Does Obama deserve your vote?

[Uncensored2008]

Wait after clinto left office are you saying there was no surplus?

I'm saying you are a mindless drone reciting talking points that you don't grasp.

The bullshit that you are attempting to sell is that there was a budget surplus, but you have no clue what that means, so you think that there was "left over money" that Bush could spend.

There was no surplus, ever. But if there had been, there still wouldn't have been any money for Bush to spend, because "surplus" doesn't mean what you think it means.

A budget surplus means that the amount of expected revenue exceeds the budgeted expenditures. Under federal law, any surplus monies must go to service the national debt. So had there been any sort of surplus, it would have gone to the debt, not Bush.

But of course, not one dime went to the debt, and we therefore know there was no surplus.

 

[emilynghiem]

Overall, I find that Obama's style of leadership works better for internal work to build relations and groundwork. It's almost sad to me that his best political talents in diplomatic negotiations are wasted fighting against opposition, when he could have invested that to build where more energy and leadership is most needed but most lacking -- on local levels to take the burden OFF federal govt!

And Romney has a greater presence and respect to enforce adherence to "rule of law" more suited for standing up and representing the country in public. And let the negotiations and groundwork go on behind the scenes, where people have personal freedom to work things out without pressure to make public statements during the process.

We need both styles of leadership to bring out the best advantages of all parties and leaders, and direct those resources where they are most effective. Why can't both type leaders work as a team, to cover all the bases and represent the full public, instead of forcing us to compromise as either/or and taking turns? [The way I explained to one friend, if we ran churches the way we ran govt, and expected all the people to be under a Hindu, Catholic or Muslim leader by majority rule, the groups would refuse and would insist on overseeing themselves under the affiliation and leadership of their choice; so why not with political parties also, and only keep the leaders or policies that are universal to all be the part that is public policy for the govt to follow, and keep the rest localized]

If I had my way, I would have Romney as President and have Obama work internally through the Vice President's office to lead the constituents and programs that prosper under Democrats and others who feel he represents those best.

I really feel for the people who most connect and relate to Obama, and would rather he work in direct relations to organize these people and groups across the states and cities to achieve these goals locally where they are sustainable and don't rely on federal mandates from top down management which doesn't help in the long run. We need to build from the ground up and you can't do that by lecturing from the top away from the people.

I believe Romney and the business leaders and community he represents most deserve this opportunity and honor of serving through the highest office.

But if American people can't get past differences, and continue to bicker and blame,
then perhaps we are the ones who don't deserve that leadership. If we deserve the govt we get, and the majority votes for Obama, then we deserve what comes with that.

I would rather we not have to keep fighting this battle, but I trust that God will give us what we deserve, for better or for worse. God is going to give us what is better for our spiritual growth. I would PREFER to work this out with fellow Democrats and leaders like Obama helping on the local level to mobilize and educate the people directly. Otherwise it has exhausted if not wasted resources just campaigning to get leaders elected to "represent" these things on public levels where the work can't get done anyway, instead of reserving those same resources and attention at the actual level where the solutions get implemented.

I am tired of fighting this battle, but if we don't learn our lessons and quit this, then we may just get 4 more years of it. I pray to God for relief, and would much prefer for Obama and the Democrat Party to work on organizing programs by city and state through a network of leadership and training for upcoming leaders to solve problems directly instead of depending on govt and depending on electing leaders who represent dependence on govt.

If the Democrats could do both at the same time, we would deserve the offices we get.
But time and time again, there is nothing but a history of neglecting the communities and issues we most claim to represent, sucking resources out to go fund election campaigns instead. I don't believe in rewarding those kinds of campaigns or they'll keep happening.

 

[Wiseacre]

Overall, I find that Obama's style of leadership works better for internal work to build relations and groundwork. It's almost sad to me that his best political talents in diplomatic negotiations are wasted fighting against opposition, when he could have invested that to build where more energy and leadership is most needed but most lacking -- on local levels to take the burden OFF federal govt!

And Romney has a greater presence and respect to enforce adherence to "rule of law" more suited for standing up and representing the country in public. And let the negotiations and groundwork go on behind the scenes, where people have personal freedom to work things out without pressure to make public statements during the process.

We need both styles of leadership to bring out the best advantages of all parties and leaders, and direct those resources where they are most effective.

If I had my way, I would have Romney as President and have Obama work internally through the Vice President's office to lead the constituents and programs that prosper under Democrats and others who feel he represents those best.

