Did you - and would you again ?

Klingsor

Worshipped Member
Joined
Mar 3, 2011
Posts
10,888
Media
4
Likes
11,642
Points
293
Location
Champaign (Illinois, United States)
Sexuality
80% Straight, 20% Gay
Gender
Male
What's with all the big "draft Hillary" hoopla? Don't get me wrong, I've nothing against her, and I actually supported her over Obama in the Democratic primaries. But there's this unexamined assumption that she would have gotten more done if she had won the presidency. Lest we forget, though, Hillarycare already had its shot--and went down in flames.
 

B_VinylBoy

Sexy Member
Joined
Nov 30, 2007
Posts
10,363
Media
0
Likes
68
Points
123
Location
Boston, MA / New York, NY
Sexuality
90% Gay, 10% Straight
Gender
Male
Huh so over the past few decades, "Rethuglicans" were responsible for $9 trillion out of $14 trillion of the debt. Heck, GWB was responsible for almost half of that, $4 trillion, in his 2 terms of office.

Actually, it's more than $6 Trillion. That's more than Reagan and Bush I combined. But what's one or two trillion dollars between political parties?

I'm not saying these are good guys. But Obama, in 3 years, is coming close to beating GWB's increase of the deficit, which was accrued over 8 years in office.

No he's not. $2.4 Trillion after roughly three years in office according to the U.S. Treasury at this point, with no real clear info as to how our future budgets are going to look like. And with economic experts saying that he should have spent more on the stimulus, that means even if he did spend more it would have been for the benefit of the country (unlike two wars and tax cuts that were never paid for under the previous administration). In short, we can either go by some fear-mongered projection concocted by political opposition based on the overly simplified, yet disingenuous notion that "all spending is bad spending during a recession", or we can pay attention to the specifics and realize that investing in our country's infrastructure (aka "The Stimulus) is not "wasteful spending"... especially since several of the Republicans who claimed that it would not amount to anything and told everyone it would kill jobs turned right around and wrote proposals requesting money from it. I'm picking the second option since that's actually based on facts we can research.
 
Last edited:

Mensch1351

Cherished Member
Joined
Jun 21, 2006
Posts
1,166
Media
0
Likes
343
Points
303
Location
In the only other State that begins with "K"!
Sexuality
99% Gay, 1% Straight
Gender
Male
There are no easy answers when it comes to rape and abortion. A baby shouldn't have to be killed because of the father's sin. The baby is a unique individual and should be protected. I'm not out to make women feel bad about an abortion they had because they were raped, but don't you think if a woman feels bad about a past abortion that, that is saying something. I've heard women who've had an abortion because they were raped say they regretted their abortion, that they just sunk into a deeper depression afterwards. I've also heard women who were raped say carrying the child to full term was a healing experience. One woman said things changed in her mind when she realized that the baby was her's and it shared her DNA.



Well, last time I checked, I'm human and I'm seeking to save human lives, I think that qualifies me to have a say.

Just keep in mind the principle -- HER choice!!
 

atlclgurl

Just Browsing
Joined
May 20, 2011
Posts
271
Media
1
Likes
0
Points
101
Sexuality
No Response
Gender
Female
VB... in regards to binary... I work in the legal arena, either a law is a law or it isn't. Either Congress passed something, AND the Senate passed that same bill AND the sitting President signed it into legislation AND it becomes the law of the land or it doesn't.

There's no "grey" area available here. Or in your terms... "2" is simply not available. (not that I think 2 ever figures into the binary code...)

Regardless of our differences in re the current President, I don't wish you any ill will either... so - I'll have a Grey Goose dirty martini, please. :)
 

B_VinylBoy

Sexy Member
Joined
Nov 30, 2007
Posts
10,363
Media
0
Likes
68
Points
123
Location
Boston, MA / New York, NY
Sexuality
90% Gay, 10% Straight
Gender
Male
VB... in regards to binary... I work in the legal arena, either a law is a law or it isn't. Either Congress passed something, AND the Senate passed that same bill AND the sitting President signed it into legislation AND it becomes the law of the land or it doesn't.

There's no "grey" area available here.

