I've had disagreements with some things President Obama has done/not done but NOTwarrior has sexual fantasies about a tiger-shooting bully. Now THAT is creepy.
Dear Luddly:
Regarding Obama -- his best ideas I support were all left to volunteer efforts
* microlending (which could still be pursued to replace welfare with a sustainable system of financial training and business development instead of handouts)
* assistance to Vets (which could be used to save historic sites and businesses to create jobs and campus housing/health care for Veterans on a sustainable basis)
* Excellence in African American Education (which could be used to set up campus coops in historic African American neighborhoods to combat poverty by creating jobs in education)
while the ideas that were most divisive and destructive are pushed through federal govt
* the drones and intelligence/spying issues
* the ACA and forcing federal controls of health care reforms, penalizing instead of rewarding states and people for solutions in the private sector
* pushing Partisan agenda above Constitutional duties to include and represent all people and parties regardless of beliefs (most notably, penalizing people who by Constitutional beliefs do not believe that federal govt has authority to mandate insurance or penalties on health care choices that belong to the states or to the people) even to the point of threatening with IRS or other police powers to target political opponents for their views
Luddly I don't mind people supporting ACA or other reforms under Obama IF YOU AGREE TO PAY FOR IT PER PARTY; but where these views have been VISIBLY BIASED BY PARTY I believe that is not only discriminating, but OPPRESSIVE and punitive to legally force people of opposing views to pay for policies that even the supporters refuse to pay for!!!
So for this, I have a major problem with.
If people are abusing support for Obama and ACA to "get back at Conservatives" that needs to be kept out of federal policy.
People should pay for their own programs and policies by party if they so decidedly disagree.
I think it is MORE THAN OBVIOUS by the partisan split that there is a religious difference going on between these groups, so in no way should federal govt be abused to force one group to fund the beliefs or agenda of the opposing group when these are religious beliefs.
Luddly if you cannot change your mind, but truly believe as you do in these policies that other people cannot change their mind about either, that should clearly show these are deeply held religious views, and should be respected equally and funded separately.
I don't know how else to frame this where it is fair to people of all views, except that the parties form an agreement to fund their own policies through their own systems of elected representatives which they already have by party, and quit imposing their agenda on the public through govt offices, processes or policies.
The same way liberals argue that conservatives need to separate church and state, liberals should equally agree to separate state from federal govt and quit pushing agenda like a national religion without or against the consent of the taxpaying public. We can't be forced to pay for other people's political agenda that is as personally held as religious beliefs.
What does it TAKE to get this point across????
An act of Congress or of God or what?