40 Reasons Not To Re-Elect Barack Obama

[Wolfsister77]

I bet NO ONE could give me 1 good reason for voting for Romney...the same people pay for Obama and Romney's campaigns they belong to the same corporations so whoever gets elected out of those 2 it matters nothing to me.

here's the best reason.....Romney has Ryan for VP.......while Obama has Biden......

Well, that gives me plenty of reason not to vote for Romney.

 

[ScreamingEagle]

I bet NO ONE could give me 1 good reason for voting for Romney...the same people pay for Obama and Romney's campaigns they belong to the same corporations so whoever gets elected out of those 2 it matters nothing to me.

here's the best reason.....Romney has Ryan for VP.......while Obama has Biden......

Well, that gives me plenty of reason not to vote for Romney.

of course it does.....you prefer to vote for an ignorant numbskull.....

Try reading some of the previous posts on this thread where everything you said here is debunked

like where exactly......?

 

[Papageorgio]

I will give you one reason to re-elect Obama. He wants to raise taxes on himself where Romney wants to reduce his own taxes. Obama wants to increase federal revenue by personally paying more in taxes while Romney wants to decrease federal revenue so he can keep more for himself.

Now if you could prove that Romney paying less in taxes will be good for everyone, then I might buy in, but unfortunately, we've been that route and found out that it doesn't work. If it did, we wouldn't have over 8% employment, now would we?

Anyway, I'm going with the guy who is willing to be taxes a little more rather than the guy who thinks he's paying too much even though he pays less than most average working Americans.

Bullshit! He had two years to close the loopholes and him and his Democratic partners did NOTHING!

Romney paid 14% of his income in taxes and gave 16%of his income to charity. Obama gave 22% of his income in taxes, not sure how much to charity.

I'm sure the $3.2 million helped a lot of people that may not of had help otherwise.

 

[Wolfsister77]

under Obamacare January 2013 Medicare reimbursements will be reduced by about 30%.....

Romney will repeal Obamacare which will bring the whole socialist system to a screeching halt.....you can say the original bankruptcy dates will come back into play but that does not mean Medicare is going to go bankrupt under his watch....he will attack fraud just as much as Obama but he will not needlessly spend on Obamacare......in fact his plan will save Medicare for the long haul as a viable, healthy free market health program instead of a socialized nightmare of rationed care.....

under Obamacare a government IPAB panel will be set up in 2013 to ration care.....

under the Romney/Ryan plan seniors 55+ will continue to get the same benefits promised to them....

Listen, if Obamacare is repealed, a lot of people are gonna pay the price. Including Seniors who will have to pay more for their drugs and lose out on the preventative care they are getting. Not to mention others are getting. And those people with pre-existing conditions or are too sick to get coverage-they are boned. So are the people who's children are on their parents policy until they are 26.

You are very foolish if you believe Romney will save Medicare with his policies. His voucher program will turn Seniors over to the whims of private insurance companies with vouchers that will not be able to cover the same costs that Medicare now does.

Really, you are sounding very uninformed on this issue. Sad, really.

Seniors would not lose Medicare, they would still get the care they need just like they have been. My parents have supplemental insurance today that covers the extras that Medicare doesn't cover, and they pay a lot, they are more at the whims of private insurance than before because of escalated costs due to Obamacare.

You and your scare tactics aren't funny.

They aren't scare tactics. It is the truth. These vouchers will lose value over time because Seniors are generally more expensive to insure with more health problems. Again, that is why Medicare was invented. Private insurance companies can and will raise rates, therefore causing Seniors to pay more and more out of pocket or go without. You know what sounds like scare tactics? Making the false claim that care will be rationed.

The supplementals you talk about are expensive because it it private insurance companies dictating the rates and what they will cover. I find it real interesting you think Obamacare has such an impact on cost when it won't even be fully implemented until 2014. At that time there will be state insurance exchanges to help bring down costs and an expansion of Medicaid that will also help cover more people.

