United States Presidential Election 2012

[Genevieve]

Yes Genevieve I've seen those Romney quotes before. Romney is a flip-flopper for the ages, one for the books. He has since started calling himself vehemently pro-life, since 2008 or so. I agree with what you're saying, but I think any president who ended the imperialism and shut down bases abroad, which I'm all for, would most likely be committing political suicide in the US, and it would get them shut down almost immediately one way or another. I'm sure Obama knows that, so he plays their game.

Based on what? Like I said, side by side, he's worse than Bush, but you're still making apologies for Obama? Who cares about political suicide when he can save thousands of innocent lives (now and in the future)? How does that make him 'better'? That makes him every bit as much of a slimeball.

I've mentioned before how Obama is still far to the right of what I'm into, but what I also take into deep consideration between Obama vs Romney (or any of them really) is religion and attitude towards foreign countries, especially the middle east. Obama claims to be Christian, but I have my doubts on his sincerity. Not that I think he is Muslim or any of that conspiracy shit, but I think he's just playing the game again. The US majority won't stand for atheists in high office, and I don't necessarily think he's atheist, but he has had atheist family make an impact on his life, as well as Muslim family (and surroundings growing up) so at the very least he can empathise with more than just run of the mill American Christians. I think that's extremely important, especially in the 21st century.

'He may have killed more people than Bush, but at least he isn't as much of a christian'.

Not to mention Romney's Mormonism, which takes the crazy religious beliefs to new heights. One of my main concerns is people's religious beliefs having an influence on their decisions in office. That whole ''let jesus take the wheel' mindset. Like how most of the neocons want to be Israel's number 1 BFF because they think Jesus is going to come back to claim the land, and they want dibs on the rapture. That's the kind of stuff they have talked about, and honestly I find that scary.

It's not _their_ religious beliefs that influence their decision making process. It's the beliefs of the people that vote for them. You really think Dick Cheney gives a fuck about a fetus?

[SCope13]

Yeah, economically and and foreign policy wise, Obama and Romney wouldn't be much different. (Romney maybe a bit more aggressive on the foreign policy front) But socially, they're two very different people. If Obama's elected, gay marriage could very well be legalized at the federal level in a couple years. If Romney's elected, that probably won't happen for a while. So Obama is the preferable choice here. Still not voting for him though because he's a pro-wall street douche and I hate the Dems.

[Genevieve]

Yeah, economically and and foreign policy wise, Obama and Romney wouldn't be much different. (Romney maybe a bit more aggressive on the foreign policy front) But socially, they're two very different people. If Obama's elected, gay marriage could very well be legalized at the federal level in a couple years. If Romney's elected, that probably won't happen for a while. So Obama is the preferable choice here. Still not voting for him though because he's a pro-wall street douche and I hate the Dems.

I don't think Romney cares if gay people get married to be honest. That's my point. He's not 'ulta conservative' and he ran on a pro-social safety net, pro-choice, 'moderate' campaign as governor. I think once president, he would 'betray' the Tea Party neocons as soon as Obama betrayed the anti-war voters. Whether or not Obama or Romney is president, the same people would be running the show anyway. If you want gay marriage to happen, vote in congressional elections.

And 'gay marriage on a federal level' is a shitty deal too. People's right to voluntary association is sacred and the government shouldn't subsidize ANY of it. And legal 'gay marriage' is still discriminatory against polygamy.

[nowaysj]

Potential voter registration fraud in Florida: GOP’s own 'ACORN' scandal?

[wormcode]

Based on what? Like I said, side by side, he's worse than Bush, but you're still making apologies for Obama? Who cares about political suicide when he can save thousands of innocent lives (now and in the future)? How does that make him 'better'? That makes him every bit as much of a slimeball.

What do you mean based on what? I'm not making apologies, I'm not even a supporter, that's just how it works. The president isn't as powerful as people think, if anything it's a PR position and a head for people to place blame on. If you think someone like Ron Paul or even my original choice Stewart Alexander could just come in and end the war and shut down bases in 48 hours, I don't believe that's possible for a president (JFK attempted similar). Even if they were to attempt that, I've got no doubt they would be removed and have that reversed. Like you said in your post above this one: Whether or not Obama or Romney is president, the same people would be running the show anyway.
Exactly. Those people do NOT want bases shut down, or wars to end. They'd be happy as pigs in shit if it went on for another 10 years and Iran was invaded tomorrow.

'He may have killed more people than Bush, but at least he isn't as much of a christian'.

I didn't say anything of the sort. Do you honestly think that though? Things don't change much from president to president, why would you expect any less death? I think people expect far too much from a president and politicians. Politicians are professional liars.

It's not _their_ religious beliefs that influence their decision making process. It's the beliefs of the people that vote for them. You really think Dick Cheney gives a fuck about a fetus?

It's both, but their beliefs influence every single thing they think and do, it doesn't matter if something is more rational or not, most people, including politicians, take religion into account in their every day decision making. And yes I think he does give a fuck about a fetus as long as it's a white christian fetus.

[Genevieve]

What do you mean based on what? I'm not making apologies, I'm not even a supporter, that's just how it works. The president isn't as powerful as people think, if anything it's a PR position and a head for people to place blame on. If you think someone like Ron Paul or even my original choice Stewart Alexander could just come in and end the war and shut down bases in 48 hours, I don't believe that's possible for a president (JFK attempted similar). Even if they were to attempt that, I've got no doubt they would be removed and have that reversed. Like you said in your post above this one: Whether or not Obama or Romney is president, the same people would be running the show anyway.
Exactly. Those people do NOT want bases shut down, or wars to end. They'd be happy as pigs in shit if it went on for another 10 years and Iran was invaded tomorrow.

