Obama Or Romney?

[benno]

I would have to take Obama over Romney. At least Obama seems like a human being with genuine cares. Romney is just revolting and self interested.

[ilikekicks]

Im quoting this as an example, not to be only directed at Benno, but ALL of us, from all walks of life on the planet..

I would have to take Obama over Romney. At least Obama seems like a human being with genuine cares. Romney is just revolting and self interested.

Human being whom generally cares? The guy makes comments about folks clinging to ' god and their guns ', allows racial divide to happen comparable to the scale of the late 60's ( wow, NBP party was around then, too! ), envokes class warfare and divides everyone in every direction. He speaks a very tactful version of ' hate speech '.

Does the guy REALLY seem like a ' caring human being '?

Heres humanity at its finest hour.

Obama knows little to nothing in regards to providing for other people. MANY people know nothing about such. They see whats on the plate at their table and vote for what ' looks good '. If someone promised steaks instead of chicken on the table every night, they would win.

The U.S. Economy is tanking again.

Nobody is investing in their homes as property values have bottomed out. Why? Some will blame the housing bubble and low interest rates. Thats PARTLY true, but the real fact is people bought things they couldnt afford and felt ' entitled ' to such. People need to EARN things. Anyone whom wishes to beg to differ here I expect you all to mail/post me some Louboutin's, size 10us, no platforms.

A ' human being that cares '.. 45 million people needing government grants ( food stamps ) to put food on their table? Over 8% unemployment and more being added to those ranks contrar to what the medias misguided numbers are?

If Obama is such a ' human being with genuine cares ', why are there people still being tortured in Gitmo Bay, Cuba? Why are we sending drones all over the planet to shoot missiles at people? Why do we still have armed forces roaming the planet killing people?

Everyone now believes Obama is for ' Gay Rights '. Really? The only reason he did anything was because Romney was more Pro-Gay in MA. Obama tossed the gays a biscuit to try and keep them appeased. He needs their votes.

How about that budget? OH YEAH! what budget? 3 years, since one has made it through the Senate.. Why hasnt Obama reached out to his guys and said ' ya know.. the people deserve a budget ' and get the process going.. Even a supposed ( he was called a.. ) ' War Criminal ' named GW Bush had budgets passed. Bad or good didnt matter, but the process was put through.

I didnt like the debt and deficit The last guy helped create but the present guy wont even step to the plate to stop hemorrhaging thats happening!

Think about what the TSA has done in the last 3 years. Sexually assaulting young girls and grandma at the airports! Why doesnt he stand up against such!! I dont think theres anyone on these forums, regardless of affiliations that would tolerate such an act in person, let alone support a person whom refuses to speak out against such. All he has to do is say ' No more! Leave grandma and the little girls alone or you will be prosecuted '. Its just to much to ask the guy to be a ' really caring human being '. Even a supposed ' War Criminal ' named GW Bush didnt allow such to happen on his watch.. THAT should scream to everyone how bad what we have in office truly is.

When the surface is scratched, Obama is no better nor any different then Romney. There is absolutely ZILCH, Nada, NIL difference. A compliment for one is just the same to the other. Vice versa for a negative. NEITHER of the 2 candidates by the Dems or Repubs will be able to ' hope and change ' anything as it went from bad to extremely worse in the last 4 years.

Because I might say any of the above, someone is bound to just wish to scream ( or have this thought on their mind ) ' Your a racist! ' when race has no regards in the picture at all.

Romneys record is just as bad as Obamas but to say Obama is better in any way then Romney without opening your eyes and taking a cold hard look at the picture.. You might as well want GW Bush back.

They are BOTH revolting and have agendas that do not equate with the common man/woman. Neither is more revolting nor self interested more then the other.

Open your eyes everyone! We have all been duped!

Respectfully Submitted

-ILK

Edited August 9, 2012 by ilikekicks

[Shafted]

I see it this way as well ILK. The truth and what the mainstream media is reporting are two entirely different things. As bad as mainstream media may seem news wise, it is completely sugar coated. The first thing people need to do in this country is throw out their televisions, radios and newspapers. Secondly people need to stop being lazy and do a little footwork to get their news. When one does this, the picture of the news changes dramatically. There is an old saying that those that don't know history are doomed to repeat it. Mainstream media in this country is completely controlled by the government. I'm thoroughly convinced that the people in this country don't want to know the truth, because the truth is too hard to take. That is exactly what our government is counting on to take totalitarian control. The days of the republic are numbered. Obama promised change and we got it. I don't expect Romney to be any different. What people don't seem to understand is that when F. D. Roosevelt signed the new deal, he signed a bank loan with the American people as the collateral. Now as we are totally unable to pay back that loan, what does everyone think will be the result? Doesn't take a rocket scientist to come up with the answer.

[yozz]

Mainstream media in this country is completely controlled by the government.

I think it is slightly different: I think the same forces that control the media control the government.

The way the system is rigged at the moment, whomever is `in power', has very little freedom to actually do things. This holds both in the USA and in Europe.

Y.

[ilikekicks]

Its scary! Not the content, but that you and I really do think a lot alike in our views.

I see it this way as well ILK. The truth and what the mainstream media is reporting are two entirely different things. As bad as mainstream media may seem news wise, it is completely sugar coated. The first thing people need to do in this country is throw out their televisions, radios and newspapers. Secondly people need to stop being lazy and do a little footwork to get their news. When one does this, the picture of the news changes dramatically. There is an old saying that those that don't know history are doomed to repeat it. Mainstream media in this country is completely controlled by the government.

I think mainstream media is nothing more then watching that TV show about the Kardashians ( did I spell their name correctly? Apology if I didnt ).

One channel says one thing, the channel next to it says another thats the total opposite.. wheres the truth?

I'm thoroughly convinced that the people in this country don't want to know the truth, because the truth is too hard to take. That is exactly what our government is counting on to take totalitarian control. The days of the republic are numbered.

Our ' republic ' is gone. It was replaced by multiculturalism and globalism. Good or bad, I wont argue for either. I really dont know much about the British Parliamentary system. Why should I? Its their country. They ( Brits ) as a people should decide what they want to do and just go about their way. I believe our Republic should do the same thing but we cannot.

Neither of the 2 Candidates being mentioned will look to foreign aid reductions in tightening the belt in governmental expenditures. Heaven forbid the U.S. didnt pay over half the United Nations bills! We are 1 in 192 nations that partake in that organization, why not pay a third or less instead of over half?