There's always a middle area in political matters. You just don't consider it because of your job title and its responsibilities. Although if I borrow your career analogy, my other career outside of the music industry is wrapped in computers. We look at "progress meters" all the time since we usually need to estimate to our clients how long it would take to install something or copy over data. Even if a job is not done, we can put people at ease by telling them or acknowledging that something is 60% complete or half way done, etc... and it usually works, unless they're under a strict deadline (which happens a lot) or just impatient (which we inform them that we're not miracle workers).

Or in your terms... "2" is simply not available. (not that I think 2 ever figures into the binary code...)

Actually, I said "ones, zeroes and points and between". So two would never be an option. But we won't get too mathematical here.

Regardless of our differences in re the current President, I don't wish you any ill will either... so - I'll have a Grey Goose dirty martini, please. :)

Now that's what I'm talking about. :wink:
 

FuzzyKen

Expert Member
Joined
Nov 10, 2006
Posts
2,045
Media
0
Likes
100
Points
193
Gender
Male
I am not madly in love with the current sitting President because of his definition on what winning something is, and desire to compromise a win into what the rest of the world would define as a loss, only to then have him redefine what a loss is to call it a win.

Given the choices I see right now, Even knowing what I know, I would have to vote for Obama again. Here are my reasons taking each GOP candidate into consideration.

Perry: A bigoted individual in the pocket and totally subservient to the Religious Right. He did not tell the truth regarding Texas finances under his administration and in so doing that makes him untruthful. He is not the brightest bulb in the chandelier and I see a repeat of the years of Bush II. If he were to choose his running mate we would have a good chance of seeing another religious extremist with both giving far greater power to the religious right than they already have and if we did not see that, it would be a Presidential Administration with internal fighting and this would compromise it's ability to move forward.

Romney: A track record as a decent qualified administrator, but a family legacy of great wealth and power that was of very limited success. Grew up with a Silver Spoon in his Mouth based on the family legacy, too conservative for the Democrats and way to liberal for the extremists of the Republican Party. Probably would in spite of these concepts have the best chances for election at trying to draw conservative Democrats away from Obama. Religious background as a Mormon would work against him with some groups and calm down others at least partially. Is the best statesman and the most intelligent and honest of the GOP candidates. Would if asked probably make an intelligent choice for VP, but if the party chooses he would very likely be paired with some individual like Bachmann or Palin to increase his appeal to the lunatic fringe.

Paul: No real significant marketable experience in public service, no track record visible enough that anyone would remember, not well enough known by the main stream. Not enough money behind him and easily chewed up in the money wars. He simply would fade into the background. Some ideas sound in concept but impractical in reality and not do-able in the long run. Does not have a good grasp on the job of the Presidency and has made statements that would indicate it would take an Imperial Presidency granting a great deal more power to the Executive Branch to get through what he has talked about. Not going to happen. The congress already thinks that the legislative branch should have more power and the other two branches less.

"The Pizza King": Simply no experience in public service, already has expressed ideas making him a target, too much of a "hothead" and his temper could be exploited and will be exploited greatly against him. Has operated a moderately successful chain of fast food restaurants that make and market a product that is easily one of the most unhealthy products to consume on this planet. If he were to take the nomination and he had a choice in who he would pick for a VP candidate you might see Bachmann or Palin as a VP candidate, and good or bad based on that Obama is in again.

Bachmann: For a person with a supposed Law Degree, no understanding of the limitations and powers of the job of President. Very limited track record in public service, a target because of her husbands Christian moralist business ventures, a target because of her statements which are preposterous, a target based on her emotional instability and simply incompetent when it comes to what the job would require of her.

In am still expecting a "Dark Horse" from the Republican Party to show up at the last minute. The reason for this would be that the Dems would use up their war chest combatting the existing candidates and not have time to dig out the dirt on the "dark horse" and or combat what the GOP would say. It would be the most intelligent decision they could make. I don't care what he says, the most likely "Dark Horse" candidate to be drafted at the last minute by the party would be none other than Jeb Bush. Notice the "give aways". If Jeb had been public in throwing his support behind any of the current candidates I would think it less likely. If he keeps completely "out of sight" and very low profile (which he has done) he becomes an ideal candidate for the office. He has the experience, he has the name recognition, he has conservative supporters and he is ambiguous enough to make it. The minds of the total lunatics would think he would be just like his brother and they could have their dream in another "Bush-Cheney" ticket, and those who want "Reagan Republican" would picture him to be more like his father and in so doing he would be far better than anything they have got right now.
 

