that Bushed signed off on. Even the Washington Post called that out.

The facts about the growth of spending under Obama - The Washington Post (http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/fact-checker/post/the-facts-about-the-growth-of-spending-under-obama/2012/05/24/gJQAIJh6nU_blog.html)

[ahabion]

the stimulus package was a response to a global economic crisis and would have happened under anyone's presidency. We don't have a reference point to measure what things would be like without the ARRA. Is it considered crazy spending if it maybe prevented a global financial meltdown? The govt only owns about 10-20% of GM now. So aside from the stimulus, what else would be considered crazy spending?

The war in Afghan and Iraq would have happened under any president after 9/11. How would you then justify that in comparison to what you're saying? It would've happened anyway so that is justification enough... I say BS.

Cash for Clunkers 2: The Return of Government Motors - Washington Times (http://m.washingtontimes.com/blog/watercooler/2011/mar/29/cash-clunkers-2-dumped-capitol-hill/)

[nelson9995]

I always notice how the wealthier/business owners/ etc... hate Obama. wonder why? Is it because he doesn't allow them to do as they please? is it because he stops them from screwing others?

[Sinfix_15]

I always notice how the wealthier/business owners/ etc... hate Obama. wonder why? Is it because he doesn't allow them to do as they please? is it because he stops them from screwing others?

And here's why YOU should hate Obama. We should all want to be wealthy business owners. We should all have goals and dreams. We should all live our own lives. I dont want the government to take care of me. Obama does.

Republicans want to control your morality. Democrats want to control you financially. Unless you care about social issues more than you do having the money to take care of yourself, there is absolutely no reason to vote for Obama. If you're on welfare and feel Obama is the best candidate to take care of you.... you need to consider the fact that you're probably on welfare because of Obama to begin with.

[.blank cd]

see no sources bra
Here it is again

Source: http://www.forbes.com/sites/rickungar/2012/05/24/who-is-the-smallest-government-spender-since-eisenhower-would-you-believe-its-barack-obama/

http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/statements/2012/may/23/facebook-posts/viral-facebook-post-says-barack-obama-has-lowest-s/

[.blank cd]

And here's why YOU should hate Obama. We should all want to be wealthy business owners.No. We should not. People have to stop thinking that you're a worthless individual unless you own a business. I don't necessarily wan to own a business. I really don't want to be a billionaire.


We should all have goals and dreams. We should all live our own lives. Yes. We should.

[nelson9995]

And here's why YOU should hate Obama. We should all want to be wealthy business owners. We should all have goals and dreams. We should all live our own lives. I dont want the government to take care of me. Obama does.

Republicans want to control your morality. Democrats want to control you financially. Unless you care about social issues more than you do having the money to take care of yourself, there is absolutely no reason to vote for Obama. If you're on welfare and feel Obama is the best candidate to take care of you.... you need to consider the fact that you're probably on welfare because of Obama to begin with.

I agree and disagree. If you want to become a business owner and be a billionaire go ahead. I don't, but I respect that. But on top of you becoming rich, should you be allowed to do as you please? Should you be allowed to over work your people and pay them shit? Should you be allowed to charge $35 for a overdraw when the person spent $1? Should you be allowed to have people working 40+ hours and not offer benefits and label them part time? FUCK NO!

This is the reason why the wealthy/ business owners hate Obama! Because he fights againsy letting them get away with half the crap Bush or any other Republican does.

[BanginJimmy]

I don't, but I respect that. But on top of you becoming rich, should you be allowed to do as you please?

As long as its not illegal, yes.




Should you be allowed to over work your people and pay them shit?

If by shit you mean at or more than minimum wage, yes




Should you be allowed to charge $35 for a overdraw when the person spent $1?

Yes, your fault for not taking care of your finances, not theirs.




Should you be allowed to have people working 40+ hours and not offer benefits and label them part time? FUCK NO!

Yes. Benefits are just that, benefits. They are not rights.



