First  Prev  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  8  9  10  11  12  13  14  15  Next  Last
Barack Obama Second Term
137658 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
25 / F / Georgia
Offline
Posted 11/7/12
So many funny comments. Sucks I finished my pancakes earlier, would've had something to eat while reading some of these replies. >:3
44030 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
Online
Posted 11/7/12
Huzzah, finally I can ignore non-political ads again, and don't have to decide which roleplay I'm gonna do with a phone campaigner for a few more years. And the lesser of two evils made it thru, go him.

That said, I want to get a few final things off, just one last time this cycle...its ranty


*yawn* well, that was ranty. Anyways, seems like ima have to accept my buds offer at some point now, seeing as weed is now state legal. Something tells me that "The Everweed State" is going to become an unofficial slogan. Too bad I'm gonna have to turn down his now legal marriage proposal to me. And there's a not funny joke in weed legalization gettin more votes than gay marriage, but i can't bother with it. ahwell.
51290 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
27 / M / Cardiff, UK
Offline
Posted 11/7/12
Well done America... ya did good
22561 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
35 / M / Northern California
Offline
Posted 11/7/12 , edited 11/7/12

superluccix wrote:






So it's fine if they vote against something that will benefit their constituents, take any and every measure to delay or block its passing, then take credit for it when it passes anyway? (EDIT: After thinking about that for a while, it seems incredibly tsundere-like. That's a scary thought... ) It's akin to taking a sledgehammer to construction work on your own house, then taking pride in the fact it got completed. That's my issue with the obstructionist mindset. Why should we accept that childish mentality? I want our politicians to work together, for the benefit of all of us, regardless of party affiliation. Not just for their wealthy friends' tax breaks, not just so they'll have guaranteed speaking engagements after they leave office, but for the good of the country, and because it's their damn job.

They often won't; or they'll move the goalposts back repeatedly, then claim the other side didn't "compromise enough". Enough of that bullshit. One can't legitimately argue that obstruction at any cost is making this country better. It's not increasing the minimum wage, or lowering the cost of living, or reducing the income disparity. It's not providing jobs for much of anyone other than lobbyists and ad agencies. Meanwhile, superPACs are free to throw unlimited amounts of money around, with no real accountability for where that money is coming from, and even less accountability for truth in advertising. This is not the sort of job creation we need right now, because it's not sustainable.

We also have far too many single issue voters, which is in itself a huge problem. Ignorant of or apathetic to most other issues, anyone who appeals to that wedge issue, particularly using fear-based tactics, will likely get their vote. The more polarized the population is about certain issues, the less likely they'll work together, even on the issues in which they do agree. Sadly, it also makes the population much easier to control through propaganda, which is ultimately the reason for this divisiveness to exist.

As for the death panels issue, you're arguing against the public option, i.e. socialized medicine, while the term "death panels" was used initially for exactly what I described. As we are arguing two related, but separate concepts in context, this part of the discussion will not foster any mutual understanding.
60814 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
31 / M / Hell Paso
Offline
Posted 11/7/12

Khaltazar wrote:

The current national debt is around $16,500,000,000,000 (16.5 Trillion Dollars) once it gets past 18 Trillion we are all screwed. Don't act like this has nothing to do with you. If the debt gets any more out of hand we will be paying 100% tax and the government will redistribute the wealth as they see fit. Not long ago we were at arms with communists about this very issue. I cannot believe it. If he turns around and gets the country back in order and reduces the national debt than I will gladly say he did a good job, until then he has failed and the debt shows that.


i'm amazed at all the baseless assumptions all of you are making.

inform yourselves first then form your opinions, don't be like a parrot repeating things and taking them out of context. and then spewing so much crap.


if you want to argue then argue with facts not baseless assumptions or emotions.