atlclgurl

Just Browsing
Joined
May 20, 2011
Posts
271
Media
1
Likes
0
Points
101
Sexuality
No Response
Gender
Female
There's always a middle area in political matters. You just don't consider it because of your job title and its responsibilities. Although if I borrow your career analogy, my other career outside of the music industry is wrapped in computers. We look at "progress meters" all the time since we usually need to estimate to our clients how long it would take to install something or copy over data. Even if a job is not done, we can put people at ease by telling them or acknowledging that something is 60% complete or half way done, etc... and it usually works, unless they're under a strict deadline (which happens a lot) or just impatient (which we inform them that we're not miracle workers).

I'm not talking political compromises, I'm talking actual campaign promises kept or even compromised into a "kinda kept" passage of law. (As is shown on that website, they do give him credit for "compromises".) You're scoring his "in progress" promises and, regardless of my career, a law is a law is a law. An unpassed bill is not, ever, a law. Fact. Not spin available. No grey, no "smooth the ruffled feathers of the anxious customer". A bill sitting in committee, is still (to paraphrase Fraggle Rock) is still "just a Bill".

I understand we will continue to disagree on this so pass that pitcher of martinis... we can get drunk and politely agree to disagree.




Actually, I said "ones, zeroes and points and between". So two would never be an option. But we won't get too mathematical here.

Two is never an option in a bit string anyway. Which is precisely why I used it. ;)
 

Tee&A

Experimental Member
Joined
May 7, 2007
Posts
345
Media
0
Likes
13
Points
163
Location
Cali
Sexuality
100% Straight, 0% Gay
Gender
Female
Sigh.

Typically, I make it a practice not to discuss for whom I have voted, but I will make an exception in this case.

Yes, I voted for Barack Obama, but I did so because in actuality I was really voting against McCain. As a veteran, the thought of having John McCain as my President frightened me. If I had my druthers Barack Obama would not have received the Democratic nomination, but he did so I had to make a choice because not voting is not an option for me. So Barack Obama it was.

Will I vote for Barack Obama again? Well, I'm going to steal a quote from one of my friends: in 2012, I'm voting for me. If you have a proven track record (which I do check, mind you) of bending the American public over to serve your own needs, you will not get my vote. If you're more concerned with idealism and don't understand the difference between patriotism and nationalism, you won't get my vote. If seeing a black man as President of the United States churned your insides to the point where you needed colon surgery, you will not get my vote. I'm voting for me. And frankly, I'm tired of getting screwed over so unless someone comes out of the woodwork who can prove they can do better, I will vote for Barack Obama again.
 

Redwyvre

Cherished Member
Joined
Jan 22, 2011
Posts
608
Media
0
Likes
321
Points
128
Location
Minneapolis (Minnesota, United States)
Sexuality
99% Gay, 1% Straight
Gender
Male
I'll vote for Obama again. 1) He doesn't make me cringe when he opens his mouth to say something. 2) Republican presidents for as long as I can remember say they want to reduce the size of the government and the deficit yet they always do the opposite. Hate That! 3) I was born to be a left-winger.
 

D_Davy_Downspout

Account Disabled
Joined
Dec 5, 2004
Posts
1,136
Media
0
Likes
18
Points
183
If you were born to be a leftie, why would you vote for a conservative like Obama?


Me, I voted for him and I won't again. I bought his slick pitch that was designed to make people believe he was a progressive, despite the staffers he hired and his actual moderate record. But I didn't expect such a hard right once he got into office.

The man is to the right of Bush on most issues, which amazed me when he realized it. The worst part is that he gets people who are nominally liberal to support far-policies they would have screamed about under Bush.

He's a Democrat who's got people talking about cutting SS. That is completely insane. He needs to go.

He'll get reelected though.
 

B_VinylBoy

Sexy Member
Joined
Nov 30, 2007
Posts
10,363
Media
0
Likes
68
Points
123
Location
Boston, MA / New York, NY
Sexuality
90% Gay, 10% Straight
Gender
Male
He's a Democrat who's got people talking about cutting SS. That is completely insane. He needs to go.

