It's Official Now

[sparks]

It's all official now.
M vs B
B is still going to throw a hell of big party in some town...............somewhere.




Lotta money being tossed around ..........ya think??

[peternap]

To be honest, I'm not crazy about either. Mitt is the better of the bad but either way I think this country is over it's hip waders in the cesspool.

We haven't had a good president in my lifetime...why change 

[mgramann]

Being from Canada I don't get  100% of your political system. It seems tho B has been president, the last few years the agenda has been set by a Ruplician congress blocking most attempts at Barrack's idea's and moves. Doesn't seem right now that Mitt or whomever they chose can really complain about how bad things are considering they had the majority of power to change it for the last couple years.

Just to clarify, there are 3 basic things required to pass legislation here(not counting judicial precedence)  We have the House of Representatives, Senate, and the President.  Right now, the democrats have the Senate, and the Presidency.  Republicans have the House.  For two years of the presidents term, the democrats had all three.  For those two years, they could effectively do whatever they wanted.  Once the people saw what they had to offer, the next election swung republicans into the house.  While the republicans had no hope of getting any of their "debatable" ideas passed, they at least had the ability to prevent the democrats from doing the same thing.  In my opinion, this was, at the very least, what the people hoped for-stop the madness so to speak.

Obviously the above explanation doesn't factor in everything, but I think it's a pretty good overview for someone who isn't familiar with our system.  In all honesty, I would not be surprised if the next four years have a similar tone should Romney win.  People are just so fickle.

[flyingvan]

To me, our current president has overstepped his Presidential authority as set forth in the constitution, using 'Presidential fiat'.

    The limiting of executive power by congressional vote isn't a failure of our system, but a success.  Our three branches of government are specifically designed as checks and balances with the people having ultimate authority.

[peternap]

To me, our current president has overstepped his Presidential authority as set forth in the constitution, using 'Presidential fiat'.

Boy...that's an understatment

The news reported today:

Another billboard has a smiling photo of President Obama, with the communist hammer and sickle symbols on his shirt collar, next to the message:

"Somewhere in Kenya a village is missing its idiot. Obama – One Big A** Mistake America. Vote Mitt Romney For 2012!"

I ain't excited about Romney but
+1 for the Billboard!

[waggin]

Choosing the perceived lesser of two evils is still a choice for evil.  Noticed that Romney's top contributors for the 2012 race look an awful lot like Obama's top contributors for 2008.   

2012 Obama/Romney comparison:
http://www.opensecrets.org/pres12/head2head.php

2008 Obama top contributors:
http://www.opensecrets.org/pres08/contrib.php?cid=N00009638

Regardless of who wins, I don't expect a substantive difference on anything but continued pandering to the voters who get whipped into a frenzy over polarizing single issues.  It's been working quite well to distract people from what should be the real issues that neither candidate or party will address.  Divide and conquer always makes a good strategy.

[UK4X4]

I'm a Brit but if I lived in the US I'd be voting for Mit

running a succesful country is the same as a succesful business, money in V's money out and make dificult decisions

A country head that seemingly does not support its military and does nothing when it looses its latest stealth aircraft /drone should simply not be in charge.

I don't agree with mormonism personaly having faught them off the doorstep multiple times 
but thats just a religeous belief thing.

Money to the muslim brotherhood when your debt can't be counted manually by humans - what the F33K.

Mind you the UK is no better with people voting for people that have the only skill set of speaking and dressing well from prompt cards and written speeches.

I wish you all luck and and hopefully someone will lower property tax !

[flyingvan]

  Hey Mr. Obama---I built that.   Want to claim I could only build it because you built roads and schools?  Well, my permit fees included huge school, park, and road fees too.  I've increased the GDP by two houses now, bought lots of domestically produced renewable resources, and the state gets two more houses to tax annually.
   Your party decided to sidestep the free market and simply mandate loans to certain groups, which led to a collapse in the market which greatly reduced the rate of new home construction, but the population continues to grow.  In the smallest of ways I've done my part to relieve the housing pressure.
   So yeah, I built that.  Not because of your bloated government, but in spite of it.

[Pox Eclipse]

If you seriously believe the Mittster can win, you can make some fat cash over at Intrade.  Mitt is trading at $3.38 a share; if he wins, you make $10 per share.  Besides nearly tripling your investment, you get the pleasure of taking money from liberals.

[Huge29]

Mr UK4x4 hit it spot on!
What logical criticism is there of Romney?  I get that there are some closet bigots against Mormons, but other than his support of the Mass. version of socialized healthcare I don't get it.  Those who criticize him, what are your criticisms of him?  I am really just curious; I don't seek to argue or demean or anything like that.

[flyingvan]

Many of us think Joseph Smith made the whole thing up....That's a simple matter of faith though and since faith implies that which can't be proven, any faith that doesn't contradict with physical law or human history is hard to argue as fact or fiction.
  That said, the Latter Day Saints have a very long tradition of upholding core American values, have a great work ethic, support the military, are invariably generous to their community.  Contrast that with Obama's church---Rev. Wright's anti-American vitriol is very well known, just ignored by the media. 
OK, all you people that voted for Obama to prove you're not racially bigoted---now is your chance to prove you aren't religiously bigoted also.
As far as Romneycare in Massachusetts.  There's a big difference in providing something at the state level and the federal level.  The feds?  There is no authority under the Constitution to provide healthcare, let alone mandate it.  Since it isn't specifically listed it's left to the states. 