I really feel for the people who most connect and relate to Obama, and would rather he work in direct relations to organize these people and groups across the states and cities to achieve these goals locally where they are sustainable and don't rely on federal mandates from top down management which doesn't help in the long run. We need to build from the ground up and you can't do that by lecturing from the top away from the people.

I believe Romney and the business leaders and community he represents most deserve this opportunity and honor of serving through the highest office.

But if American people can't get past differences, and continue to bicker and blame,
then perhaps we are the ones who don't deserve that leadership. If we deserve the govt we get, and the majority votes for Obama, then we deserve what comes with that.

I would rather we not have to keep fighting this battle, but I trust that God will give us what we deserve, for better or for worse. God is going to give us what is better for our spiritual growth. I would PREFER to work this out with fellow Democrats and leaders like Obama helping on the local level to mobilize and educate the people directly. Otherwise it has exhausted if not wasted resources just campaigning to get leaders elected to "represent" these things on public levels where the work can't get done anyway, instead of reserving those same resources and attention at the actual level where the solutions get implemented.

I am tired of fighting this battle, but if we don't learn our lessons and quit this, then we may just get 4 more years of it. I pray to God for relief, and would much prefer for Obama and the Democrat Party to work on organizing programs by city and state through a network of leadership and training for upcoming leaders to solve problems directly instead of depending on govt and depending on electing leaders who represent dependence on govt.

If the Democrats could do both at the same time, we would deserve the offices we get.
But time and time again, there is nothing but a history of neglecting the communities and issues we most claim to represent, sucking resources out to go fund election campaigns instead. I don't believe in rewarding those kinds of campaigns or they'll keep happening.

It almost sounds like you're saying Obama is better suited to being a lobbyist than a president, which might be true. Leadership and governing is not his forte IMHO.

IMHO, the democratic party is inextricably bound to the public unions. Their money is the party's lifeblood, but if those unions don't back off of the demands they're making then the cities and states where they hold the most power are going to go bankrupt. Public pensions in this country are woefully underfunded, and promises that were made cannot possibly be kept. Something's gotta give, and we're seeing it in cities and counties declaring bankruptcy. In their desire to support the public unions, the democrats are screwing their other constituents - the lower and middle class and the impoverished. That's because the money isn't there at the local levels to provide the services they need. Instead, it's going to HC premiums and pensions.

 

[4Horsemen]

It almost sounds like you're saying Obama is better suited to being a lobbyist than a president, which might be true. Leadership and governing is not his forte IMHO.

I still say Late night talk show host.


Late Night with Barry. he would kill Letterman and Leno.

 

[MikeK]

"Real Birth Certificate?"

Why because his middle name is Hussein?

Cause is last name is Obama?

Cause his dad was an African Muslim?

Give me a break guys none of you can possibly justify your critcism of Obama as comparably worse as Bush's administration.

Obama is a politician, and a politician's job is to make and break promises. Californians know this best especially when we voted a republican actor as governor who cheated on his wife with an ugly maid.

I am still waiting for a legit response as to how Obama is worse than Bush.

But by the way since you guys want to see Obama's birth certificate I hope you call for Mitt Romney's since he was raised in Mexico.

There is no question that Obama is better than Bush. The problem is that comparison is like saying gonorrhea is better than syphilis.

Obama is better than Bush and he would be better than Romney. But having the choice between the lesser of two easily definable and readily recognizable evils is a goddam shame!

 

[Wiseacre]

It almost sounds like you're saying Obama is better suited to being a lobbyist than a president, which might be true. Leadership and governing is not his forte IMHO.

I still say Late night talk show host.


Late Night with Barry. he would kill Letterman and Leno.

Could be, who's the late night guy on MSNBC?

 

[Wiseacre]

" There is no question that Obama is better than Bush. [That's up for debate] The problem is that comparison is like saying gonorrhea is better than syphilis.


I wasn't real thrilled with Bush either. A lotta conservatives weren't.


Obama is better than Bush and he would be better than Romney. [Again, debateable] But having the choice between the lesser of two easily definable and readily recognizable evils is a goddam shame! "

Not all that thrilled with Romney either, but I think we gotta try something else. Obama's ideas ain't working well enough to suit me.

 

[4Horsemen]

It almost sounds like you're saying Obama is better suited to being a lobbyist than a president, which might be true. Leadership and governing is not his forte IMHO.

I still say Late night talk show host.


Late Night with Barry. he would kill Letterman and Leno.

Could be, who's the late night guy on MSNBC?

Right now it's Al Sharpton and Rachel Maddow. total snore. both of them

 

[dblack]

..Not all that thrilled with Romney either, but I think we gotta try something else. Obama's ideas ain't working well enough to suit me.