This is the reason why the wealthy/ business owners hate Obama! Because he fights againsy letting them get away with half the crap Bush or any other Republican does.

Really? Like what?

[.blank cd]

As long as its not illegal, yes.


If by shit you mean at or more than minimum wage, yes


Yes, your fault for not taking care of your finances, not theirs.


Yes. Benefits are just that, benefits. They are not rights.

One thing is for sure, as long as there are people who still think corporations taking advantage of people is ok, it will continue to happen.

[nelson9995]

As long as its not illegal, yes.
If by shit you mean at or more than minimum wage, yes
Yes, your fault for not taking care of your finances, not theirs.
Yes. Benefits are just that, benefits. They are not rights.
Really? Like what?

I just mentioned a few.




One thing is for sure, as long as there are people who still think corporations taking advantage of people is ok, it will continue to happen.

People don't think it's okay. CEO's do, and they have been allowed to get away with it by the Gov't. Now, they see a president that actually cares about the people, not corporations aka Romney, Bush, etc... and hate him. Why did Bush not give 2 fucks about green energy? Because he controls petrolleum in texas. Why do republicans always benefit corporations? because they are benefiting themselves. They are all wealthy ambitious full of greed business owners who could care less about the people.

[nelson9995]

There is nothing a worker can do but allow himself to be exploited.

Sure you guys will say quit and find another job. How easy is it to walk away from a job when you have responsibilities to pay and there aren't many jobs floating around. How about when you have a kid/kids? Can you afford to just quit? No, most likely you will stay there and allow yourself to get exploited until you see a way out.

Sometimes I wish some of you could experience certain things so you see life is not always sweet when you are not the one on a cruise on a holiday blowing money that your "slave" is making you while you pay him shit, treat him like shit, and make him work on holidays while being "part time" yet they are working 40+ hours.

[BanginJimmy]

There is nothing a worker can do but allow himself to be exploited.

Sure you guys will say quit and find another job. How easy is it to walk away from a job when you have responsibilities to pay and there aren't many jobs floating around. How about when you have a kid/kids? Can you afford to just quit? No, most likely you will stay there and allow yourself to get exploited until you see a way out.

Sometimes I wish some of you could experience certain things so you see life is not always sweet when you are not the one on a cruise on a holiday blowing money that your "slave" is making you while you pay him shit, treat him like shit, and make him work on holidays while being "part time" yet they are working 40+ hours.


You really have no clue.

I have never, and will never be exploited because I made a decision to gain a marketable skill. If you dont choose a skill that is needed in the marketplace, that is your failure. My employer currently has over 4000 job openings nationwide that they cannot fill. If you cannot change jobs at the drop of a hat, it is because you dont have the skills needed, not because of the job market.

What things do I need to experience?

Being laid off? Been there, done that. Laid off twice in the matter of 6 months, both times back to work within a couple weeks.
Long term unemployment? been there too. When I was in school I had a very hard time finding work that would revolve around my school schedule. Fortunately for me, I gave myself options and was able to survive without steady work for over 2 years.
Blue collar work? Doing that now, also a union worker.
Blowing money my slave is making, sorry, never been there, I was born a couple hundred years too late. I am leaving on a cruise in a couple weeks though.


Who is making you work? No one but you. Acquire some marketable skills and you are the one that exploits the employer, not the other way around.

[BanginJimmy]

One thing is for sure, as long as there are people who still think corporations taking advantage of people is ok, it will continue to happen.

How are corporations taking advantage of people?

[ahabion]

I always notice how the wealthier/business owners/ etc... hate Obama. wonder why? Is it because he doesn't allow them to do as they please? is it because he stops them from screwing others?

Maybe because they hate paying more taxes and being portrayed as 'the bad guy' all the time.


No. We should not. People have to stop thinking that you're a worthless individual unless you own a business. I don't necessarily wan to own a business. I really don't want to be a billionaire.