Why do we have 12 ( yes 12! ) CVN groups floating around the planet. 12 aircraft carriers? Why do we need more then 6? Why do we have 20+ submarines carrying all these nukes?

Why do we have all those nukes and the costs of their upkeep? Do we really need enough firepower to wreck the world 2 or 3 times? Wouldnt being able to just cover half the planet work as our supposed enemies would cover the half that stood with us? ( talk about stupidity on the highest levels, nuclear weapons. )

Why is it our schools and hospitals have open doors for everyone whom is here Illegally yet citizens whom pay taxes to fund those institutions are going bankrupt from medical bills?

There are people out there whom WANT our republic destroyed. Why? I'll make no accusations, not the place for it.

Obama promised change and we got it. I don't expect Romney to be any different.

I told someone about my outright disgust for BOTH of them. It was an Obama supporter and they asked why I couldnt support Obama and why I wouldnt support Romney.

I dont think they had the comprehension level to understand that there actually COULD be a possability that Obama could out do himself in destroying teh Republic on a more grand scale then what his ilk already has. Face it, if he wins in November, he doesnt have to try to be re-elected again. He can do whatever he wants, no holds barred and not have to face the voters.

Think of the programs he would fund. Think of the EPA mandates that he could force into play. Think of the tax hikes he could put on everyone. Where could his reign end? We know where it begins. It begins with hating on successful people and telling them they havent achieved anything or didnt without a handout from the Government. Romney is the SAME way in his executions of his plans. His Record in MA proves it. Hell, Romneys forced medical insurance policies are what was used to put Obamacare on the map as its base! If that doesnt speak volumes to everyone, they are deaf!

What people don't seem to understand is that when F. D. Roosevelt signed the new deal, he signed a bank loan with the American people as the collateral. Now as we are totally unable to pay back that loan, what does everyone think will be the result? Doesn't take a rocket scientist to come up with the answer.

Its called ' Addition by Subtraction '. Others refer to the theme as ' divide and conquer '.

Our society is so divided amongst the front lines of ' political correctness ' that people are shunned from saying how they feel. How can there be a real voice or a place where everyone is heard at the table, as equals, when there are millions of idiots out there calling everyone a ' Racist ', ' Bigot ', ' Homophobe '.. Look at the comments putting people down about ' clinging to god and their guns '.. So what if someone wants to be a bumpkin out in the sticks. So long as they arent harming anyone whom cares. Its not like they are by the voting booths with clubs/nightsticks menacing others ( and going un-prosectued for voter intimidation ). How about calling that Cop in Boston ' stupid ' and not saying anything at all about the drunk professor whom happened to be one of Obamas friends/supporters/associates. Romney? Same thing. There are PLEANTY of examples out there demonstrating such.

Hes ' a more caring human being '.. really? How so? I just dont see it that way.

The world outside of the U.S. Boarders THINKS it has a clue about the American system. They have no realization that the Democrats in this country cannot buy them off with aid money and kissing their butts anymore. The Republicans cant afford to play ' Global Cop ' with our military anymore as well.

But most people ( including those here in the U.S. ) will believe that if someone gets more votes, they win the election, totally forgetting the stupid Electoral College process and not knowing that winning by a landslide of votes doesnt win an election for the Presidency. If that realization doesnt speak for whats wrong..

Where is someone, a great statesman that cares for liberty and freedoms of the individual to become the great people we once were? Wheres someone that would get rid of that stupid Patriot act, the TSA, all those useless bombs.. to think those around me whom CLAIM to be liberals call me a ' conservative ' OH NO!

Thats another thing, whats bad about being a Liberal? I mean a REAL Liberal, not someone whom THINKS they are a ' Liberal ' or calls themselves one.

Ask yourselves this :

With Gitmo bay going on, the ' Patriot Act ' still existing, the TSA doing their thing, the existence of warrent-less searches, those drone strikes.. how could ANY ' Liberal ' vote for Obama? Obama never stood against any of it.

With no economic plan displayed yet, Romneycare in MA and his reign at Bain destroying small businesses, how could any CONSERVATIVE support Romney?

Neither are what they CLAIM to be. Fact is, neither are worthy of my vote as theres no hope and change is all thats in my pocket right now. There used to be some greenbacks. I didnt make 250,000$ or more in the last 3 years, let alone 1.. wheres my ' bail out '?

For the longest time, I heard one side do nothing but ' blame Bush '. OK, they guy was a total asshat, failure.. but when will those same people now own up to their own part in electing the same kind of failure? Truth be known, and as you said shafted.. ' people in this country don't want to know the truth, because the truth is too hard to take. '.

The truth is too hard to take because we need to blame ourselves for putting our heads in the sand and not paying attention. We as a people need to find common ground and agree on this but its impossible when everyone is calling each other a racist, homophobe, bigot, birther, wingnut.. the list of slanders is way to long to post all of..

Edit : Speak of the devil!

http://news.yahoo.co...s-politics.html

"President Obama and Mitt Romney have found some new common ground -surprisingly - on an issue of gay rights.

Obama today joined Romney in publicly disagreeing with a controversial ban on gay members of the Boy Scouts of America, one of the nation's largest and most well-known youth development groups."

This is why Obama changed his mind in regards to ' gay ' anything. Romney ( claimed he was.. ) was ' pro-gay ' a decade ago when he was Governor of MA.

I would bet anyone here a dollar to a dime both have gone home and said something about not liking ' fags ' or ' homos ' at one time or another. They need the votes so.. toss them a biscuit and say ' Im all for gay rights ' instead of being honest with the rest of us.

Instead of caring about others and seeing them as human beings that deserve dignity, they use people as pawns to gather ' votes '.

Edited August 9, 2012 by ilikekicks

[FreshinHeels]

Such bitterness here, sorry I was just curious

Edited August 9, 2012 by FreshinHeels

[ilikekicks]

Such bitterness here, sorry I was just curious

The bitterness isnt in any way reflected towards yourself. If it appeared as such please accept my most sincere apology for making it seem/appear as such.

The problem is ' perception '. The people in America believe they have a perfectly understandable view of whats really going on. Everyone feels they have a clue and the answers and are informed enough to go out and cast a vote in good faith.

The truth is, there are a LOT more selections on the Ballot then Mitt Romney and Barack Obama but the media doesnt want to mention them. The people whom reflect the populace of the U.S. for the most part are ' bought and sold ' in their minds that one or the other is the only choice to choose from.

www.isidewith.com/ is a site that has a short ' quiz ' and from most of the respondents, most people are ' Libertarians ' more then a Democrat or a Republican.. yet people wont vote for someone whom is more in-line with their beliefs. Most people have Gary Johnson, Ron Paul or Jill Stein as the Candidate that has the closest representation of what they would want in office.