[OlJarhead]

Being from Canada I don't get  100% of your political system. It seems tho B has been president, the last few years the agenda has been set by a Ruplician congress blocking most attempts at Barrack's idea's and moves. Doesn't seem right now that Mitt or whomever they chose can really complain about how bad things are considering they had the majority of power to change it for the last couple years.

The Main Stream Media (lapdogs for O) would like you to believe that but the Senate, controlled by Democrats, hasn't passed a budget in what?  3 years?  4?

The truth is, the Senate has been blocking everything while the House has been passing various bills.  However, in the US it is common, since the founding, to call BOTH houses "The Congress" and thus the President and the MSM can say  "Congress is blocking the bills" while meaning the Senate but setting up those who don't pay enough attention to believe the opposite.  It's a great trick.

[Windpower]

[embed=425,349]http://youtu.be/tvuTsKed-Po[/embed]

[Huge29]

Many of us think Joseph Smith made the whole thing up....That's a simple matter of faith though and since faith implies that which can't be proven, any faith that doesn't contradict with physical law or human history is hard to argue as fact or fiction.
  That said, the Latter Day Saints have a very long tradition of upholding core American values, have a great work ethic, support the military, are invariably generous to their community.  Contrast that with Obama's church---Rev. Wright's anti-American vitriol is very well known, just ignored by the media. 
OK, all you people that voted for Obama to prove you're not racially bigoted---now is your chance to prove you aren't religiously bigoted also.
As far as Romneycare in Massachusetts.  There's a big difference in providing something at the state level and the federal level.  The feds?  There is no authority under the Constitution to provide healthcare, let alone mandate it.  Since it isn't specifically listed it's left to the states.

Well stated, I was hoping to hear from those who don't like him; I get that many with inferiority complexes just hate anyone who is rich as their poor intellect makes them think that one being rich makes them more poor, but really what is a reasonable criticism of him?  It seems they keep slinging the mud, but they just can't get anything to stick, makes it hard for a guy who mastered the dirty politics system of Chicago to get ahead in this game.

[Huge29]

Regardless of who wins, I don't expect a substantive difference on anything but continued pandering to the voters who get whipped into a frenzy over polarizing single issues.  It's been working quite well to distract people from what should be the real issues that neither candidate or party will address.  Divide and conquer always makes a good strategy.

I get it that this is the way the old men talk in the barber shop slowly sharing each other's ignorance as their is nothing else to complain about, but you really look silly to me, such a comment makes no sense at all.  Polarizing single issues, say like a balanced budget that the dem controlled senate refuses to do?  Do you look forward to your fed govt going bankrupt?  The downgrade of the credit was not enough?  That is a very real issue and one of the R's main points, that the D's keep trying to scare people on how the elderly will be homeless and we all be slaves again, in Biden's words....your comments just seem very misinformed to me, please clear this up for me as to which issues specifically you speak of, thanks!  The one can't do anything as he does not even have the credentials to oversee the neighborhood clean up project, as to his opponent.....what a better resume could be presented than one who has made a very successful living turning around companies? 

[flyingvan]

Obama. Pelosi, Reid, all rich.  Few understand that you can't make the poor richer by making the rich poorer.  Wealth is created, and when we were a nation that respected, even revered, those who were good at creating wealth, prosperity flourished.  Now with the '99%' doofuses out there publicly displaying their ignorance by attacking anyone successful, I'm a little concerned.  Obama can't really destroy our country, we have good checks and balances.  People willing to vote for a more socialist agenda, and actually believe a government can provide a better life for them--ignoring the long history of keeping groups in a cycle of poverty----are the ones that can destroy our nation

[Huge29]

You forgot Kerry and how he married in to the Heinz millions! 

[flyingvan]

  See, I thought it would be snarky to point out wealth is never bad, but the way it's acquired sometimes has more of a positive impact.  If OLJarhead went in his yard and dug out 4 pounds of gold, the government could print enough cash to buy all that gold, and OLJarhead could buy jet skis, ocelots, and a veeblefeltzer making machine.  He has increased the GDP by 4 pounds of gold, distributed it to have fun, get a pet, and start a business.
   Contrast that with Huge29.  He married into cash and bought an office, by promising government hand outs and telling peopple the reason they are poor is the rich took all the money.  He has to be very careful to only hand his constituents things, not provide opportunity--when people go to all the effort and red tape to build veeblefeltzers, and their profit goes to the government (with a small amount of that cut going to hand outs to pnader to the people NOT building veeblefeltzers), they lose that vote. 
   Huge 29 gets rich, too----but it's through kick backs and lecture tours---he produces nothing and employs no one.  He's rich, and does move money around, but has done nothing to grow the GDP. 