You're not worthless. You're only worthless if you have that mindset. And best of all blank, God doesn't think you're worthless. He finds value in everyone. :)



There is nothing a worker can do but allow himself to be exploited.

Sure you guys will say quit and find another job. How easy is it to walk away from a job when you have responsibilities to pay and there aren't many jobs floating around. How about when you have a kid/kids? Can you afford to just quit? No, most likely you will stay there and allow yourself to get exploited until you see a way out.

Sometimes I wish some of you could experience certain things so you see life is not always sweet when you are not the one on a cruise on a holiday blowing money that your "slave" is making you while you pay him shit, treat him like shit, and make him work on holidays while being "part time" yet they are working 40+ hours.

Life is hard. We all choose to our own path. Naruto-kun!


One thing is for sure, as long as there are people who still think corporations taking advantage of people is ok, it will continue to happen.

Then don't let them take advantage of you. Why is this hard? If you sincerely believe evolution to be real, I'm sure it didn't give up on trying... why should you?

[Sinfix_15]

No. We should not. People have to stop thinking that you're a worthless individual unless you own a business. I don't necessarily wan to own a business. I really don't want to be a billionaire.

Yes. We should.

If you dont want to own a business or be a billionaire that is fine. Live the life that your income can support. Quit living off the paycheck of the business owners and billionaires.

[Sinfix_15]

I agree and disagree. If you want to become a business owner and be a billionaire go ahead. I don't, but I respect that. But on top of you becoming rich, should you be allowed to do as you please? Should you be allowed to over work your people and pay them shit? Should you be allowed to charge $35 for a overdraw when the person spent $1? Should you be allowed to have people working 40+ hours and not offer benefits and label them part time? FUCK NO!

This is the reason why the wealthy/ business owners hate Obama! Because he fights againsy letting them get away with half the crap Bush or any other Republican does.

People and business hate Obama because he is terrible for business. Nobody wants to work hard for their money to hand it to Obama and have him redistribute it to the poor. At some point you have to take responsibility for your actions and quit acting like every business is trying to fuck you. Every business is trying to make money. All of the things you complain about, why do you feel entitled to them? you dont like the way a bank operates, put your money in a shoebox. you dont like your salary, find a new job. A business is not going to reduce their profit margin because of the government. You raise taxes on the wealthy, that's 1 less person they hire to cover that cost. One less raise someone gets to cover that cost. I want to shrink the government's involvement in everything, not hand more of my life over to them. If democrats have their way, a senator will be wiping your ass for you and tucking you in at night by 2050.

[nelson9995]

so just because you're okay you don't care about anyone else? Just because you are in a situation where you can't be taken advantage of it makes it ok for others to be taken advantage of? That is what I'm talking about. I understand small businesses not being bothered too much... but there is no way corporations should be allowed to get away with half the crap they do.

[geoff]

I just can't believe success is seen as a bad thing these days. Unless you inherited a large company, a large sum of money, or won the lottery; chances are that if you are successful then you busted your @ss to get their. What people need to understand is that success and failure are a mindset. Some people make $40,000 a year, have a home, family, nice cars, and pay bills. They are not millionaires or "well off" but they see themselves as successful because they live within their means and are happy. I know some people that have been out of work for a year; they do odd jobs to barely get by. They lost their home and are back with parents. Yet they don't see themselves as failures. They see it as a temporary set back and are working to make themselves more marketable and desirable in the work force.

My point is this, you want to make something of yourself, you gotta do it yourself. Quit demonizing the "rich" because you are jealous. I happen to know a millionaire, he is a great guy. He loves his company and employees and treats them well. It tears him up when he has to lay off workers, but such is life.