I'm betting outside of Ron Paul, most of the U.S. members here reading this have never heard of Gary Johnson or Jill Stein.

Voting for whats known as a ' third party candidate ' is often looked upon or called a ' wasted vote '. The only vote ' wasted ' is one not cast. People have a voice at that ballot box yet they never put their true voice into it. They believe the main 2 parties are in line with ' good versus evil ' or ' left versus right '..

From looking at the past track records of the last 5 Presidents of the U.S. , where has any one of them stood for true personal liberty across the board? Where have any of them stood for economic freedom to pursue our dreams?

What we see on out TV sets and hear from our radios is ' Wall Street versus Mainstreet! '. ' Hate crimes of one race against another '. ' Crazy people shooting one another '. ' Rich people arent paying their fair share '. Everything is divisive and a means to have people at each others throats.

One needs to reflect not to long ago in history to have a realization of another man whom did the same thing which put millions into slavery and death. The problem here is theres now 2 people following the same creed looking to be elected into the same office whereas in past history, it was one mans sick/twisted reality. Twice the potency with a misinformed or blind public following them both.

Some will say Im a loon, some kind of nutjob.. I ask them to look no further then the total abandonment of what the Constitution of the U.S. states and whats currently being used as ' law ' upon the people. Its absolutely heartbreaking that a nation founded upon the base thought/principle of liberty is now a bad fruition of people not caring for one another.

Theres too much polarization from dividing cultures. ' The Great Melting Pot ' has turned into the theme of ' Ill speak whatever language I want and go by my own culture ' instead of trying to fit in with everyone else. If those individuals feel ' offended ' the Political Correctors come in and cause havoc.

It needs to stop. The problem is.. theres too many people subscribing to ' correctness ' and not having the ability to think for themselves.

To put this into a real perception :

Of Mitt and Barack, which one will openly say ' Hey, go put on those heels or a dress or whatever you want. You are whom you are and be proud of it! '. Nobody here should even consider one or the other on such a topic. Most will falsely believe ' Well, Obama is for gays ' because its been said enough.. yet he JUST said something, 3 years after being President about the Boyscouts position? Why didnt he rescind ' Dont ask Dont tell ' his first day in Office as an Executive Order.. such is the ability of the President. Fact is, He doesnt care either way ( that I have seen ) and until political pressure amassed he wouldnt have even said anything.

Stein, Johnson and Paul are all for common sense and truly addressing the issues.

Edited August 9, 2012 by ilikekicks

[Shafted]

Some will say Im a loon, some kind of nutjob..

I find this is the case for those still plugged into mainstream media. It's absolutely nuts how many people actually believe what they read in the newspaper or watch on television. I get most of my news from alternative media. Why? Because many of them provide references that allow you to actually determine what is BS and what is not.

Last time I looked TV and newspapers they had no such burden of proof. They print or produce whatever they want and provide no supporting documentation as to the legitimacy of their stories.

I'm sorry, but if you get your news from a newspaper or TV, you know nothing. That's how different mainstream media is from the truth.

If the people knew the truth, they would be s%^&ing bricks as to just how close we are to the brink.

[meganiwish]

[ilikekicks]

Shafted... I bet if you and I both posted what we have seen or looked into about both of the mainstream candidates, it would cause so many upset stomaches and headaches that people would be disgusted with themselves. They would be so mad about the choices they have considered that they would become unpleasant towards others whom dont hold the same beliefs. IE : Thats the system we have right now. Slander ones opponent so bad trying to make themselves look like the lesser of 2 evils. If the accomplishments and failures of both Mitt and Barack were listed, it would shock people. In my life, I have had some failures. We ALL have some and are usually decent enough people to say ' yeah, Ive screwed up on this or that. wish I could re-do that one again.. '. With the 2 people mentioned ( or anyone presently in office ) , TRY and find a cite where such is said. Theres no difference. Both are arrogant and to be honest, not the type of person I would freely invite to dinner in my home.

[FreshinHeels]

The bitterness isnt in any way reflected towards yourself. If it appeared as such please accept my most sincere apology for making it seem/appear as such.

no, no problem here at all

[Shafted]

Such an appropriate selection, Megan. Different era, same message. The stakes are much higher now.

I think it is slightly different: I think the same forces that control the media control the government.

Also a distinct possibility, yozz. I certainly wouldn't rule it out.

[ilikekicks]

I think it is slightly different: I think the same forces that control the media control the government.

Also a distinct possibility, yozz. I certainly wouldn't rule it out.

Think of this if you would ( anyone ).

Why is there a consistency, even outright LIES being told by certain ' Journalists ' to prove how loyal their political affiliations are?

Without mentioning any names, I would like for anyone to go to yahoo's page and put into a search engine the following :

"journalist lied about bush"

There will be THOUSANDS of links to all the lies ( or maybe even truths ) that G.W. Bush told/stated.

Yet the reporter/journalist whom was fired/resigned in disgrace after almost 30 years in the limelight is not even mentioned. No links at all to such a story?

Heres another one, just to show how much a double standard most ' Journalists ' have : http://www.salon.com/2004/02/05/national_guard/

' one year '. Its stated there was ONE year in which someone found a service record wasnt correct. Where is the same kind of reporting on a WHOLE LIFE of a guy now in office that people believe is a ' better human being ' and replaced the guy with ' one year ' worth of deceit?

Everyone HATED G.W. Bush. For the last decade, I have heard nothing but people saying ' Well, its all Bushes fault! He made this mess! '. Its years later, 3 of them, and we are even worse off..

Where are those same journalists, whom could NEVER be biased ( yes, sarcasm ) , Vetting Obama? They are hounding Romney on everything from where he has worked to what hes destroyed to any position he has ever had.. how about his tax returns?

WHY in the last 4 years ( the year of the DNC primary race in 2007 to the present ) havent they given Obama the SAME attention?

Its pretty simple and obvious. They will NOT do it. They have had 4 years to even try it and they havent lifted a finger to do such.

Nixon was a crook. Good Journalism brought him down and exposed him for the Crook he was. Where are those ' Journalists ' today?

Its surely not Dan Rather. A guy whom was with CBS News for 40+ year and anchored CBS broadcastings for 20+years and completely let his political bias get the best of him, his network and fraudentually published a report SUPPOSEDLY without checking his ' sources ' properly. 3 other producers were let go instead. After much pressure, he parted ways with CBS.