Obamacare or the ACA mandates that private insurance companies can't drop people because of pre-existing conditions, or because they are too sick. Leaving it up to the States like you suggest will only make the system more expensive overall.

Really, read up on it. I'd give you some links but you can find it. Here's one on the exchanges. It's written by Bill Frist. Not exactly a Liberal.

Why both parties should embrace ObamaCare's state exchanges - The Week


This was directed at both people I quoted above.

 

[auditor0007]

I will give you one reason to re-elect Obama. He wants to raise taxes on himself where Romney wants to reduce his own taxes. Obama wants to increase federal revenue by personally paying more in taxes while Romney wants to decrease federal revenue so he can keep more for himself.

Now if you could prove that Romney paying less in taxes will be good for everyone, then I might buy in, but unfortunately, we've been that route and found out that it doesn't work. If it did, we wouldn't have over 8% employment, now would we?

Anyway, I'm going with the guy who is willing to be taxes a little more rather than the guy who thinks he's paying too much even though he pays less than most average working Americans.

Romney GIVES away more money than Obama will ever pay in an increase of his taxes.....

yet you would prefer that Obama raises EVERYBODY's taxes.....just so you can tax the rich guy more.....?
(see #4 on the list)

Romney gives his money to a church I don't really believe in, but that is his choice. As for taxes, we have the lowest tax rates in over 60 years and the lowest federal revenues to go along with those low rates, yet we wonder why we have such a big deficit. Even when Reagan had over 10% unemployment, tax revenues were over 19% of GDP. We have been sitting at approximately 15% of GDP the last few years because tax rates are so low. Had they been a bit higher and revenues were at 19% of GDP, that would equate to additional revenues of about $600 billion, not enough to create anywhere near a balanced budget, but much better than the $1 trillion plus in deficits.

 

[ScreamingEagle]

I will give you one reason to re-elect Obama. He wants to raise taxes on himself where Romney wants to reduce his own taxes. Obama wants to increase federal revenue by personally paying more in taxes while Romney wants to decrease federal revenue so he can keep more for himself.

Now if you could prove that Romney paying less in taxes will be good for everyone, then I might buy in, but unfortunately, we've been that route and found out that it doesn't work. If it did, we wouldn't have over 8% employment, now would we?

Anyway, I'm going with the guy who is willing to be taxes a little more rather than the guy who thinks he's paying too much even though he pays less than most average working Americans.

Romney GIVES away more money than Obama will ever pay in an increase of his taxes.....

yet you would prefer that Obama raises EVERYBODY's taxes.....just so you can tax the rich guy more.....?
(see #4 on the list)

Romney gives his money to a church I don't really believe in, but that is his choice. As for taxes, we have the lowest tax rates in over 60 years and the lowest federal revenues to go along with those low rates, yet we wonder why we have such a big deficit. Even when Reagan had over 10% unemployment, tax revenues were over 19% of GDP. We have been sitting at approximately 15% of GDP the last few years because tax rates are so low. Had they been a bit higher and revenues were at 19% of GDP, that would equate to additional revenues of about $600 billion, not enough to create anywhere near a balanced budget, but much better than the $1 trillion plus in deficits.

Obama and the Dems rate of spending has run as high as 27% of GDP....

how the hell are you going to cover that kind of spending with some higher tax rates and a low growth rate.....?

The numbers are mind boggling. From the second quarter of 2007, i.e., the first full quarter of a Pelosi-Reid dominated Congress and a politically weakened President Bush, to the second quarter of 2009 when President Obama assumed office, government spending skyrocketed to 27.3% of GDP from 21.4%. It was the largest peacetime expansion of government spending in U.S. history.

Laffer and Moore: Obama's Real Spending Record - WSJ.com

 

[beagle9]

40 reasons I can give you 16 trillion and counting.

half of which belongs to his predecessor. but I'm sure you didn't blame him for anything.

It goes back a little further then that.

Considering the debt has not been paid down in 55 years........

But thanks anyway.........