Then please, vote for something else. Falling in line and voting for the same old nonsense is getting us nowhere.

 

[PaulS1950]

Voting for the lesser of two evils is not necessary. There ARE more than two candidates.
I try to vote for the one who is:
1. believes in and supports the constitution
2. in line with my morals (staying out of moral issues)
3. best supports the freedoms and rights that we are supposed to have
4. lets people have the freedom to grow into the best they can be
5. keeps government in the place of protecting our freedoms and rights
6. allows people to start and run businesses

Basically that means that the two top runners are completely out of the question.
There is only one candidate that fits all those points for me.
I can only hope that others will vote with their intellect and conscience as well and not just for the one "most likely to win". This is not a horse race!

 

[Wiseacre]

..Not all that thrilled with Romney either, but I think we gotta try something else. Obama's ideas ain't working well enough to suit me.

Then please, vote for something else. Falling in line and voting for the same old nonsense is getting us nowhere.

I think we talked about this before. The reality is that only one of two men will be the next president. That's it, unless somebody gets shot or blown up. Nobody else. Nobody. You wanna vote for the Libertarian guy, fine by me. It's your constitutional right. But he is not going to be the president next January. Not going to happen.

Which means - pick your poison, Romney or Obama, Obama or Romney. Pick the one you want the most or the one you don't want the most and vote for one of the two. If you vote for a 3rd party or don't vote at all then you are in effect throwing away your vote and allowing everyone else to make the call.

 

[4Horsemen]

Voting for the lesser of two evils is not necessary. There ARE more than two candidates.
I try to vote for the one who is:
1. believes in and supports the constitution
2. in line with my morals (staying out of moral issues)
3. best supports the freedoms and rights that we are supposed to have
4. lets people have the freedom to grow into the best they can be
5. keeps government in the place of protecting our freedoms and rights
6. allows people to start and run businesses

Basically that means that the two top runners are completely out of the question.
There is only one candidate that fits all those points for me.
I can only hope that others will vote with their intellect and conscience as well and not just for the one "most likely to win". This is not a horse race!

I like this...because I have a business but I tried to open another one during Obama's regime and the banks would NOT loan me a red fucking dime and my credit rating is spotless and I already own a business.

All I wanted to open was a skatepark for the kids out in the country where they wouldn't be bothered. didn't even put restrooms in the plan since it's expensive and the land is wooded out there and they can use the woods like campers do..lol... I had the deal on the land, the contractors ready to pour concrete, shovel ready, all I needed was the bank to approve the money and they shut me down.

I totally blame Obama's bank bailout stimulus trainwreck for that.

 

[dblack]

You wanna vote for the Libertarian guy, fine by me. It's your constitutional right. But he is not going to be the president next January. Not going to happen.

Next January has been a lost cause since the Republican establishment decided Romney was "it". We can compound that loss, and endorse their selection, or we can look to the future and make it clear we won't follow along like sheep.

 

[Dreamy]

You wanna vote for the Libertarian guy, fine by me. It's your constitutional right. But he is not going to be the president next January. Not going to happen.

Next January has been a lost cause since the Republican establishment decided Romney was "it". We can compound that loss, and endorse their selection, or we can look to the future and make it clear we won't follow along like sheep.

Few will understand that change will only come through individuals breaking free of the status quo and voting honestly and with full knowledge of what is currently happening within both major parties.

 

[Uncensored2008]

I still say Late night talk show host.


Late Night with Barry. he would kill Letterman and Leno.

Yeah, with a drone strike....

 

[Aristotle]

And Bush2 had a mess from Clinton and Clinton had a mess from Bush1 and Bush1 had a mess from Reagan...yada..yada yada...smell my dog's ass with that shit man!

OBAMA COULD'VE REPEALED A LOT OF SHIT BUSH2 DID, BUT DID HE DO IT? NO!

so stfu with that whiny bullshit man, I'm over that shit. Talk common sense.



More bullshit. Do you pay attention to what's going on around you or do you just regurgitate the same stale shit that filters through your tell-a-vision?

FACT - Obama has spent MILLIONS sealing his personal records. not just Personal shit like B.C. and SSN, but Educational shit like Diplomas, grades, thesis for college, etc...

Really? He sealed his Educational shit too? YES.

You'd think a guy spouting "Transparency" every two words would at least be 50% Transparent himself right? NOPE. that bastard is barely 1%

Fool thinks we have 57 states, couldn't name the other baseball team in Chicago besides the Cubs that he claimed he was a fan of...lol..dumbass it's the White Sox.