Im not a ' right wing ' kinda guy, contrar to what most would believe from what I have wrote. I want pot legalized, gays should serve their nations openly, people deserve to have the liberty to choose from themselves, legalize gambeling..

I dont care for bias at all, going in either direction and 80-90% of people whom pick up a paper or watch TV news are being fed a line of dung thats miles long and stinks very badly.

[benno]

ILK your posts are great and I admire your research and views... But what about Obama and healthcare? Does that not at least show some glimmer of compassion in relation to the Republicans and their ways. One of the troubles with large scale politics is that right wingers get voted in on promises of tax relief and easy to sound bite remarks about war and immigration... Left wingers on the other hand are trying to change years of right wing gobbledegook and political messing about with nations. All mainstream politicians could be said to have blood on their hands (and all over their faces), but given the choice between Obama and Romney I could only go one way. If a leftwinger actually tried to change the really big issues he would be gunned down (either with a bullet of some kind of scandal) pretty much instantly. We have messed up and it's going to take a very long time for any meaningful change to become apparent... I personally have never found any party that I could really get behind. I usually find the world to be so messed up with it's own issues that it can't see that the most important things in life are education, healthcare and the environment. Everything else is simply human delusions of grandeur.

Edited August 11, 2012 by benno

[ilikekicks]

ILK your posts are great and I admire your research and views... But what about Obama and healthcare?

Thats his greatest FAILURE so far. It does NOTHING to address the growing costs of medical insurance or premiums. Nada, Zilch, zippo! Tort Reform would have been a much better path to have taken.

Does that not at least show some glimmer of compassion in relation to the Republicans and their ways.

Your speaking of ' compassion '.. hey dude, how about everyone going bankrupt! How many homes have had their owners and famalies kicked out? How about 40+ solid months of 8% or more Unemployed? 40+Million on foodstamps because they dont make enough to put food on the table..

Compassion? The dolt has NONE outside of his rhetoric! Seriously!

From what you have posted, it shows immediate bias/hate/discontent. Your insinuating Republicans have a ' lesser ' amount of compassion then a Democrat would. They are all individuals, human beings, just the same as a Democrat.

BTW, Did you know Charles Manson was a registered Democrat? He was quite a compassionate guy, no?

You have been duped mate, like many MILLIONS of others. One side is not more compassionate then the other.

Heres the REAL DEAL with ' Obamacare ' or ' The Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act (PPACA) '

For starters, its not ' Health Care '. Its MEDICAL INSURANCE. The general public doesnt understand that ' health care ' is when you or I care for our health. The way we eat, exercise, the decisions we make in smoking or not smoking. ' Caring for ones health '. How its PAID FOR is done with ' Medical Insurance '.

Its like the bullshyt term of ' Fuel Economy '. Everyone is duped into that term as well. ' Fuel Economy ' would be the market where Gases, oils, fossil fuels, charged electrical cells ( batters ) or any commodity that releases energy for a purpose would be sold. ' Fuel Efficiency ' would ( and has been for many decades ) the definition used for what they now call ' fuel economy '. They tied the term economy ( IE: Cost ) to the whole entity with cars/autos/transportation to make Oil Companies look bad.

They have done the same with the term ' Health Care '. Do you pay for ' Health Care ' or ' Medical Insurance '? They are 2 different things.

' Obamacare ' does absolutely NOTHING towards ' helping ' anyone. Most would laugh and state it will ' help the poor '. No, it doesnt. If someone wants to help the poor, you hire them and give them a livable wage. You make them self proficient so they can earn things for themselves without having to involve/infringe upon anyone else.

I have done such for 2 people, hired them to help my business. Neither had ANY experience in what we do. They were friends of my neighbors whom were in hard times ( laid off due to the EPA closing their plant! ). I can no longer hire anyone due to ' Obamacare ' and I would go so far as to say by the end of the year, I *might not* have a business at all due to the economic repercussions and effects ' Obamacare ' has triggered.

The way ' Obamacare ' works, Medicade is gutted. Over 500billion is removed. Not a smart thing to do when the inflationary rate of Medical Insurance policies is sitting around 20% annually. Medicare has over 30 TRILLION dollars in unfunded liabilities over the next decade. Thats you and I in the near future and probably our Parents in the present time. Medicade is presently suffocating 43 of the States budgets. Its adding trillions in obligations that we dont have the means to pay for.

(( Side-note : If we confiscated EVERYTHING in the top 5% of all earners wealth and possessions, we wouldnt have 30 trillion. ))

The CBO ( Congressional Budget Office ) could NOT Score the original bill. It was forced through without anyone seeing it. It was blindly voted on. ( Why? Who cares, it just wasnt, doesnt matter why. ). The Senate version of the bill was available to the public and it was scored/cost analysed at a severe deficit.

It was stated the bill would reduce deficit of 130billion over the next 10 years. This is done by 10 straight years of tax increases ( no rhetoric, look at the bill in its senate version, its in there. ) totaling 500 billion along with 500 billion from medicade over 10 years to pay for 6 years of ' Obamacare '. ( think of that math. 10 years of funding from 2 sources to pay for 6 years of 1. what happens for those other 4 years?!?! ).

The kicker is in that 6 year timeframe, the cost is 2.3 trillion dollars, not 1 trillion. Its 230% the initial cost and theres 4 years of being taxed with nothing to fall back on as the program of Medicade will already be bankrupt/unfunded and the monies taxed to pay for it will have already been spent.

A Democrat in the senate budget said ' Obamacare is a ponsey scheme that would make Bernie Nadolf Proud '.

Obama actually was in Comittie when all of this was stated and sat there like a deer in a pair of headlights..

www.youtube.com/watch?v=zPxMZ1WdINs

I would ask you and anyone else whom supports ' Obamacare ' , how are people going to stay healthy when they cant afford to buy food to eat? When they are constantly unemployed? When the economy is starting to tank and looks to go completely under in the next 3 years..

If its all about ' compassion ' and ' ones better then the other ', please show me how. I dont think either democrats nor republicans are worthy as being a suitable replacement for my toilet paper. Neither have achieved that superior level of toiletry, let alone my vote.

One of the troubles with large scale politics is that right wingers get voted in on promises of tax relief and easy to sound bite remarks about war and immigration... Left wingers on the other hand are trying to change years of right wing gobbledegook and political messing about with nations.