[flyingvan]

  BTW----building a cabin increases the GDP.  Any time you exploit a natural resource to produce something of value you increase the overall wealth.  If you sell it to buy stuff you've distributed some of that.  If you increase the property tax assessment for the land, same thing.   You stimulate the economy by buying a box of nails.   You ease the pressure of the coming housing shortage.  You, homebuilder, are a true American.  (If you're from Canada you're still a true American but a Canadian one)

[waggin]

I get it that this is the way the old men talk in the barber shop slowly sharing each other's ignorance as their is nothing else to complain about, but you really look silly to me, such a comment makes no sense at all.  Polarizing single issues, say like a balanced budget that the dem controlled senate refuses to do?  Do you look forward to your fed govt going bankrupt?  The downgrade of the credit was not enough?  That is a very real issue and one of the R's main points, that the D's keep trying to scare people on how the elderly will be homeless and we all be slaves again, in Biden's words....your comments just seem very misinformed to me, please clear this up for me as to which issues specifically you speak of, thanks!  The one can't do anything as he does not even have the credentials to oversee the neighborhood clean up project, as to his opponent.....what a better resume could be presented than one who has made a very successful living turning around companies?

Yesterday, I had a conversation with a friend of mine who is an Obama supporter.  She's a business owner, farm owner, and a gun owner.  We see eye to eye on a lot of things.  We talked about all sorts of things including politics and why I won't vote for Obama.  We disagree on that, but it was a good conversation with mutual respect for each other's views.  Some people can handle that, and some people can't.  Not sure why it bugs you so much that I don't like Romney, and you feel that you need to talk him up to me.

The point of my post was that the actions of an office holder are dictated by their contributors.  Obama has served his top 2008 contributors quite faithfully, especially JPM, Goldman Sachs, etc.  I abhor Obama for his hypocrisy on FISA, the Patriot Act, TBTF bailouts, fiscal irresponsibility in general, foreign policy, NDAA, TARP, HAFA, the reappointment of Ben Bernanke, the appointment of Eric Holder, and many other reasons.  I expect that if Mitt Romney had been elected, he would have done almost exactly the same things as Obama did on all of the above as well as other issues. 

Looking at each candidate's history on forced purchase of "health" insurance and rhetoric on gun control shows exactly the sort of pandering and changing positions to suit the times that they'll engage in for campaigning.  Both have voted for and supported gun-limiting legislation and have changed their tune as part of their presidential campaigns.

The section you snipped and quoted was my commentary on how the two of them are speaking for campaign purposes, but don't really reflect how they've governed or will govern.  By selectively taking one part and spinning it into some straw man arguments I never made in the first place, now you're calling me silly and asking me to rebut arguments I never made?  Thought my point was clear that I didn't like either one of them, and I have zero interest in discussing horse {crap} partisan nonsense with people like you.  I'd love to see debates about actual budget issues with realistic numbers and plans, but neither candidate or party are providing feasible scenarios.  What I've seen from both parties relies on bogus assumptions and false data, just as it did in the election before, and the election before...  I'd love to hear about how we're going to end supporting failure at all levels, but neither candidate will address that with any concrete plans.

If you're going to quote me in a post, I'd respect disagreement if you at least tried to address the point of the post instead of throwing out insults and goads.  You don't need me to answer your questions; just make up some more straw man arguments and rebut them yourself.

[NM_Shooter]

I am absolutely confused as to the support that Obama has.  Both the voting base, and the financial support.  Polls show them in a dead heat, but the electorate shows Obama way ahead.  WTH?

I've yet to have a single person explain to me what Obama has successfully done, other than to further plunge our country into financial ruin.  He promised to fix the problem, and he has not.  He's made it much, much worse.  Why would anyone want more of him?  Why does he deserve a second term? 

Anyone who says that Mitt would be worse is only speculating.  We have absolute, hard evidence that Obama is horrendous.  At this point, I'll dance with the devil I don't know. 

I understand that there are a lot of Obama supporters that vote for him out of pure self serving motivation.  They want their "free" health care.  They want their union salaries protected.  They want as much free stuff as they can get. 

I don't understand why the Obama base can't understand that the treasury is broke (or maybe they do?  ).   Our enemies are amassing, we are weakening our ability to defend, and we are mistreating our allies.

I'd also like to know where his money is coming from.  His base is made up significantly of those who don't have much money at all.  I wonder if his campaign funding comes primarily from overseas interests who are benefitted by a weak America?

I'm also pissed at the Republican party.  Mitt is the best we can do?  Our whole election process..... primaries through general election is a farce. 

[MountainDon]

Our whole election process..... primaries through general election is a farce. 

Agreed!!   

[Pox Eclipse]

The irony is, when Romney loses, Republicans will conclude it was because he wasn't conservative enough, and in 2016 they will nominate Michele Bachman or Rick Santorum.

[flyingvan]

Explain McCain then

[Pox Eclipse]

Explain what, exactly?  That he is a washed up has been, still railing about DADT and withdrawing from Iraq?  He is about as relevant to the future of the Republican Party as Bob Dole.