If you can't see how inconsistent and blabbering fake this clown is, and only vote for him based on being a mixed President. then you go right ahead. I can't help you

Here is my question to you.

Why ask for his birth certificate?

I just ibformed you even on the local level such as county jobs they do thourough background checks any federal/state/county job does that so again, why birther are you asking for his birth certificate? What is your reason?

Why not ask for it? It was a simple request that BARACK OBAMA blew outta proportion by trying to hide it and eventually making it worse and making him look like a gotdamn fool. 4 years later stilll...nothing.

Personally I think this issue would've blown over and been a non-issue had he just whipped it out and said "gotcha"....but he couldn't even do that.

First he filibustered for weeks, then the Gov. of Hawaii tried to intervene, all kinds of shit went down, then to our a surprise a photoshopped BC shows up on the internet..OF ALL PLACES.

Obama is a dunce and his fraudulence is without measure.

What bothers me is you think Obama should've upon request. No president has ever had to do this! Why should Obama be any different. Donald Trump made it an issue, the republican party made it an issue by inciting the idea that Obama is an "other."

"Obama isn't one of us he's a black man, his dad was Mooslim from Kenya, he isn't one of us. For god's sake Obama's middle name is Hussein!"

When people are convinced that the president is an "other" they won't care about logic.

I recently had a friend that was disqualified from the LAPD process because he forgot to mention he was busted for marijuana in the eighth grade which was almost 20 years ago! This is a city job. You honestly think people who get disqualified for trivial stuff like that our government will secretly induct a foreign person to the highest office in the world? Seriously man use common sense. Obama shouldn't have to prove he is a US citizen.

 

[Aristotle]

Wait after clinto left office are you saying there was no surplus?

I'm saying you are a mindless drone reciting talking points that you don't grasp.

The bullshit that you are attempting to sell is that there was a budget surplus, but you have no clue what that means, so you think that there was "left over money" that Bush could spend.

There was no surplus, ever. But if there had been, there still wouldn't have been any money for Bush to spend, because "surplus" doesn't mean what you think it means.

A budget surplus means that the amount of expected revenue exceeds the budgeted expenditures. Under federal law, any surplus monies must go to service the national debt. So had there been any sort of surplus, it would have gone to the debt, not Bush.

But of course, not one dime went to the debt, and we therefore know there was no surplus.

Since I am a mindless drone.please point to an unbiased objective source where I can be informed. If you can, and it's legit, I will come back here and apologize.

 

[Uncensored2008]

Since I am a mindless drone.please point to an unbiased objective source where I can be informed. If you can, and it's legit, I will come back here and apologize.

{ How does the budget deficit or surplus relate to federal debt? View details More Results Toggle

When the Congress makes budgetary decisions, it is also indirectly making decisions about the level of debt held by the public. The yearly change in debt held by the public is approximately equal to the budget surplusThe amount by which the government’s revenues exceed outlays in a given period. or deficitThe amount by which the government’s spending exceeds its revenues for a given period, usually a fiscal year.. The budget surplus or deficit is the difference between total federal revenue and spending in a given year. When the budget is in deficit, the government borrows from the public. Alternatively, when the budget is in surplus, the government can reduce debt held by the public. Thus, debt held by the public generally represents the total of all cash deficits minus all cash surpluses accumulated over time.
}

Budget and Federal Debt

 

[4Horsemen]

What bothers me is you think Obama should've upon request. No president has ever had to do this! Why should Obama be any different. Donald Trump made it an issue, the republican party made it an issue by inciting the idea that Obama is an "other."

So by your logic, Obama is just a steppinfetchit monkey that does what every other President does or has done?. is that what you're saying? if so, SLAP YOURSELF!

When people are convinced that the president is an "other" they won't care about logic.

I recently had a friend that was disqualified from the LAPD process because he forgot to mention he was busted for marijuana in the eighth grade which was almost 20 years ago! This is a city job. You honestly think people who get disqualified for trivial stuff like that our government will secretly induct a foreign person to the highest office in the world? Seriously man use common sense. Obama shouldn't have to prove he is a US citizen.

a dumb ass Cop doesn't have half the power a slick greasy Lawyer has. If he did, the weed issue would've been swept under the rug....just like Obama's weed smokin' past.

oh yes, Obama inhaled. did some lines of coke too. Said it himself. or did you even know that?

 

[Aristotle]

Thanks for proving my point. You cannot coherently assimilate a response to the question and exact a refutation to my response. Like all other Obama haters and birthers you lack a significant response to criticism. I laid down a specific criticism to birther logic and you resort to a response than neither improved your position, nor did it effectively discredit mine.