[nelson9995]

I just can't believe success is seen as a bad thing these days. Unless you inherited a large company, a large sum of money, or won the lottery; chances are that if you are successful then you busted your @ss to get their. What people need to understand is that success and failure are a mindset. Some people make $40,000 a year, have a home, family, nice cars, and pay bills. They are not millionaires or "well off" but they see themselves as successful because they live within their means and are happy. I know some people that have been out of work for a year; they do odd jobs to barely get by. They lost their home and are back with parents. Yet they don't see themselves as failures. They see it as a temporary set back and are working to make themselves more marketable and desirable in the work force.

My point is this, you want to make something of yourself, you gotta do it yourself. Quit demonizing the "rich" because you are jealous. I happen to know a millionaire, he is a great guy. He loves his company and employees and treats them well. It tears him up when he has to lay off workers, but such is life.


success is not viewed as a bad thing. Who doesn't want to be successfull? To some people, like myself, being successfull is not being a millionaire or having a huge bank account. To me, as long as I can afford my bills, live a joyful life, eat what I want, do what I want, and put money away, I'm good.

What I view wrong is the way some owners do things simply because they are owners, have the power to do so, and the Gov't allows them to do so. That is what I see wrong, nothing else.

I'm not saying screw the rich, I'm saying, allow them to be rich, but also have control and don't allow them to do as they please simply because they are owners. This is what Obama is doing and this is why they hate him.

[BanginJimmy]

so just because you're okay you don't care about anyone else? Just because you are in a situation where you can't be taken advantage of it makes it ok for others to be taken advantage of? That is what I'm talking about. I understand small businesses not being bothered too much... but there is no way corporations should be allowed to get away with half the crap they do.

No, I dont care about the whining of someone that doesnt make an effort to improve their situation.

Sent from my DROIDX using Tapatalk 2

[.blank cd]

Nobody has an original opinion anymore. All I'm hearing is a regurgitated narrative. "I can't believe success is a bad thing these days". No one at all sees success as a bad thing. Then when you support the president, you're a black liberal on welfare.

[BanginJimmy]

Nobody has an original opinion anymore.


I assume you are including yourself in this statement.

The real reason you havent hear anything original in a while is because the narrative from both sides hasnt changed. Dems are still attacking the rich, GOP is still sabotaging themselves by bringing up social issues. Does anyone actually care about social issues anymore?

Abortion, I couldnt possibly care less. The ONLY people affected by abortion legislation are the people that want one. The people that dont agree with it cannot possibly be affected by it.

Global warming. The US could shut down every pollution generating machine in the country and we would see zero effect as the Chinese and other 3rd world countries would continue to ignore it.

Illegal immigration. Its a national security issue. If a bunch of uneducated mexicans and make the trip, what is going to stop a few hundred muslim killers from doing it?

[deutshwise]

Here it is again

Source: Who Is The Smallest Government Spender Since Eisenhower? Would You Believe It's Barack Obama? - Forbes (http://www.forbes.com/sites/rickungar/2012/05/24/who-is-the-smallest-government-spender-since-eisenhower-would-you-believe-its-barack-obama/)

http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/statements/2012/may/23/facebook-posts/viral-facebook-post-says-barack-obama-has-lowest-s/

you posted far left minded websites. so kind of hard to believe what they said.

[ahabion]

Nobody has an original opinion anymore. All I'm hearing is a regurgitated narrative. "I can't believe success is a bad thing these days". No one at all sees success as a bad thing. Then when you support the president, you're a black liberal on welfare.

No. There are plenty of stupid people too. :goodjob:

[.blank cd]

you posted far left minded websites. so kind of hard to believe what they said.

Are you being serious?

This is exactly what I'm talking about. How in the world are you supposed to have an informed opinion if you don't know facts? How is anyone supposed take you seriously? Just because facts don't confirm your bias doesn't mean they're not facts

[BanginJimmy]

Here it is again

Source: http://www.forbes.com/sites/rickungar/2012/05/24/who-is-the-smallest-government-spender-since-eisenhower-would-you-believe-its-barack-obama/

http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/statements/2012/may/23/facebook-posts/viral-facebook-post-says-barack-obama-has-lowest-s/



If you are talking about that 1.8% increase thats Obama tried, it was shown to be nothing more than manipulated numbers. That analysis gave Bush the credit for spending that Obama signed, then gave Obama credit for loans that were paid back that Bushed signed off on. Even the Washington Post called that out.