And the ' left wing ' gets a pass from you once again.

Heres the truth : Left wingers get voted in on FEAR. Straight up fear-mongering and lying. They believe in ' social justice ' and class warfare. Have you seem the commercials yet? Did you know Romney is a Felon? Did you know hes responsible for killing sick women?

It was about robbing kids of school lunches in the 90's. It was 138 of them saying Saddam had WMD's on the floor of the house when discussing a resolution to take to the U.N. floor for more sanctions against Iraq ( You mentioned something about war above? Yes, Democrats are just as blood thirsty as Republicans contrar to what code-pink might preach ). It was about ' a womans right to choose ' when no such provision is in the Constitution and should have defaulted to the 10th amendment where states could decide for themselves.

Theres so many instances where both are ' 1 in the same ' thats theres virtually no difference at all. NONE.

Theres enough to NOT like about Romney already, why make things up? The guy is a chroney whom has had Daddy hand him a life. Daddy paid for his Education and put his foot on the map. Why not go that route instead of defimation thats not true?

All mainstream politicians could be said to have blood on their hands (and all over their faces), but given the choice between Obama and Romney I could only go one way.

Thats the saddest thing I have heard all day. Being closed minded like that is why we face the situations we have. You cannot see they are one in the same and that choosing EITHER of them amounts to more of the same.

It must be odd for you ( and many others ) to have someone say your being ' closed minded ', but Im sure you can see how applicable a term truly can be. I dont mean such in a demeaning way, but your saying you can only choose 1 way, the other isnt really a choice.. thats a textbook definition of being closed minded, not allowing yourself any form of choice.

If a leftwinger actually tried to change the really big issues he would be gunned down (either with a bullet of some kind of scandal) pretty much instantly. We have messed up and it's going to take a very long time for any meaningful change to become apparent...

The ONLY way to solve the problems in the US of A is to do a few things. Your NOT going to want to hear this at all but if you have the ability to actually listen to another point of view, you would learn greatly from this :

1.) Get rid of the philanthropist interventions in our political system. Have people like the Jew hunting George Sorros ( Yes, he is Jewish. YES, he aided Nazis in hunting down Jews and worked with the gestapo, such is fact! Hes a compassionate left winger of grand scales! ) and the Koch Brothers completely removed from the equation. Remove ALL influences from outside the U.S. Boarders.

2.) Trash the Electoral college. Get rid of it. Use the Populace vote.

3.) Go back to the Gold standard.

4.) Get rid of SSI, Medicare, medicade, EPA, FDA.. bring things back to the local level.

5.) Re-institute the principle of the 10th amendment.

6.) End ALL Foreign aid, recall all our military, close the overseas bases and stay out of other countries affairs.

7.) Have a Constitutional Convention to determine weather or not being a U.N. member is actually legal by our Constitutional Standards.

8.) Balanced Budget Amendment.

Problems solved.

The only problem left to solve is how to cover all the medical expenses from Liberals and Neocons having heart attacks and the deficit that ' Obamacare ' wont cover financially from the event

I personally have never found any party that I could really get behind.

Ive been a Libertarian since 1988. " Free minds, free markets " is what I believe in. Harry Brown has a lot of good reads if you want the truth about politics and our system.

I usually find the world to be so messed up with it's own issues that it can't see that the most important things in life are education, healthcare and the environment. Everything else is simply human delusions of grandeur.

The most important thing in life isnt anything you have mentioned above. The most important thing in your life is RESPONSIBILITY. Being responsible for you and your life. Its something thats a second thought for most people when it should actually be the very first thing that comes to mind.

We as individuals should have the personal liberty to do as we please. *I* like smoking pot. I like wearing heels. I like waking up when I want to ( or not ). I like choosing whom I love, where I want to live, what I care to buy, what I drive, I like having choices being made by myself for me.

Im not a SLAVE. I dont buy off on things like others do with putting some priorities in a list of political talking points. Its why I can speak freely, say exactly how I feel and get along with about 99% of everyone from all walks. I dont feel theres only 1 choice I can make on ANYTHING.

I dont think someone in California, all the way across the country should have a say in what *I* do. What the hell do they know about Noreaster Storms, 6 foot snowfalls, Buffalo Wings, Niagara Falls.. How could THEIR Ideals represent MY ideals when its 2 totally different lifestyles? I dont know a damn thing about surfing! I do know some of their beach babes are smoking hot though!

I dont need to have a say in what someone in Cali does, thats their turf to legislate away with however they see fit. They dont know NY like I do.

' Obamacare ' for all its ' Compassion ' dictates to me I am to be forced into a program I may or may not want to partake in. It tells me, that as an Employer, I have to either put forward mega bucks for a MEDICAL INSURANCE policy for my 2 workers ( Its over 10 grand a year just for them, not their families ) OR they will each have to pay 2500$ out of pocket as a penalty for not having any coverage.

Obamacare was stated to only effect large businesses or those with over 50 employees/people. Yet, when the surface is scratched, theres a total of 4 of us and it effects us all! Its just one of the ' smoke and mirror ' tricks used to sell this bill to the public.

Hmm.. 10 grand out of my pocket or 5 grand from theirs.. I dont think you need to guess whos paying. Sure, Im one of those guys your referring to as not having compassion compared to a Democrat, but I think its cheaper on me to toss 5$/hr out in wages then get a nice 10,000$ policy that covers more and doesnt have any waiting-lines involved when seeing a doctor.

So ask yourself about whos going to be more ' compassionate ' here.

The Government is dropping a HUGE cost increase by mandating people have HEALTH INSURANCE ( no, its not health care, its insurance! ) or there are penalties involved.

So the guy making 15$/hr ( thats what my 2 guys make ) now has a penalty of 2500$ a year he has to pay. 2000 hours in a ' work year ' means that over 1$/hr of their earnings now goes to the government as a penalty for ' health insurance mandates ' or an ' individual mandate ' as its called.

What do they get for that ' penalty '? Not much at all.

Obamacare and Romneycare are both built off the same model. Insurance providers in M.A. are going bankrupt. Take a look into it. Your jaw will drop!

Their systems are said to resemble that of Canadas ( I dont think so myself but.. ).. I live in Buffalo N.Y. . The Hospitals here are full of cars with Ontario ( canadian ) plates on them. Go figure! If the system is so great, why are they using the hospitals in the U.S. instead? I have seen plates from as far away as Alberta, Canada, here in Buffalo Hospital parking lots. THAT speaks volumes!