FACT. Bush was the worst president we have ever had. he alone effed up our economy. before bush came into office we had zero debt. you can thank clinton for that... once bush took the office, we started a few wars. the first was meaningless. going to war with iraq was worthless. and we lost a lot of soldiers and wasted too much money on it. afganistan was also worthless. when we could have just done what obama did. send a special ops team to kill osama and be done with it.

also remember that the market crash happened under the bush administration and the republicans controlled the congress after the first year effectively obstruction 90% of the things obama wanted to do and make good on his word. after obama took office we started recovering from the market crash. if you know anything about stocks you would know that the dow jones is now at almost completely recovered and on its way to reaching the record maximum.

if you know anything about economics then you should know that in order for the economy to start flowing again you need to put money in. Bailout comes in, but the economy did not start working immediately because after the crash people were fearful of losing even more money or their livelihood.

if you say that romney was the best choice. you should really consider going back to middle school and study more and raise your way up the education ladder. romney outsourced 100's of thousands of jobs to china and india... there is your true capitalist. what do a capitalistic wants? money but not for this country, but for himself.

A capitalist economy - is basically just an economic system based on private ownership of capital. with 0 government involvement. for this refer to bush's terms in office. he deregulated many things and let the business owners and corporations make their own decisions...
guess what? that did not work and he had the market crash and went into a depression (yes depression not a recession) we are finally out of that depression and have finally started to see the light at the end of the tunnel. while i do not think obama is the best president we have ever had, i do believe that currently he is the only man able to completely get us out of the mess bush got us into.

now i know all of you romney sheeps will hate my post and try to retaliate. thats fine i welcome any and all arguments and specially constructive criticism.

but before you speak (write) go and familiarize yourself with how the government and the economy works. then give facts and not hearsay or fallacies. make sound arguments, not emotional ones.

and just to make something clear I did vote for obama and he was not my main choice but out of the ones that actually had a chance of winning he is the one that aligns itself more to my own beliefs. my main choice would have been the green party. but she obviously had no real chance of winning.

and now with a democratic congress and senate you all can expect to see a bit more changes but don't expect miracles.


Posted 11/7/12

zarkoviss wrote:


meipurushiroppu wrote:


hush184 wrote:

I voted for the Obama team, so "YAY!". Personally his views are similar if not the same as mine at the moment. Plus he hasn't pissed me off yet with anything he has done.


so basically ur ok with abortion?


so basically ur ok with telling people what they can and can't do with their bodies, especially concerning it can easily change the fabric of their life forever?

If so, you're not the kind of person I like talking to.

You have beliefs? Fine, keep to them, do whatever you want, just don't try to force them on people you don't even know.

This isn't the middle east.



Why shouldn't we? There's a thing called STUPIDITY. You don't go shack up with someone and do it knowing the risks. There's a thing called protection. Don't want a baby? Try using the precautions put there for you. That or don't do it at all. Problem solved.

No one reaps what they sow anymore, that's why this world is so friggin messed up. You can burglarize a home, get shot, sue the home owner, and even win. No one is held accountable or bears the responsibility anymore, it's just shoved off onto someone else.

As far as abortions go, that should be the sole right to rape victims, they DIDN'T ask for that, nor (in a lot if not most cases) could they prevent it. More than half the people getting abortions are teen queens and, to be blunt, whores who are just too lazy to use protection and take responsibility for stupidity.


51290 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
27 / M / Cardiff, UK
Offline
Posted 11/7/12
I'm in the pro-abortion corner to be quite honest. Of course, I wish people would use protection and not have it get to the point where an abortion is needed, but if you're young or ill prepared to raise a child plus the whole range of other problems then I believe you do have a right to an abortion. I don't think anyone looks at it as something to be taken lightly.

21991 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
21 / M / Lichfield, UK
Offline
Posted 11/7/12
It really makes no difference who won.
With the economy the way it is people will hate anyone who is elected at this time.
Nobody who is elected can come up with a magical solution, being in a position of power at this time means making difficult and unpopular decisions no matter who won.
It's exactly the same over here with the prime minister.
22561 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
35 / M / Northern California
Offline
Posted 11/7/12

AZFox wrote:
As far as abortions go, that should be the sole right to rape victims, they DIDN'T ask for that, nor (in a lot if not most cases) could they prevent it. More than half the people getting abortions are teen queens and, to be blunt, whores who are just too lazy to use protection and take responsibility for stupidity.