The facts about the growth of spending under Obama - The Washington Post (http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/fact-checker/post/the-facts-about-the-growth-of-spending-under-obama/2012/05/24/gJQAIJh6nU_blog.html)



Are you being serious?

This is exactly what I'm talking about. How in the world are you supposed to have an informed opinion if you don't know facts? How is anyone supposed take you seriously? Just because facts don't confirm your bias doesn't mean they're not facts


My post references an article in the Washington Post that outlines how Nutting's article, while technically correct when looking only at budget years, was highly biased. As I said, if credited spending signed by Obama to Bush, and gave Obama credit for repayment of TARP funds that were approved and disbursed under Bush.


Not sure about Forbes political slant in their reporting, but they do have a couple editorial writers that definitely lean left. Politifact has been proven to gloss over facts that were damaging to the left.


Sent from my DROIDX using Tapatalk 2

[Sinfix_15]

so just because you're okay you don't care about anyone else? Just because you are in a situation where you can't be taken advantage of it makes it ok for others to be taken advantage of? That is what I'm talking about. I understand small businesses not being bothered too much... but there is no way corporations should be allowed to get away with half the crap they do.

I dont care about you enough to share money with you, no. I support programs that help people help themselves. Just because you're poor doesnt mean a rich person should have to help you. You're poor and he's rich for a reason. It's not a wealthy person's job to take care of the poor.

[fatty]

I dont care about you enough to share money with you, no. I support programs that help people help themselves. Just because you're poor doesnt mean a rich person should have to help you. You're poor and he's rich for a reason. It's not a wealthy person's job to take care of the poor.

I dont fully agree with that. mainly that some people are poor to no fault of their own. I am all for giving people a chance to go from poverty to making a nice life but the problem with obama is. He wants the poor to stay poor and keep depending on the government. that way the government becomes more powerful.

[Sinfix_15]

I dont fully agree with that. mainly that some people are poor to no fault of their own. I am all for giving people a chance to go from poverty to making a nice life but the problem with obama is. He wants the poor to stay poor and keep depending on the government. that way the government becomes more powerful.

It's hard to say that anyone is poor to no fault of their own when we have people crawling under fences and floating in boats to get here with nothing but the shirt on their back. There's always a way to survive, some people just arent willing to do the work. Our culture has led us to believe that everything is meant to be easy. While our grandfather's grandfather lived on the land and ate the food that he grew, we're a nation that wants to search for a job on the internet and we're upset that our foodstamps wont buy food that's already cooked for us. If you're poor, it's your fault.

[ahabion]

It's hard to say that anyone is poor to no fault of their own when we have people crawling under fences and floating in boats to get here with nothing but the shirt on their back. There's always a way to survive, some people just arent willing to do the work. Our culture has led us to believe that everything is meant to be easy. While our grandfather's grandfather lived on the land and ate the food that he grew, we're a nation that wants to search for a job on the internet and we're upset that our foodstamps wont buy food that's already cooked for us. If you're poor, it's your fault.

:goodjob: Agreed 100%. Folks (in the USA) who say otherwise don't realize that they have significantly, i do say significantly, more options than a great majority of the world populace. Poor here in the States is considerably well off in comparison to other countries, where people literally have no means. The choice is to starve or eat maggots. The homeless people in Atlanta live better lives than those people in other countries... I call BS on being poor not by their own fault. They're poor because they choose to be poor. Poor in the States is a mindset. I'd be surprised if there are people on here who really know what real hunger pains are.

