Our president has been a good leader in most cases and has got a lot done

gendoikari87 wrote: Like what?

This is a US election that defies logic and brings the nation closer towards a one-party state masquerading as a two-party state.

The Democratic incumbent has surrounded himself with conservative advisors and key figures — many from previous administrations, and an unprecedented number from the Trilateral Commission. He also appointed a former Monsanto executive as Senior Advisor to the FDA. He has extended Bush tax cuts for the wealthy, presided over a spiralling rich-poor gap and sacrificed further American jobs with recent free trade deals.Trade union rights have also eroded under his watch. He has expanded Bush defence spending, droned civilians, failed to close Guantanamo, supported the NDAA which effectively legalises martial law, allowed drilling and adopted a soft-touch position towards the banks that is to the right of European Conservative leaders. Taking office during the financial meltdown, Obama appointed its principle architects to top economic positions. We list these because many of Obama's detractors absurdly portray him as either a radical liberal or a socialist, while his apologists, equally absurdly, continue to view him as a well-intentioned progressive, tragically thwarted by overwhelming pressures. 2008's yes-we-can chanters, dazzled by pigment rather than policy detail, forgot to ask can what? Between 1998 and the last election, Obama amassed $37.6million from the financial services industry, according to the Center for Responsive Politics. While 2008 presidential candidate Obama appeared to champion universal health care, his first choice for Secretary of Health was a man who had spent years lobbying on behalf of the pharmaceutical industry against that very concept. Hey! You don't promise a successful pub, and then appoint the Salvation Army to run it. This time around, the honey-tongued President makes populist references to economic justice, while simultaneously appointing as his new Chief of Staff a former Citigroup executive concerned with hedge funds that bet on the housing market to collapse. Obama poses something of a challenge to The Political Compass, because he's a man of so few fixed principles.

As outrageous as it may appear, civil libertarians and human rights supporters would have actually fared better under a Republican administration. Had a Bush or McCain presidency permitted extrajudicial executions virtually anywhere in the world ( www.amnesty.org/en/library/info/AMR51/047/2012/en ), expanded drone strikes and introduced the NDAA, the Democratic Party would have howled from the rooftops. Senator Obama the Constitutional lawyer would have been one of the most vocal objectors. Under a Democratic administration however, these far-reaching developments have received scant opposition and a disgraceful absence of mainstream media coverage.

irishman wrote: We are not children and we can not get our way on ever issue.

wlewisiii wrote:The Puritopians won't listen Irish. Just work with your ward & GOTV. It's all we can do to fight the fascists without wasting time on the puritopians.

FECK BECK! indeed. I can't envision myself voting "R" in any election, but because both candidates share something so polarizing (healthcare) in common, my cynicism bolts to the forefront of whatever brain cell produces my political opinions. I find myself nodding my head in agreement with the people saying "Vote Obamney".

GuitarsandGuns wrote: Nader gave us Bush more than Florida.
Rocky Anderson can give us Romney.

GuitarsandGuns wrote:I got your back. The Irish are stickin' together.


Go n'eirigh do bothair leat'

My friend with MS would likely be homeless without Obamacare.

That's enough for least my vote.

If a person can find NO ONE in their circle of friends or relatives who was helped by it, then they need to get out more and make more friends.

Nader gave us Bush more than Florida.
Rocky Anderson can give us Romney.

gendoikari87 wrote:Jesus, the republican pitchfork really is scaring everyone to voting for the corporatists. Here's an idea instead of begging and pleading for those of us fed up with this shit to vote for the wolf in sheeps clothing, maybe you should have been begging and pleading the Obama administration to actually not do the shit that's pissed us off.

gendoikari87 wrote:Here's an idea instead of begging and pleading for those of us fed up with this shit to vote for the wolf in sheeps clothing, maybe you should have been begging and pleading the Obama administration to actually not do the shit that's pissed us off.

whitey wrote:Maybe when you have a real job you will actually see the difference between a republican and democratic administration. Perhaps its just in my line of work there are differences that are noticeable, subtle, but noticeable. I wish you luck in finding whatever true socialist agenda you are longing for gendo.

gendoikari87 wrote:Jesus, the republican pitchfork really is scaring everyone to voting for the corporatists.

gendoikari87 wrote:Jesus, the republican pitchfork really is scaring everyone to voting for the corporatists. Here's an idea instead of begging and pleading for those of us fed up with this shit to vote for the wolf in sheeps clothing, maybe you should have been begging and pleading the Obama administration to actually not do the shit that's pissed us off.

lemur wrote:

irishman wrote: We are not children and we can not get our way on ever issue.

Implication: Those who won't vote for Obama are children and want to have their way on every issue. Ad hominem and strawman in the span of one sentence... bravo!