I say Bill Clinton caused most if not all of it, it just took years now for the complete fall out to take place.

Bush inherited Clintons failures by Clinton not dealing with terrorist as he should have, and then Clintons signing of the Nafta Treaty, where next it's policies began killing jobs for Americans soon there after, and it began destroying American manufacturing in this nation as well, along with the outlayers of that manufacturing in which also employed hundreds of thousands of Americans before hand. Bill Clinton and his wife may be theee most destructive force that has ever been involved in this nations affairs and security, since it's inception and/or creation of. George W. Bush had to fight a war in two nations abroad after Clinton's weakness, and then he began battling a failing economy that had came due after Clintons reign for 8 years of writing bad checks that his free and irresponsible policies couldn't cash on down the road. Barack blaming Bush is rediculous and shows the dis-honesty of him and that party, when they know exactly why the economy had finally gone broke in this nation after the likes of a Bill Clinton becoming President, and especially after he had taken the lock off of the tool shed.

 

[C_Clayton_Jones]

OK, I'm just gonna address your first point for right now.

Obama did not take 716 billion out of Medicare and put it into Obamacare. These are cuts in overpayments to providers and Medicare Advantage. And these cuts are supported by Ryan's plan that Romney supports. They are intended to keep Medicare solvent and were agree'd upon by the providers.

The extra money does not come out of any benefits that Medicare recipients receive. In fact, they are going to close the doughnut hole and Medicare recipients are actually going to save money on their prescriptions. And, they will get free preventative care that they didn't have before.

So Medicare will be improved and be solvent for longer.

Romney likes Ryan's plan which will turn Medicare into a voucher program with a voucher to buy private insurance that will be worth less and less as time goes on and they'll have to pay more and more out of pocket.

There is a reason Medicare was created and that was because Seniors generally have more health issues and are more expensive to insure. Medicare keeps the costs from going up. Private insurance can raise the rates, therefore making the vouchers less valuable and Seniors paying more out of their own pocket and nothing is there to guarantee they even get insurance like they have now with Medicare.

Please do some fact checking before repeating Romney's lies.

Thank You

it was the Affordable Care Act (Obamacare) that made the cuts to Medicare....and Obama will keep those savings for his Obamacare program which combined with his open borders policy will just overload the whole system to where rationed care will become the norm...

they all agree on cutting back fraud and waste but Romney will not use the savings to underwrite Obamacare....a senior will still be able to keep his regular Medicare....but the voucher option will promote more choices and savings....this will help to save the program.....which under Obama will continue on its way into bankruptcy....

You couldn't be more wrong. Please educate yourself on this. There is plenty of good information out there. Just repeating talking points that are false does no one any good.

Conservatives like the OP believe otherwise, they’re not interested in the truth.

 

[Wolfsister77]

half of which belongs to his predecessor. but I'm sure you didn't blame him for anything.

It goes back a little further then that.

Considering the debt has not been paid down in 55 years........

But thanks anyway.........

I say Bill Clinton caused most if not all of it, it just took years now for the complete fall out to take place.

Bush inherited Clintons failures by Clinton not dealing with terrorist as he should have, and then Clintons signing of the Nafta Treaty, where next it's policies began killing jobs for Americans soon there after, and it began destroying American manufacturing in this nation as well, along with the outlayers of that manufacturing in which also employed hundreds of thousands of Americans before hand. Bill Clinton and his wife may be theee most destructive force that has ever been involved in this nations affairs and security, since it's inception and/or creation of. George W. Bush had to fight a war in two nations abroad after Clinton's weakness, and then he began battling a failing economy that had came due after Clintons reign for 8 years of writing bad checks that his free and irresponsible policies couldn't cash on down the road. Barack blaming Bush is rediculous and shows the dis-honesty of him and that party, when they know exactly why the economy had finally gone broke in this nation after the likes of a Bill Clinton becoming President, and especially after he had taken the lock off of the tool shed.