[Elbow]

I don't get two major issues in politics:

1. Abortion.

2. Same sex marriage.

They should not matter to anyone. If I had a daughter and she was a skank and got pregnant, she should be able to have an abortion, who cares? Does rape fit into the "no abortion" rules? Same sex marriage is just dumb, WHO CARES? It makes no difference to any of us if Bobby and Joe want to get married, not a single difference. If they can't get married, they will still be gay and they will still be in a relationship together.

This country cares more about stupid things like those and buying assault rifles than anything important.

The funniest thing to me is how many people claim to be a republican but clearly have NO IDEA what they're voting for or supporting. Anyone I know that "claims" to be a republican would technically be worst off than they are today minus the fact gays can't get married, you can't have an abortion, and you get to keep your gun.

Stupid people in this country.

[BanginJimmy]

I don't get two major issues in politics:

1. Abortion.

2. Same sex marriage.

They should not matter to anyone. If I had a daughter and she was a skank and got pregnant, she should be able to have an abortion, who cares? Does rape fit into the "no abortion" rules? Same sex marriage is just dumb, WHO CARES? It makes no difference to any of us if Bobby and Joe want to get married, not a single difference. If they can't get married, they will still be gay and they will still be in a relationship together.

This country cares more about stupid things like those and buying assault rifles than anything important.

The funniest thing to me is how many people claim to be a republican but clearly have NO IDEA what they're voting for or supporting. Anyone I know that "claims" to be a republican would technically be worst off than they are today minus the fact gays can't get married, you can't have an abortion, and you get to keep your gun.

Stupid people in this country.


There are only 2 groups that care about those issues. Theocrats, and people that can profit from being for or against them. Normal thinking people that have nothing to gain by those issues simply dont care.

[Sinfix_15]

I don't get two major issues in politics:

1. Abortion.

2. Same sex marriage.

They should not matter to anyone. If I had a daughter and she was a skank and got pregnant, she should be able to have an abortion, who cares? Does rape fit into the "no abortion" rules? Same sex marriage is just dumb, WHO CARES? It makes no difference to any of us if Bobby and Joe want to get married, not a single difference. If they can't get married, they will still be gay and they will still be in a relationship together.

This country cares more about stupid things like those and buying assault rifles than anything important.

The funniest thing to me is how many people claim to be a republican but clearly have NO IDEA what they're voting for or supporting. Anyone I know that "claims" to be a republican would technically be worst off than they are today minus the fact gays can't get married, you can't have an abortion, and you get to keep your gun.

Stupid people in this country.

Republican is the lesser of two evils. I think republicans are jackass bible thumping morons. I agree completely with you that we shouldnt be wasting time talking about gay marriage or abortions, its fucking nonsense. With that said.................. Romney is a business man and that is what we need. Obama wants to buy you lunch with the money he stole from your wallet. He doesnt know anything about business because he's never had a job. He thinks the way to grow the economy is to hire more people and grow the government. Everyone in washington right now is a jackass...... all of them. republicans and democrats.... the republicans want to give power back to the business owner and take power away from the government, democrats want to do the exact opposite. Grow the government and attempt to spend our way out of debt. I think it's best that we go with the side who wants to shrink the government. The smaller they are.... (hopefully) the less than can fuck up.

Obama wants the campaign to be about anything but Obama. He's the worst president in american history. His crowning achievement is saying "yes" to the military. The same "yes" that any president or presidential candidate in history would have said. He's the quintessential talking head speech reader for the democratic party.

[Elbow]

I don't like Romney, I'm not a huge Obama fan either but he has done some good that I have seen and felt, but I won't vote for him. Personally I don't think Obama or Romney are the right answer right now, I just look forward to if Romney does get elected and can't "fix" the country what die hard ill informed republicans will say then. Nobody can fix the country in a term, Obama even claimed numerous times he can't and that most of what he's doing will be seen down the road.

If Romney would drop the whole "good ol' hard working American" attitude and stop acting like he's some down to earth man than he may not annoy me as much. Listening to his wife speak last night was more than enough for me to not even give him a chance when I vote.