Really? The sole right, huh? Women who have ectopic pregnancies didn't ask for those, nor could they prevent them, either. Those are literally a death sentence to the mother, unless an abortion is performed. (If you didn't know, it's when the egg implants inside the fallopian tube.) There are other medical complications that go beyond your sweeping generalizations here, as well. And any of those can threaten the life of the mother, which will kill them both. Also, by strict definition, a miscarriage is an abortion, albeit undesired, and not artificially induced. Are you intending to investigate every woman who has one for murder? (For the record, legislation to do just that has been brought up before.)

While I may be personally against abortion in my own life, and I would hate to be in a situation where it was the only option to save the woman I love...I sure as hell am not so arrogant as to take that choice away from someone else, so that they might have to watch the woman they love die. My personal morals don't trump the woman's right to keep living, and neither do yours, thankfully.

I am pro-choice, not pro-abortion. There is a difference between the two.

It saddens me that there are people who talk about women who get abortions as "teen queens and whores", insist that they have to carry the child to term, but probably wouldn't lift a goddamn finger to help the child once it's been born. More likely, they just keep referring to those women as just "sucking on the public teat." I hate that phrase, but it's on topic. Yeah, that's just compassionate conservatism for you. Let's completely defund Planned Parenthood while you're at it, and really fulfill the conditions of the phrase, "The rich get richer, and the poor get children."
70151 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
25 / M / UofL; Louisville, KY
Offline
Posted 11/7/12

jer5500 wrote:


Khaltazar wrote:

The current national debt is around $16,500,000,000,000 (16.5 Trillion Dollars) once it gets past 18 Trillion we are all screwed. Don't act like this has nothing to do with you. If the debt gets any more out of hand we will be paying 100% tax and the government will redistribute the wealth as they see fit. Not long ago we were at arms with communists about this very issue. I cannot believe it. If he turns around and gets the country back in order and reduces the national debt than I will gladly say he did a good job, until then he has failed and the debt shows that.


i'm amazed at all the baseless assumptions all of you are making.

inform yourselves first then form your opinions, don't be like a parrot repeating things and taking them out of context. and then spewing so much crap.


if you want to argue then argue with facts not baseless assumptions or emotions.

FACT. Bush was the worst president we have ever had. he alone effed up our economy. before bush came into office we had zero debt. you can thank clinton for that... once bush took the office, we started a few wars. the first was meaningless. going to war with iraq was worthless. and we lost a lot of soldiers and wasted too much money on it. afganistan was also worthless. when we could have just done what obama did. send a special ops team to kill osama and be done with it.

also remember that the market crash happened under the bush administration and the republicans controlled the congress after the first year effectively obstruction 90% of the things obama wanted to do and make good on his word. after obama took office we started recovering from the market crash. if you know anything about stocks you would know that the dow jones is now at almost completely recovered and on its way to reaching the record maximum.

if you know anything about economics then you should know that in order for the economy to start flowing again you need to put money in. Bailout comes in, but the economy did not start working immediately because after the crash people were fearful of losing even more money or their livelihood.

if you say that romney was the best choice. you should really consider going back to middle school and study more and raise your way up the education ladder. romney outsourced 100's of thousands of jobs to china and india... there is your true capitalist. what do a capitalistic wants? money but not for this country, but for himself.

A capitalist economy - is basically just an economic system based on private ownership of capital. with 0 government involvement. for this refer to bush's terms in office. he deregulated many things and let the business owners and corporations make their own decisions...
guess what? that did not work and he had the market crash and went into a depression (yes depression not a recession) we are finally out of that depression and have finally started to see the light at the end of the tunnel. while i do not think obama is the best president we have ever had, i do believe that currently he is the only man able to completely get us out of the mess bush got us into.

now i know all of you romney sheeps will hate my post and try to retaliate. thats fine i welcome any and all arguments and specially constructive criticism.

but before you speak (write) go and familiarize yourself with how the government and the economy works. then give facts and not hearsay or fallacies. make sound arguments, not emotional ones.

and just to make something clear I did vote for obama and he was not my main choice but out of the ones that actually had a chance of winning he is the one that aligns itself more to my own beliefs. my main choice would have been the green party. but she obviously had no real chance of winning.

and now with a democratic congress and senate you all can expect to see a bit more changes but don't expect miracles.




You're seriously not concerned if we dip past 18 Trillion Dollars in debt? How do you think we as a country will pay for that? That is not a baseless claim. If Obama does well for the country during his second term I will be the first to congratulate him, until then we are not doing so well.
698 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
28 / F / Lost
Offline
Posted 11/7/12
As a foreigner, all I say is... Thank you USA for electing the least of two evils.
18603 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
26 / M / Seattle, and ever...
Offline
Posted 11/7/12

SakiAiza wrote:

As a foreigner, all I say is... Thank you USA for electing the least of two evils.


No problem! It was tough, but we did our best.
Banned
33175 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
18 / M / Stoke, England
Offline
Posted 11/7/12
I hope David Cameron doesn't get another term over here.
Posted 11/7/12

Spazticus wrote:


AZFox wrote:
As far as abortions go, that should be the sole right to rape victims, they DIDN'T ask for that, nor (in a lot if not most cases) could they prevent it. More than half the people getting abortions are teen queens and, to be blunt, whores who are just too lazy to use protection and take responsibility for stupidity.


Really? The sole right, huh? Women who have ectopic pregnancies didn't ask for those, nor could they prevent them, either. Those are literally a death sentence to the mother, unless an abortion is performed. (If you didn't know, it's when the egg implants inside the fallopian tube.) There are other medical complications that go beyond your sweeping generalizations here, as well. And any of those can threaten the life of the mother, which will kill them both. Also, by strict definition, a miscarriage is an abortion, albeit undesired, and not artificially induced. Are you intending to investigate every woman who has one for murder? (For the record, legislation to do just that has been brought up before.)

While I may be personally against abortion in my own life, and I would hate to be in a situation where it was the only option to save the woman I love...I sure as hell am not so arrogant as to take that choice away from someone else, so that they might have to watch the woman they love die. My personal morals don't trump the woman's right to keep living, and neither do yours, thankfully.

I am pro-choice, not pro-abortion. There is a difference between the two.

It saddens me that there are people who talk about women who get abortions as "teen queens and whores", insist that they have to carry the child to term, but probably wouldn't lift a goddamn finger to help the child once it's been born. More likely, they just keep referring to those women as just "sucking on the public teat." I hate that phrase, but it's on topic. Yeah, that's just compassionate conservatism for you. Let's completely defund Planned Parenthood while you're at it, and really fulfill the conditions of the phrase, "The rich get richer, and the poor get children."



Pardon me, I was caught up in the other particular end of the spectrum that I did fail to include abortion due to various health risk factors along with rape victims. I obviously don't expect someone to die rather than get an abortion to prevent their death. That would be an entirely obscene ideal. With that inlcuded, I do think it's their sole right in those cases.

Back to other things.

I may or may not lift a finger to raise said child but, like I said, responsibility always gets shoved off onto someone else. Why should I pay for someone else's stupid mistake? You don't bite off more than you can chew from the start. If you can't handle the responsibility then there is protection and abstinence. Protection can only do so much, so unless you are willing to accept the responsibility if it happens, then you shouldn't be doing it.

More importantly than abortions themselves, stop the problem before it starts. Sure, you could say it's their choice to do what they want, but you certainly don't go cut yourself knowing it causes undesired results such as pain and possible death. It works the same way. If you don't want it to happen, you do everything to prevent it.

Touching on another item here, The rich are rich because of whatever reason they are, the poor not everyone has a choice in that or that they can even make it better. But one thing you don't do, you don't go adding to your bills. Not to say that someone poor can't have a child, should they be able to provide the bare necessities.

Posted 11/7/12
BARAK OBAMAAAAAAAAAA >:D

Foreigners are stoked also (;
First  Prev  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  8  9  10  11  12  13  14  15  Next  Last
You must be logged in to post.