Bush did not have to invade Iraq. They had nothing to do with any terrorist attacks here and were not a threat in any way.

It is amazing to me how you think Bush has no blame for what happened to the economy with 2 wars, a massive tax cut, and an unfunded Medicare prescription plan to his name.

And may I remind you that 9-11 happened on his watch.

I've always been told it is the person in charge who is at fault. Well Bush was in charge on 9-11.

Don't go blaming Clinton for that if Obama can't blame Bush for the mess he inherited.

 

[Wolfsister77]

it was the Affordable Care Act (Obamacare) that made the cuts to Medicare....and Obama will keep those savings for his Obamacare program which combined with his open borders policy will just overload the whole system to where rationed care will become the norm...

they all agree on cutting back fraud and waste but Romney will not use the savings to underwrite Obamacare....a senior will still be able to keep his regular Medicare....but the voucher option will promote more choices and savings....this will help to save the program.....which under Obama will continue on its way into bankruptcy....

You couldn't be more wrong. Please educate yourself on this. There is plenty of good information out there. Just repeating talking points that are false does no one any good.

Conservatives like the OP believe otherwise, they’re not interested in the truth.

Yep, I figured no matter what I say, he's got his own version of the facts and doesn't really want to hear anything else.

 

[ScreamingEagle]

it was the Affordable Care Act (Obamacare) that made the cuts to Medicare....and Obama will keep those savings for his Obamacare program which combined with his open borders policy will just overload the whole system to where rationed care will become the norm...

they all agree on cutting back fraud and waste but Romney will not use the savings to underwrite Obamacare....a senior will still be able to keep his regular Medicare....but the voucher option will promote more choices and savings....this will help to save the program.....which under Obama will continue on its way into bankruptcy....

You couldn't be more wrong. Please educate yourself on this. There is plenty of good information out there. Just repeating talking points that are false does no one any good.

Conservatives like the OP believe otherwise, they’re not interested in the truth.

unlike idiot liberals.....conservatives are very interested in the truth.....here's some more truth for ya...read it and weep....

Last week, a new Congressional Budget Office (CBO) report updated the amount of money Obamacare robs out of Medicare from $500 billion to a whopping $716 billion between 2013 and 2022.

...
In total, Obamacare raids Medicare by $716 billion from 2013 to 2022. Despite Medicare facing a 75-year unfunded obligation of $37 trillion, Obamacare uses the savings from the cuts to pay for other provisions in Obamacare, not to help shore up Medicare’s finances.

But Obamacare’s raid of Medicare doesn’t stop with cuts; it includes a redirection of tax revenue from the Medicare payroll tax hike in Obamacare. The payroll tax funds Medicare Part A, the trust fund that is projected to become insolvent as soon as 2024. Obamacare increases the tax from 2.9 percent to 3.8 percent, which is projected to cost taxpayers $318 billion from 2013 to 2022. However, for the very first time, Obamacare does not use the tax revenue from the increased Medicare payroll tax to pay for Medicare; the money is used to fund other parts of Obamacare, much like the $716 billion in cuts are.

With a raid on Medicare of this magnitude, President Obama’s assertion that his new law is protecting seniors and Medicare is astonishing. The truth is that Obamacare does the opposite.

Obamacare Robs Medicare of $716 Billion to Fund Itself

 

[Zoom-boing]

I bet NO ONE could give me 1 good reason for voting for Romney...the same people pay for Obama and Romney's campaigns they belong to the same corporations so whoever gets elected out of those 2 it matters nothing to me.

He's a moderate, he's a proven leader, he's smart, he can (and has) worked across the aisle, he chose Ryan who leans conservative (although his record includes yay votes for big gov't spending so he is not as conservative as he is being presented, imo) who is also a proven leader who also can (and has) worked across the aisle and he's smart as all get out. Both these guys understand how the economy works and we need leaders like that right now.

Most importantly? R & R do not want to 'fundamentally change America'. Obama does.

 

[beagle9]

1. Bush did not have to invade Iraq. They had nothing to do with any terrorist attacks here and were not a threat in any way.