When in office, Clinton also talked about cutting Medicare & Social Security. Jimmy Carter signed into law major Social Security Amendments in 1977. Making necessary adjustments to Social Security is something every President has to take into consideration while in office. Even Democrats do this from time to time. They don't all just mindlessly shield it from opposing views to keep into perspective an unwavering ideology as to what it means to be a liberal.

What's crazy is that not a single piece of legislation, written or proposed by Obama or the current Democrats, has been voted on in Congress which gives any substantial numerical value as to how much he, personally, would like to see cut from Social Security. We don't know any of the specifics.

But the fact that he has some people talking about it is wrong? Really?! When just talking about certain ideas becomes the problem, our country is severely fucked.
 
Last edited:

Redwyvre

Cherished Member
Joined
Jan 22, 2011
Posts
608
Media
0
Likes
321
Points
128
Location
Minneapolis (Minnesota, United States)
Sexuality
99% Gay, 1% Straight
Gender
Male
To be honest I struggled finding three reasons to vote for him again. His healthcare reform 'package' is probably going to be completely smashed and/or will make matters worse and that is only a small problem compared to other things the Federal government has to deal with for the foreseeable future.
 

D_Percy_Prettywillie

Account Disabled
Joined
Jul 6, 2011
Posts
748
Media
0
Likes
24
Points
53
He needs to go.

*through a megaphone*

In favor of whom?


After reading several of your posts now I'm convinced this is part of a larger strategy; Pretend to be a progressive or just left leaning, claim at the top of your lungs that the President isn't really a liberal and that he's "Super Conservative" (because he wasn't 100% against making amendments to Social Security... even though Bill Clinton and Jimmy Carter both did the same thing), and then bash him openly and tell people you're not going to vote for him this time.

Then propose one of two alternatives- vote Green party or just don't vote at all. Bam- Republican victory. It would be an effective strategy if executed by someone who wasn't making it so painfully obvious.



JSZ
 

Tee&A

Experimental Member
Joined
May 7, 2007
Posts
345
Media
0
Likes
13
Points
163
Location
Cali
Sexuality
100% Straight, 0% Gay
Gender
Female
I stop spending money because times are bad.

I think that's great. It seems that you have quite the viable solution to the country's current financial situation. When times get lean and prices go up: Just don't spend money.

..And all this time I thought that most of the people in the United States are having a tough go because they're spending money on McMansions, Ferraris and bling, not because they are going broke trying to pay for necessities like groceries, gasoline, and keeping a roof over their heads. Which in "theory" are all things they simply can't live without, sooo they kind of/sort of don't have the option of not spending money... Hm.
 

B_enzia35

Experimental Member
Joined
Mar 12, 2011
Posts
863
Media
0
Likes
16
Points
53
Location
Texas
Sexuality
100% Straight, 0% Gay
Gender
Male
What's with the class warfare? I've recently started hanging clothes to dry instead of using the dryer, so I can save that money on electricity. Do I have to? No, but it helps me save some money for the inevitable dry times ahead.

Wasn't there a recent article that said something like 80% of "poor" people had a gaming console in the house? Priorities...
 

B_VinylBoy

Sexy Member
Joined
Nov 30, 2007
Posts
10,363
Media
0
Likes
68
Points
123
Location
Boston, MA / New York, NY
Sexuality
90% Gay, 10% Straight
Gender
Male
Wasn't there a recent article that said something like 80% of "poor" people had a gaming console in the house? Priorities...

Since game systems have been in existence since the 70s you need to be more specific. Besides, a game system does provide an inexpensive way to entertain oneself and an entire family, plus can boost people's morale if not abused. $150 on a Nintendo Wii, which comes with a free multiplayer game that everyone can play is really the problem here? That's why poor people are financially struggling? Yeah, right. It could easily be $150 on drugs, and we all know how certain folks don't like them poor people spending money on those kinds of things for recreational fun.

It's like you said... priorities. Focus on the real ones next time.
And do keep in mind, one of my biggest hobbies of all times is video gaming. I've followed the industry avidly since Pong and my first Atari VCS, and own systems that are older than some members of this board. Refute with caution.
 
Last edited: