The Difference between Obama and Romney Supporters

[jtpr312]

I noticed your list for Romney's "accomplishments" don't include AmPad, GS Steel, Damon Medical or any of the other companies that went under on his watch.


But hey, keep showing contempt for working people. You keep doing that... and it will come back to bite you in November.

That may be because Conservatives don't consider failed companies to be accomplihsments like you liberal obama supporters seem to think.

Real conservatives shouldn't think that failure should be rewarded. Which... Bain did if the business failed or not. The only thing that should be gained from failure is a lesson learned.

Real conservatives know Bain is a business not a charity and the bottom line in a business is profit.

 

[JoeB131]

That may be because Conservatives don't consider failed companies to be accomplihsments like you liberal obama supporters seem to think.

Real conservatives shouldn't think that failure should be rewarded. Which... Bain did if the business failed or not. The only thing that should be gained from failure is a lesson learned.

Real conservatives know Bain is a business not a charity and the bottom line in a business is profit.

Maybe it shouldn't be.

What you call "profit", I call people's lives being upended because someone saw the company they dedicated years to working at as a quick way to make a buck.

 

[Bfgrn]

There are two types of Republican voters, millionaires and suckers...

Meet the Romney supporters on this board...

 

[dblack]

There are two types of Republican voters, millionaires and suckers...

Meet the Romney supporters on this board...

As much as I think Romney supporters are kidding themselves, and perhaps do fit the definition of 'suckers', I have to reject the core implication of this argument. Liberals are repeatedly charging non-rich Republicans of foolishness for supporting policies that don't directly benefit them. I wonder if you all realize how much this makes you seem unprincipled and narrow-minded.

The fact is, whether Romney actually represents them validly or not, many non-rich Republicans reject the idea that the state should be in deciding winners and losers in life. They don't support a system of government handouts - even if they are the potential recipients of the handouts - because they recognize it for the dangerous dependency that it is.

 

[Bfgrn]

There are two types of Republican voters, millionaires and suckers...

Meet the Romney supporters on this board...

As much as I think Romney supporters are kidding themselves, and perhaps do fit the definition of 'suckers', I have to reject the core implication of this argument. Liberals are repeatedly charging non-rich Republicans of foolishness for supporting policies that don't directly benefit them. I wonder if you all realize how much this makes you seem unprincipled and narrow-minded.

The fact is, whether Romney actually represents them validly or not, many non-rich Republicans reject the idea that the state should be in deciding winners and losers in life. They don't support a system of government handouts - even if they are the potential recipients of the handouts - because they recognize it for the dangerous dependency that it is.

"Labor is the United States. The men and women, who with their minds, their hearts and hands, create the wealth that is shared in this country—they are America."
President Dwight D. Eisenhower

You are very naive. The 'government' decides every day the winners and losers... It is not We, the People, it is the elite. My biggest concern is that the Democratic Party of FDR, Truman and JFK is caving to the same special interests. Ike's GOP is dead. Today's GOP is totally owned by the opulent, who have no problem hooking up their auto milkers to the taxpayers tit.

EDUCATE yourself 'peasant'

The Contemporary Condition: The Real Entitlement Crisis

We do face an entitlement crisis, then. But it is not the one identified by Fox News and the Neoliberal Right. It is the one concealed by the nomenclature and attacks by the Right. What’s more, as the recent economic meltdown in 2008 demonstrated, these entitlements are not only unjust, they are extremely dangerous. A class entitlement to escape regulation while putting at risk a whole society, and indeed world, is nothing to sneeze at. And as we have seen most recently, even if a world wide depression is avoided after such a meltdown, its costs and sacrifices gradually trickle down the social ladder until they, too, reach those at the middle and bottom layers of society. So, the rich and the superrich feel entitled to monopolize the largesse when growth occurs and to pass down the costs of their adventurism when the bottom falls out. That is a hell of a lot of entitlement. That is precisely why so many are so eager to publicize the false version of “the entitlement society” today, within state legislatures controlled by the Republican Party, through Superpacs allowed by the gang of five neoliberals on the Supreme Court, and on the 24 hour News Media. Reduce the deficit, they chant, by curtailing programs supporting the middle and poor classes. Quietly accept the double-trickle down process. But don’t you dare touch the entitlements of the rich that put everyone else at risk.

credit to midcam5 for the article...


"Harry Truman once said, 'There are 14 or 15 million Americans who have the resources to have representatives in Washington to protect their interests, and that the interests of the great mass of the other people - the 150 or 160 million - is the responsibility of the president of the United States, and I propose to fulfill it.'"
President John F. Kennedy

 

[dblack]

You are very naive. The 'government' decides every day the winners and losers... It is not We, the People, it is the elite. My biggest concern is that the Democratic Party of FDR, Truman and JFK is caving to the same special interests. Ike's GOP is dead. Today's GOP is totally owned by the opulent, who have no problem hooking up their auto milkers to the taxpayers tit.

My naivete is likely, but not so much on this. As I've posted repeatedly, I don't believe that Romney, or the Republican establishment, is any more dedicated to laissez-faire than are the Democrats. Both parties enthusiastically use government to manipulate the economy to benefit their friends and punish their enemies. I'm simply defending the targets of your ridiculous cartoon. In many ways, they are more principled and thoughtful than the libs who are criticizing them.

 

[uscitizen]

I noticed your list for Romney's "accomplishments" don't include AmPad, GS Steel, Damon Medical or any of the other companies that went under on his watch.

Bain made plenty of money on all those companies. That's what they are in business for.

Yep and as long as the mega corps make money it is fine for America to go down.

 

[Shelzin]

That may be because Conservatives don't consider failed companies to be accomplihsments like you liberal obama supporters seem to think.

Real conservatives shouldn't think that failure should be rewarded. Which... Bain did if the business failed or not. The only thing that should be gained from failure is a lesson learned.

Real conservatives know Bain is a business not a charity and the bottom line in a business is profit.

Profit even at the expense of the business. *shrugs*

Ok.

In the real world those are known as parasites. They come in, eat the host... It dies.. They move on to another host.

 

[Bfgrn]

You are very naive. The 'government' decides every day the winners and losers... It is not We, the People, it is the elite. My biggest concern is that the Democratic Party of FDR, Truman and JFK is caving to the same special interests. Ike's GOP is dead. Today's GOP is totally owned by the opulent, who have no problem hooking up their auto milkers to the taxpayers tit.

My naivete is likely, but not so much on this. As I've posted repeatedly, I don't believe that Romney, or the Republican establishment, is any more dedicated to laissez-faire than are the Democrats. Both parties enthusiastically use government to manipulate the economy to benefit their friends and punish their enemies. I'm simply defending the targets of your ridiculous cartoon. In many ways, they are more principled and thoughtful than the libs who are criticizing them.

What is ridiculous is that the peasants for plutocracy don't have even a hint of who and what they are. They are Monica Lewinkys for the opulent. This is not about party, this goes a lot deeper. It is the manifestation of personality types, the way they were raised and even differences in the brain structure between liberals and conservatives.

As a liberal, I put people, and all of God's creations above materialism. I view no man as being above me, and conversely, I view no man as being below me. Conservatives have a whole different set of values. Conservatives worship the opulent. They equate wealth with virtue. I call them the modern day Pharisee.

Luke 16:13-15

13 “No one can serve two masters. Either you will hate the one and love the other, or you will be devoted to the one and despise the other. You cannot serve both God and mammon (money).”

14 The Pharisees, who loved money, heard all this and were sneering at Jesus.

15 He said to them, “You are the ones who justify yourselves in the eyes of man, but God knows your hearts. What is highly valuable in the eyes of man is detestable in God’s sight.

 

[dblack]

What is ridiculous is that the peasants for plutocracy don't have even a hint of who and what they are. They are Monica Lewinkys for the opulent. This is not about party, this goes a lot deeper. It is the manifestation of personality types, the way they were raised and even differences in the brain structure between liberals and conservatives.

As a liberal, I put people, and all of God's creations above materialism. I view no man as being above me, and conversely, I view no man as being below me. Conservatives have a whole different set of values. Conservatives worship the opulent. They equate wealth with virtue. I call them the modern day Pharisee.

Sure, they have different values. But are they any less ridiculous than their liberal counterparts who blindly follow Democrats, even though they cave to the same special interests as the Republicans?

 

[Bfgrn]

What is ridiculous is that the peasants for plutocracy don't have even a hint of who and what they are. They are Monica Lewinkys for the opulent. This is not about party, this goes a lot deeper. It is the manifestation of personality types, the way they were raised and even differences in the brain structure between liberals and conservatives.

As a liberal, I put people, and all of God's creations above materialism. I view no man as being above me, and conversely, I view no man as being below me. Conservatives have a whole different set of values. Conservatives worship the opulent. They equate wealth with virtue. I call them the modern day Pharisee.

Sure, they have different values. But are they any less ridiculous than their liberal counterparts who blindly follow Democrats, even though they cave to the same special interests as the Republicans?

"The perfect is the enemy of the good"
Voltaire

Yes, the Democratic Party has their blue dogs who cave to the same special interests as Republicans. But the perfect should not be the enemy of the good. The more liberal and progressive members are not the ones beholden to those special interests.

 

[dblack]

Sure, they have different values. But are they any less ridiculous than their liberal counterparts who blindly follow Democrats, even though they cave to the same special interests as the Republicans?

"The perfect is the enemy of the good"
Voltaire

Yes, the Democratic Party has their blue dogs who cave to the same special interests as Republicans. But the perfect should not be the enemy of the good. The more liberal and progressive members are not the ones beholden to those special interests.

So, would the answer to my question be "Not really, no" ?

 

[Bfgrn]

Sure, they have different values. But are they any less ridiculous than their liberal counterparts who blindly follow Democrats, even though they cave to the same special interests as the Republicans?

"The perfect is the enemy of the good"
Voltaire

Yes, the Democratic Party has their blue dogs who cave to the same special interests as Republicans. But the perfect should not be the enemy of the good. The more liberal and progressive members are not the ones beholden to those special interests.

So, would the answer to my question be "Not really, no" ?

That would be my answer. The GOP is not even an option in this country. That party has been breached completely and is totally beholden to the monied interests whose priorities are in direct opposition to the general public.

The Democratic Party, ESPECIALLY the liberals and progressives are the only hope of preventing a plutocracy.

BTW, why don't you just hit the Quote' button so it doesn't screw up the posts?

 

[dblack]

The Democratic Party, ESPECIALLY the liberals and progressives are the only hope of preventing an oligarchy.

And I think they are, albeit unintentionally, the principal tool of the oligarchy.

BTW, why don't you just hit the Quote' button so it doesn't screw up the posts?

sorry bout that. fixed.

 

[Bfgrn]

The Democratic Party, ESPECIALLY the liberals and progressives are the only hope of preventing an oligarchy.

And I think they are, albeit unintentionally, the principal tool of the oligarchy.

BTW, why don't you just hit the Quote' button so it doesn't screw up the posts?

sorry bout that. fixed.

I vehemently disagree. I have talked to you before, and although I believe you are genuine and well intentioned, your views are the most dangerous to a democratic society. I had hoped you would read the article I posted an excerpt from, because the neoliberals like you who are mentioned pose the greatest danger. Laissez-faire was not the economic philosophy of our founding fathers, and neoliberals like the 5 right wing robes believe laissez-faire should be the basis of our very laws and governance. It is more dangerous than Marxism, and just as blindly followed.

 

[OohPooPahDoo]

If someone asks you what the main difference is between the Obama
supporters and Romney supporters, just tell them that Romney supporters sign their checks on the front, and Obama supporters sign their checks on the back.

I'm supposed to vote for a guy because he invested money in Domino's pizza?

How fucked is that?


I notice you conveninently leave out all of Mitt's taxpayer subsidized ventures. Somehow 1.5 billion of our money to help run the olympics really means Mitt Romney is a great manager.

 

[Soggy in NOLA]

If someone asks you what the main difference is between the Obama
supporters and Romney supporters, just tell them that Romney supporters sign their checks on the front, and Obama supporters sign their checks on the back.

I noticed your list for Romney's "accomplishments" don't include AmPad, GS Steel, Damon Medical or any of the other companies that went under on his watch.


But hey, keep showing contempt for working people. You keep doing that... and it will come back to bite you in November.

How is pointing out that Obama's an abject failure at everything showing contempt for working people?

Are you high or something?

 

[NoNukes]

The difference is that Obama supporters believe in who they are voting for. Romney voters are voting for him because he is the Republican who is running.

 

[jtpr312]

Real conservatives shouldn't think that failure should be rewarded. Which... Bain did if the business failed or not. The only thing that should be gained from failure is a lesson learned.

Real conservatives know Bain is a business not a charity and the bottom line in a business is profit.

Maybe it shouldn't be.

What you call "profit", I call people's lives being upended because someone saw the company they dedicated years to working at as a quick way to make a buck.

Business is not a charity, charity is charity.

 

[Politico]

Yep and as long as the mega corps make money it is fine for America to go down.

Ah yes the PS campaign button BS. Classic. The only time you ever see comments like these are on the internet or anywhere involving ratings and sponsors.

You would do nothing different. Same goes for everyone else. If you owned a business you would want to make a profit. If that meant buying products from overseas that's what you would do. And you wouldn't be crying at night over some lost job in Montana. People need to cut the crap and be freaking honest.