2. It is amazing to me how you think Bush has no blame for what happened to the economy with 2 wars, a massive tax cut, and an unfunded Medicare prescription plan to his name.

3. And may I remind you that 9-11 happened on his watch. I've always been told that it is the person in charge who is at fault. Well Bush was in charge on 9-11. Don't go blaming Clinton for that if Obama can't blame Bush for the mess he inherited.

Answer: 1. Bush was dealing with a conglomerate of situations that were boiling over from the previous years of mis-management and dictators gone wild in the world. It was told by intel that the dictator Sadam had weapons of mass destruction, so Bush patiently sent a team along with our allies in the world into that nation to check it out. Sadam wasn't very co-operative and played cat and mouse with the team while there. Bush then gave Sadam many ultimatums, but Sadam just snubbed them all, and beat the retorical drums of war onward. Well this nation being a nation of strength in the world under good leadership, expects co-operation and answers when dealing with such vital issues in which threatened the region under or around this Sadam, as was proven in the first Gulf War involving him invading Kuwait. No love loss for a man who was a dictator, and a war monger who killed in mass murder his own people along with the kurds in very evil ways. His sons were also bad cats that the people of Iraq had absolutely no love loss for either. Then of course the dealing with Afghanistan was an on going war to get Bin Laden of course, and it involved Pakistan as well in this quest as was proven. We actually have fought a new world war in all of this mess to date, but no one is putting the huge puzzle and struggles together in which we have been dealing with in all of this to date, and if they do try and put it together, many times now they have been wrong about it all, but yet they control the megaphone and the media when shouting their views from the roof tops. Obama failed to do many of the things he had done or promised in the security aspect of his job, because he found out the truth finally, and had to agree with the inteligence agency that the on going struggle to get Bin Laden had to continue, and guamtonamo bay had to remain open, just like he learned alot more about it all once his information security clearence as President became a reality check for him in it all.

It is the only reason that the dems can say now to the repubs, hey he killed Bin Laden didn't he, and hey he's been tough on security hasn't he ? They couldn't say these things before, because Obama thought we were the enemy to the world when he went around apologizing to it during his campaigning, and this in respect to us and our actions in the world. How many marines have been killed now over the last 20 years ? It's time we wake back up and gain our strength back from these hippies in this nation again. Now look at Egyt and where they have gone, what a failure that has turned into. wow

Answer: 2. After 9-11 Bush had his hands full with the world up on his shoulders at that point, and yes because of this, he did ignore for to long the economy, and that was a mistake on his part, but he probably figured that 9-11 had made the nation stronger and more unified at that point as well, and that we could handle our end, if he just kept us safe. Well we could handle our end, but Clintons error had finally come back to haunt us in the worst ways imaginable (fun while it lasted back then), but payday was now upon us. Bush coudn't stop this title wave coming, and Obama is dealing with it also to this very day.

Answer: 3. I do blame Clinton, because his chickens have come home to roost now. Thanks, but we don't need anymore Clintons in our leadership, and that is the truth of the whole matter I think now..

 

[beagle9]

I bet NO ONE could give me 1 good reason for voting for Romney...the same people pay for Obama and Romney's campaigns they belong to the same corporations so whoever gets elected out of those 2 it matters nothing to me.

He's a moderate, he's a proven leader, he's smart, he can (and has) worked across the aisle, he chose Ryan who leans conservative (although his record includes yay votes for big gov't spending so he is not as conservative as he is being presented, imo) who is also a proven leader who also can (and has) worked across the aisle and he's smart as all get out. Both these guys understand how the economy works and we need leaders like that right now.

Most importantly? R & R do not want to 'fundamentally change America'. Obama does.

Exactly, either we vote on the correct business managing of this nation right now, or we vote on the social re-engineering of this nation right now. Obama had four years of social re-engineering fun, now it's time for management again, but management with compassion and mercy involved in it's daily platform.