I believe your a great guy and human being Benno but your not fully looking at whats right in front of you.

Think of this Benno, and it should open your eyes to ' the system '.

If the Government can tell you that you have to buy something, when will it dictate what we can buy? When will it tell us what time we have to get up in the morning or what color we have to paint our houses? Where will the line be drawn on your liberties of what you will and will not do and when will you allow the same for others, to choose for themselves.

Anyone whom supports ' Obamacare ' has no concern at all for individual liberties and should not complain at all in regards to censorship, gay marriage being outlawed, abortion being illegal or english being mandated as the only language allowed to be spoken.

Your either for personal liberty or your not. Obamacare does an equal amount of restricting of personal liberty as the Patriot Act when compared in an honest way.

' Obamacare ' is the pandoras box to taking away all of the bill of rights and our personal liberties. Most will laugh at such a thought, but its in black and white, legislated right in front of us.. yet nobody will accept such.

I called ' Obamacare ' a complete failure at the beginning of this message. Its a failure for all of us voters, but a win for Barack Obama and his ideology. If thats ' compassion ', Id rather all out hate sent my way instead.

Edited August 11, 2012 by ilikekicks

[Shafted]

Sounds like you read that 1000(depending on revision level)+ page nightmare as well as I did. Thank God I'm exempt.

[meganiwish]

.

All mainstream politicians could be said to have blood on their hands (and all over their faces), but given the choice between Obama and Romney I could only go one way.

Have you ever seen 'Brewster's Millions'? 'None of the Above'.

[Shafted]

I don't know if the provision for chipping all the program particpants with RFID chips is still in there or not. But it was when I read it. That's scary stuff guys! Right out of Orwells 1984.

[meganiwish]

Ah, 1984.. You know the bit about war being a way of destroying the results of human labour and so keeping them working. Throw away society. Chronic shortages? Replaced by advertising creating needs where none existed before. People in this country get worked up about CCTV cameras, but they don't really play much part in the novel. 'It was conceivable that everyone was watched all the time,' means, it was conceivable that no-one was ever watched. This was Orwell's point, you think you're Ok if you're doing nothing wrong, but power is not law, and a ruler who rules by power needs no evidence. They just get you.

[ilikekicks]

Sounds like you read that 1000(depending on revision level)+ page nightmare as well as I did. Thank God I'm exempt.

Unfortunately, I did. It took me 2 weeks to go through all the provisions and really dig into what it all meant. I couldnt imagine how any of our representatives could have used less then a week to comb over the whole thing and then cast a vote on it. Then again, there wasnt a week or even a day, it was just voted on without being looked at. Is that a representation of ' transparency ' or ' ethical ' government? What happened to putting things online for a few days for ' we the people ' to look at?

Thats not compassion, thats blatant lying.

My main problem with Republicans in general is their not keeping their word ( lying ). From working and running a small business, they spent and taxed like a bunch of liberals with a million dollar limit mastercard. In a 6 year period ( 2000-2006 ) they added trillions!

Basic numbers to consider ( from www.treasurydirect.gov ) :

President Lyndon B. Johnson

• Nov. 22, 1963*: $308,567,018,756
• Jan. 20, 1969*: $362,629,668,607
• Days in Office: 1,885
• Compounded Annual Growth Rate: 3.18%

President Richard Nixon

• Jan. 20, 1969*: $362,629,668,607
• Aug. 9, 1974*: $481,792,000,000
• Days in Office: 2,026
• Compounded Annual Growth Rate: 5.25%

President Gerald Ford

• Aug. 9, 1974*: $481,792,000,000
• Jan. 20, 1977*: $653, 907,000,000
• Days in Office: 895
• Compounded Annual Growth Rate: 13.28%

President Jimmy Carter

• Jan. 20, 1977*: $653, 907,000,000
• Jan. 20, 1981*: $934,073,000,000
• Days in Office: 1,460
• Compounded Annual Growth Rate: 9.32%

President Ronald Reagan

• Jan. 20, 1981*: $934,073,000,000
• Jan. 20, 1989*: $2,697,957, 000,000
• Days in Office: 2,922
• Compounded Annual Growth Rate: 14.18%

President George H.W. Bush

• Jan. 20, 1989*: $2,697,957, 000,000
• Jan. 20, 1993*: $4,188,092,107,183.60
• Days in Office: 1,460
• Compounded Annual Growth Rate: 11.62%

President Bill Clinton

• Jan. 20, 1993*: $4,188,092,107,183.60
• Jan. 20, 2001: $5,727,776,738,304.64
• Days in Office: 2,922
• Compounded Annual Growth Rate: 3.99%

President George W. Bush

• Jan. 20, 2001: $5,727,776,738,304.64
• Jan. 20, 2009: $10,626,877,048,913.08
• Days in Office: 2,922
• Compounded Annual Growth Rate: 8.03%

President Barack Obama

• Jan. 20, 2009: $10,626,877,048,913.08
• Jan. 4, 2011: $14,025,215,218,708.52
• Days in Office: 715
• Compounded Annual Growth Rate: 15.21%

The tally right now is 16 trillion dollars. How can that much debt be justified? In just 1 term, 40% of the debt of the last 4 decaded has been compiled. Thats with less then 1 full term!!!!

Thats not compassion, thats lunacy and insanity!

The same was applied to the medical insurance takeover known as ' Obamacare '. Government was used as a type of lethal force to destroy something.

If rolls were reversed and say someone wanted to eliminate something like ' climate change support ', those supporters of ' Obamacare ' would all be out in the streets with the Medias full support declaring how everyone whom supported such a measure was evil. Such is the polarization of things as they presently are. Such is the reflection of the thinking or mindset of the people of today ( in general ).

Theres more then one choice to everything yet folks just refuse to accept it. They look for the name with the ' D ' or the ' R ' behind it and click the lever.

I dont drive drunk because I dont drink. I dont go around being violent towards others endless they force me into a corner ( best to walk away if I can ). I dont tell others what they can or cannot have.

Democrats have forced their will upon me saying I had to buy something and that if I didnt, there would be a ' price to pay '. Its a threat, plain and simple. The Patriot Act ( bi-partisan but signed into law by a Republican ) told me what I could or could not say, my phone could be tapped. I now have to go through a TSA checkpoint at an airport and face searches? For what? I havent done anything outside of bought some cool shoes and tried to provide a living for myself and others, Ive been responsible.

I couldnt stand GW Bush but would take 4 more years over him then the present guy. To think I might have voted for Obama in 2008..

