Liberals- Do you really want four more years of this? (dollar, rating)
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
I'll have to take a look at his views in more detail. I quickly looked at his values, since I don't want a social conservative in the White House. While the Economy is a more important issue, support for Civil rights is a strong indicator of a person who supports a move to be like the rest of the free world, as opposed to aligning more with less free societies. I personally do not trust a candidate who bases their secular obligations on a faulty understanding of an ancient text.
While I like that Ron Paul basically doesn't support a Constitutional ban on gay marriage, as an example, I don't like his reasoning. Marriage has not historically (outside this country anyway) been a religious concept as he claims, in fact Martin Luther strongly opposed Christianity and marriage being involved. He also cited that the dictionary definition of marriage supports DOMA, which is absurd, since it depends on the dictionary (not all say man/woman) and dictionaries are not reliable means to judge federal laws that ban millions of people from obtaining thousands of rights. He also voted to ban gay adoption in DC, which irritates me to no end since science proves children raised in gay households do just as well, sometimes better than straight households, and I'd rather orphaned children be raised in a loving, same-sex household, then being abused in child services or orphanages.
However, despite my disagreement with his reasoning on one of the issues I looked up, I at least would trust him to not concern himself so much with denying gays rights, as say a Bachmann or Perry would. That at the very least makes him better than them.
OK, let's start with the name calling....grow up tough guy. This is the internet...you know...where you don't have to back up your mouth in person.
Next, you listed a what was supposed to be a rebuttal, but didn't address what I stated.
You are one of those people who pay pennies into the system, but want the free ride to go on forever, without sacrifice, without skin in the game.
You are incapable of seeing passed your Prog colored glasses. Take responsibility for your own life, stop enabling bad behavior with blind faith in your Liberal leadership.
Oh, and ease up on the internet muscle.....tough guy.
Sorry theS5, reconmark tore your points apart. You last statements are generalizations that have nothing at all to do with that poster. Seems like you're swinging at the air.
I, for one, do not crave economic misery or uncertainty for my children. Obviously, Obama is incompetent and incapable of addressing the economic woes of the nation and seems completely unwilling to change from failed policy. That being said, four more years of an Obama presidency would only continue with the same policies and put the nation deeper and deeper into economic trouble.
Why in the world would any rational person want four more years of this? I would think that even liberals would want a strong economy, low unemployment, and someone to address our debt. Yet, most liberals seem to really like what Obama is doing.
Why four more years of this?
How were Bush's policies good for the American economy?
Electing a Republican (or Democrat) isn't the answer to all of our problems. The government doesn't control the economy. I know this is difficult for some people to accept, but it's true: We have a market-driven economy, not a government-driven one.
How were Bush's policies good for the American economy?
That has already been answered. See the thread, "Krammer on Meet the Press: Obama caused the fear & panic," post #58.
Quote:
Electing a Republican (or Democrat) isn't the answer to all of our problems. The government doesn't control the economy. I know this is difficult for some people to accept, but it's true: We have a market-driven economy, not a government-driven one.
I, for one, do not crave economic misery or uncertainty for my children. Obviously, Obama is incompetent and incapable of addressing the economic woes of the nation and seems completely unwilling to change from failed policy. That being said, four more years of an Obama presidency would only continue with the same policies and put the nation deeper and deeper into economic trouble.
Why in the world would any rational person want four more years of this? I would think that even liberals would want a strong economy, low unemployment, and someone to address our debt. Yet, most liberals seem to really like what Obama is doing.
Why four more years of this?
well bucko whos gonna come in and change everything all in a short period of time? NO-ONE....american politicians work for someone other that american people and if you haven't figured that out then
blame the companies who do not want to follow guidelines and pay their share of taxes and just want to line in their pockets.
i would love nothing more than to have a conservative super majority so people can see who shifty some of these people are....
That has already been answered. See the thread, "Krammer on Meet the Press: Obama caused the fear & panic," post #58.
A president can have an affect on the economy.
answer his other question
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.