We can't afford the latter (social re-engineering at all cost) so the answer is obvious.

 

[Papageorgio]

You couldn't be more wrong. Please educate yourself on this. There is plenty of good information out there. Just repeating talking points that are false does no one any good.

Conservatives like the OP believe otherwise, they’re not interested in the truth.

Yep, I figured no matter what I say, he's got his own version of the facts and doesn't really want to hear anything else.

All your blow hard lines and propaganda, then we get the accusation that conservatives aren't interested in the truth.

Sorry so many of your posts fail so completely, they are just laughable and not really worth responding to because the misinformation is so deep.

 

[Harry Dresden]

Half the number belongs to Bush. I never said how far back in time the debt goes. Are you just slow today or what?

Damn Elvis, I hadnt counted on you being mathematically challenged.

What ever you say buddy...........

Neither Bush nor Obama is worth a ****. I don't like hacks...

on either side. I exaggerated when I said half. It's a third.

you got that right El.....and both were and are terrible leaders....

 

[Harry Dresden]

Neither Bush nor Obama is worth a ****. I don't like hacks...

on either side. I exaggerated when I said half. It's a third.

Bush sucked..No question.....He sure looks good now though. Hey I just found something to actually thank the current president about.

Obama has done as much damage in four years as Bush did in 8.

no he hasnt.....ask Dean or Lakunta.....they will set you straight by Golly.......

 

[RDD_1210]

Conservatives like the OP believe otherwise, they’re not interested in the truth.

Yep, I figured no matter what I say, he's got his own version of the facts and doesn't really want to hear anything else.

All your blow hard lines and propaganda, then we get the accusation that conservatives aren't interested in the truth.

Sorry so many of your posts fail so completely, they are just laughable and not really worth responding to because the misinformation is so deep.

Here is the perfect example of what is wrong with politics in our country. "I don't understand all the facts you just posted, nor do I have an interest in understanding, so I'll belittle you and pretend I am too good for you".

Ignorance is bliss and the fuel for the modern day GOP. It's truly sad that an honest conversation is impossible, literally impossible because people like this refuse to even talk about the issues like an adult.

 

[freedombecki]

40 reasons I can give you 16 trillion and counting.

half of which belongs to his predecessor. but I'm sure you didn't blame him for anything.

Umm, his predecessor is not running for President in 2012.

Obama promised to cut the deficit in half by the end of his first term. We all know how that worked out.

 

[freedombecki]

I bet NO ONE could give me 1 good reason for voting for Romney...the same people pay for Obama and Romney's campaigns they belong to the same corporations so whoever gets elected out of those 2 it matters nothing to me.

He's a moderate, he's a proven leader, he's smart, he can (and has) worked across the aisle, he chose Ryan who leans conservative (although his record includes yay votes for big gov't spending so he is not as conservative as he is being presented, imo) who is also a proven leader who also can (and has) worked across the aisle and he's smart as all get out. Both these guys understand how the economy works and we need leaders like that right now.

Most importantly? R & R do not want to 'fundamentally change America'. Obama does.

Zoom-Boing, I've seen a lot of posters gang up on one side or the other, but it's getting hard to find a poster who is so balanced he can appreciate someone who truthfully works across the aisles. Romney will, but the reason I like him is while he did, if there was something he saw that was truly fiscally bad in his state of Massachusetts, he would veto it, even though he knew he would be overridden in his state by those across the aisle and to the left. He took his licks from the press for it, but he kept on doing what he felt was the right thing to do--hold down spending, using his veto as a message to others to stop the spending.

We haven't seen any movement of this administration to do more than speak dictation to the other side of the aisle and not work together with it, all the while gauging the press to join in the "Booooooosh' fault" line.

Because you're one of few posters here who really does not carry favoritism of any party or person very far, and for renewing a reminder to all about the importance of fellowship between the two aisles, I'm dubbing your post "best of season" and am bookmarking it with thanks for your calming and sage perspective in what is otherwise the silly season of an election year.