Hope and change you can step in..

Edited August 12, 2012 by ilikekicks

[benno]

ILK I get where you coming from and actually I have pretty similar views to you. But being told how to think by a Libertarian is not something I like. You know nothing about my political viewpoint and you are actually preaching to the converted. Calm down please. I am not a naughty child. The original post is entitled Obama Or Romney? I was answering the question. Given the choice between Obama or Romney I would vote for Obama. The NHS in the UK could be called health insurance. But when I had testicular cancer about 10 years ago I was treated immediately and received the best possible care and it was 'free'. Everyone in the UK would get the same level of care regardless of their background. I call that a pretty fair system. Therefore yes I think it's good that Obama is trying to setup a similar system in the USA. One can argue forever about money and taxes and national debt but at the end of the day the USA is the world's premier nation and I'm sure it can cope. In the last few elections in the UK I have not voted for either the Conservatives or Labour.

[newheeler]

Why don't you guys vote the one whichever wears high heels sooner? By the way have i mentioned Barack means peach in my language?

[Trolldeg]

Not much of a choice between right wing and ultra right wing. I know that wasn't the question, but I'd vote for Nader.

[ilikekicks]

If only Perot could be on the ballot this time around.

[Heelster]

If only Perot could be on the ballot this time around.

I might even have considered that option this time around - - alas, not a viable option.

Ohio primaries are by party line. Last two primaries I went straight libertarian. I may not totally agree with their candidate, but I also didn't like the other two main options. I also have been thinking that since the libertarians are the closest to being a viable third party, I'll waste the primary vote to help get the numbers up.

Then again, I just might vote libertarian this time around in the general election. I could go 'green' - - Nahhh

[ilikekicks]

Then again, I just might vote libertarian this time around in the general election. I could go 'green' - - Nahhh

I vote my conscious. Gary Johnson is the only candidate I can cast a ballot for and not feel any shame.

I guess Im trying to find the mental rational as to how anyone could vote for either Romney or Obama. I dont think people are dumb or that they are just generally inclined to making bad decisions or that they are ' bad people ', but neither of the 2 mentioned have done anything productive. All they have done is taken from one person and given to another in so many different ways.

I'm willing to bet, of those 8 or 9 that said they were voting for Obama, at least 4 of them are doing such because ' hes the democrat ' or ' hes not a republican '.. when they dont even know whom they are voting for and for all intensive or comparable purposes, his track record is abysmal.

[johnr104]

No matter how good your intentions, you simply cannot change reality. And the reality is that over the years the USA has existed on a pyramid scheme by spending more than we take in. The reality is also that it can't continue forever, and we are seeing the beginnings of the pyramid beginning to collapse. We are also seeing reality take hold in the most liberal states insofar as they are going bankrupt and their state pensions are broke. No government entity can afford the pensions that have been awarded to some of the public employee unions. It just can't happen. And since the states can't simply "print" money, they are going broke and the pensions will not be paid as originally intended. Since the Feds can print money, and borrow without limit, the time of reckoning is slightly delayed. However, the day of reckoning is coming and it doesn't matter who the president is. The only question is whether the changes that are coming will be painful and "controlled" or painful and "uncontrolled". Some of the States are now demonstrating what painful and "uncontrolled" changes will look like. In either case they will be painful and anybody who thinks that their favorite entitlement is untouchable let me assure you... it is not, as demonstrated by the bankrupt pension funds that some states now have. You can stand on the corner and shout "This was a promise the government made to the workers and you can't change it" to your hearts content, because (see "you can't change reality", above) if you have no more money, guess what? That super generous pension won't be paid. And Medicare? There seems to be a lot of back and forth about that lately. Again, just fall back to reality. No matter how good our intentions, we just cannot continue to spend at the current level. There is simply not enough money to go around. So, you might suggest, keep all the benefits and just reduce the payments to the providers. Well, that certainly is one alternative, but I will tell you first hand that the more you reduce the payments to providers, the fewer providers there will be (can you say "rationing"). Why on Earth do you think that so many Canadians come to the USA for treatment? There are whole industries set up in the border areas to organize and help Canadians get treated in the USA. Again, that's reality. Ok, let's tax the millionaires and billionaires their fair share. Well, that seems reasonable (althought putting people making $250K a year in that same boat doesn't sound quite so reasonable, but that's another story) . Keep in mind that people don't get jobs from poor people (they really don't). And, back to that pesky reality, every dollar taken from a person and given to the government is one less dollar that person will spend, on infrastructure, employees, etc. Unlike the federal gov't, a small business can't spend money it does not have. The thing that bothers me about all this is that the so-called rich are really being portrayed as being not as good or nice as the so-called middle class. You see, the nasty rich people buy boats, planes, and have multiple houses. They have fancy cars and eat at expensive resturants. Yea, ok, I guess they do. But what most people don't think about is that EVERY DOLLAR SPENT IS A GOOD DOLLAR. All those people whose job it is to build the boats and planes and houses, and work at the fancy restaurants, they all depend on the "rich" to spend their money on those things. If the rich stopped all the "extravagant" spending how many people would lose their jobs? And here is how it all pulls together. Rich people pay more taxes, they therefore have less money to spend, the people who depend on them spending that money are now out of work and have to turn to the government to provide them with money. And the government can now do this with the extra money they took from the additional taxes on the rich. And we have come full circle. There is a movement in this country that says the government can spend a dollar better than the individual can spend a dollar. If you believe that then vote Obama, if you don't vote Romney. That simple.

[ilikekicks]

No matter how good your intentions, you simply cannot change reality. And the reality is that over the years the USA has existed on a pyramid scheme by spending more than we take in. The reality is also that it can't continue forever, and we are seeing the beginnings of the pyramid beginning to collapse. We are also seeing reality take hold in the most liberal states insofar as they are going bankrupt and their state pensions are broke. No government entity can afford the pensions that have been awarded to some of the public employee unions. It just can't happen. And since the states can't simply "print" money, they are going broke and the pensions will not be paid as originally intended.

Heres just a theory I have. I have a theory that those State Workers pensions are derived/funded from tax dollars. ( more on this in a moment )

Since the Feds can print money, and borrow without limit, the time of reckoning is slightly delayed. However, the day of reckoning is coming and it doesn't matter who the president is.

BINGO!

The only question is whether the changes that are coming will be painful and "controlled" or painful and "uncontrolled". Some of the States are now demonstrating what painful and "uncontrolled" changes will look like. In either case they will be painful and anybody who thinks that their favorite entitlement is untouchable let me assure you... it is not, as demonstrated by the bankrupt pension funds that some states now have. You can stand on the corner and shout "This was a promise the government made to the workers and you can't change it" to your hearts content, because (see "you can't change reality", above) if you have no more money, guess what? That super generous pension won't be paid.

Agree on all of this but.. more on this in a moment..

And Medicare? There seems to be a lot of back and forth about that lately. Again, just fall back to reality. No matter how good our intentions, we just cannot continue to spend at the current level. There is simply not enough money to go around. So, you might suggest, keep all the benefits and just reduce the payments to the providers. Well, that certainly is one alternative, but I will tell you first hand that the more you reduce the payments to providers, the fewer providers there will be (can you say "rationing"). Why on Earth do you think that so many Canadians come to the USA for treatment? There are whole industries set up in the border areas to organize and help Canadians get treated in the USA. Again, that's reality.

Ok, let's tax the millionaires and billionaires their fair share. Well, that seems reasonable (althought putting people making $250K a year in that same boat doesn't sound quite so reasonable, but that's another story) . Keep in mind that people don't get jobs from poor people (they really don't). And, back to that pesky reality, every dollar taken from a person and given to the government is one less dollar that person will spend, on infrastructure, employees, etc. Unlike the federal gov't, a small business can't spend money it does not have.

The thing that bothers me about all this is that the so-called rich are really being portrayed as being not as good or nice as the so-called middle class. You see, the nasty rich people buy boats, planes, and have multiple houses. They have fancy cars and eat at expensive resturants. Yea, ok, I guess they do. But what most people don't think about is that EVERY DOLLAR SPENT IS A GOOD DOLLAR. All those people whose job it is to build the boats and planes and houses, and work at the fancy restaurants, they all depend on the "rich" to spend their money on those things. If the rich stopped all the "extravagant" spending how many people would lose their jobs?

Too many would lose their jobs AND the sales taxes the states collect would no longer be there..

And here is how it all pulls together. Rich people pay more taxes, they therefore have less money to spend, the people who depend on them spending that money are now out of work and have to turn to the government to provide them with money. And the government can now do this with the extra money they took from the additional taxes on the rich. And we have come full circle. There is a movement in this country that says the government can spend a dollar better than the individual can spend a dollar. If you believe that then vote Obama, if you don't vote Romney. That simple.

Another theory I have :

Forget ' taxing the rich '. Lets take an example from another country during their history and take EVERYTHING from the rich. Lets take their homes, their cars.. their toaster ovens.. take it all and liquidate it and use it for the budget.

What people dont see is it would be a 1 time deal. Once its gone, you cant re-spend it. If we tallied the total worth of all of the top 5% of taxpayers, it wouldnt cover our budget/debt payments.

I KNOW the ' rich ' pay more then their fare share. all those complaining about the rich havent had to do something for themselves ( like create their own job! ).

When I bid a contract, I know whatever the final number comes out to be.. 54% of it is costs, insurances and taxes. I still have to come up with wages, material costs and equipment upkeep ( 2 trucks ). The ' profit margin ' is beyond ' slim ' right now as nobody is spending. The markets are absolutely scared shytless right now. Employers are in limbo waiting to see how the new ' affordable care act ' is going to fully implement. Banks arent giving out loans as they know the market is very unstable and loaning to businesses.. odds are its a loosing bet. Same goes for homeowners trying for a line of credit or a second mortgage.

One of the problems in the system is most people get up, work a 9-5 job, get paid on friday, and move on to the next week. They dont have to deal with the ' background ' of what a business entails.

Its easy to say someone else should ' pay their fair share '. I sent out over 200,000$ in taxes last year for my State and Federal. Thats probably more then 3 or 4 members of this site added together would make ( average member, Im sure theres some rolling the dough and some whom are broke ).

The State and Fed made more off my business then Myself and 3 workers combined. What did they do? They didnt unload a single ladder from one of the 2 trucks.

Yet there are those whom have it ' so bad ' and receive ' help ' from that 200,000$ I had to hand over.

[meganiwish]

I think it's worth remembering here that money isn't a real thing, it isn't wealth. To get wealth you need to dig something out of the ground, or grow something, or pull something from the sea etc. EVERYTHING else is wealth distribution.Where there are miners you have people making picks, where there are fishermen you have boat builders and so on. Richer people are getting a bigger share of the wealth. Sometimes that may be fair. Some people work harder than others, some a particularly skilled. Hard to believe, though, that all the chaps with £1,000,000 a year are working that much harder or are that much more skilled. But too big a share for some means too small a share for others. Hmm, society better off for having rich people. Trickle down wealth. The fact is that the economy needs money to move, to be spent. Rich people keep money in the bank, poor people spend every penny they have. That's why it makes sense to tax the rich. I'm waiting to see if I get the response I expect.

Edited August 21, 2012 by meganiwish

[johnr104]

Rich people keep money in the bank, poor people spend every penny they have. That's why it makes sense to tax the rich.

You are correct, more or less. The "rich" must keep money in the bank proportional to their spending. If I had 1 million dollars in the bank I would NOT buy a 1 million dollar car, leaving me with nothing. Does that make sense?

You are also correct insofar as we must tax the rich. Oh, yes, we already do. That's why (in the USA) 50% of the people pay no federal tax at all. Some lower income folks actually get tax refunds without paying tax. The question has always been "what does fair share" mean? All the liberal politicians keep saying "the millionaires and billionaires need to pay their fair share" but then NEVER, NEVER say what that means. We also need to compare apples to apples. Many liberal folks compare "long term gain" with "ordinary income" (which is taxed higher). This makes absolutely no sense at all. People who invest in things like mutual funds, stocks, bonds, etc. for the long term are taking a RISK and in order to keep the flow of investment the gains are taxed at a lower rate. This applies to lots of middle class folks who have long term investments in things like their savings, investments or pension funds. Tax them more, and, yep you guessed it, you tax the middle class more, too.

The bottom line is quite simple. You can tax at 100% and you will simply not solve our debt problem... We have a SPENDING PROBLEM, not a taxing problem. Politicians (of every variety) haven't met a dollar they couldn't spend, and to solve our problems that has to change. Most people haven't met a dollar given to them as an entitlement that they haven't joyously accepted, and that has to change.

Government cannot create wealth, it can only spend our money. Only people can create wealth by hard work, dedication, and a little luck.

Was this the response you expected?

Edited August 21, 2012 by johnr104