Except a president still has legal authority to move troops at will. The president is commander in chief. Even if it wouldn't end all foreign involvement. It would be a huge setback for America's military interventionism.

Be all that as it may. Obama, given his authority as 'commander in chief' didn't do everything that he can. Especially considering he went around congress to seek authority to start MORE military conflicts from the United Nations, If he did everythign that he could, surely, these would've been a more peaceful less 4 years. Maybe not entirely peaceful, but an improvement.

And while you're not a supporter. You're still convinced that he has good intentions. While his funding and actions show quite the opposite. My point is that lots of people are pretty soft on their criticism of Democrats and Obama compared to Republicans. You don't have to be an outright supporter to be 'well yeah he's killed thousands of people, aquired the authority to indefinitely hold you without process and killed some civilians, which even Bush didn't do.. BUT HE STILL DOES WHAT HE CAN, DAMNIT'.

It's both, but their beliefs influence every single thing they think and do, it doesn't matter if something is more rational or not, most people, including politicians, take religion into account in their every day decision making. And yes I think he does give a fuck about a fetus as long as it's a white christian fetus.

It's about wielding power and using people's religion to do so. There's a lot of politicians, from both parties who do have a hard on for Jesus. But MOST of the big guys would abort a fetus in a heartbeat if it means an extra million dollars.

[wormcode]

Except a president still has legal authority to move troops at will. The president is commander in chief. Even if it wouldn't end all foreign involvement. It would be a huge setback for America's military interventionism.

Be all that as it may. Obama, given his authority as 'commander in chief' didn't do everything that he can. Especially considering he went around congress to seek authority to start MORE military conflicts from the United Nations, If he did everythign that he could, surely, these would've been a more peaceful less 4 years. Maybe not entirely peaceful, but an improvement.

And while you're not a supporter. You're still convinced that he has good intentions. While his funding and actions show quite the opposite. My point is that lots of people are pretty soft on their criticism of Democrats and Obama compared to Republicans. You don't have to be an outright supporter to be 'well yeah he's killed thousands of people, aquired the authority to indefinitely hold you without process and killed some civilians, which even Bush didn't do.. BUT HE STILL DOES WHAT HE CAN, DAMNIT'.

It's about wielding power and using people's religion to do so. There's a lot of politicians, from both parties who do have a hard on for Jesus. But MOST of the big guys would abort a fetus in a heartbeat if it means an extra million dollars.

I'm critical of them all, but it's obviously much easier and funnier to poke fun at the far right because they are much more comedic. I don't make too much actual distinction between Democrats or Republicans or the 2 party system.

I get where you're coming from and agree really, but the biggest problem is as I said it would be political suicide. You asked who cares if it's political suicide... obviously he does, just as anyone who gets that power will. Of course he didn't do everything he could, or everything he said he would. I didn't believe it for a second, as I've mentioned Obama is still far to the right of my beliefs, and more right of the middle than anything. That's why I find it very funny when they trash him and call him a communist or socialist. I don't think he has all good intentions, but I don't necessarily think he's evil either. He will look out for himself and his interests first just as I expect them all to. That means trying to secure another term in office by not swaying too far from the mainstream. I certainly don't think the things you mentioned would have been better under the previous alternative candidates at all.

Also what I think about is how even the president doesn't have full knowledge of what is going on. Not necessarily 'clearance', since technically the president has unrestricted access, I mean the 'need-to-know basis' type stuff, and black operations. The things that have been operating in secret for 50+ years, and continue to operate whenever a new president is sworn in. Clandestine type groups/people who are at least operating without his direct knowledge of their existence. I certainly would never believe once a president sits down at his desk on his first day in office, he is given a stack of files with spy names and locations, a list of all things contained in Hangar 18, and who will be assassinated or what countries are currently being manipulated by the CIA etc. For all we know he receives daily threats from people tied to that. That might sound very cynical, but I've never witnessed or read anything concerning the US government's dark history that would have me think that to be a ridiculous notion. Quite the opposite really.

[wormcode]

Reminded me of a pretty interesting article someone sent me a while back:
Why the Left Won’t Stop the Wars
http://www.lewrockwell.com/gregory/gregory209.html

[Genevieve]

LewRockwell.com has a ton of great articles. It's the biggest libertarian website in the world. Tom Woods, aka the most badass historian ever, posted an article today about his conversion from a neocon hawk from when he was in college to his current, radically anti-war position (he's an anarcho-capitalist now obv) http://lewrockwell.com/woods/woods201.html

It's a written version of the last 10 minutes of his speech here

<iframe src="/forum/video.php?url=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qp5hMiTS2dg" frameborder="0" style="overflow:hidden; height:auto; max-width:540px"></iframe>

Those last 10 minutes are gold to anyone rlly. Most impassioned antiwar speech ever.

[SCope13]

I agree with right-libertarians (true right-libertarians, not douche bags like Paul Ryan or Mitt Romney that claim to oppose the government) on almost all of their social critiques, but damn, their economics are seriously fantasy land stuff.

[nowaysj]

Quote: Everyone carries a part of society on his shoulders, no one is relieved of his share of responsibility by others!

[deadly_habit]

Quote: Everyone carries a part of society on his shoulders, no one is relieved of his share of responsibility by others!

With the exception of corporations getting bailed out or subsidies from tax payer money. Remember corporations are people too.

[Genevieve]

Quote: Everyone carries a part of society on his shoulders, no one is relieved of his share of responsibility by others!

You can prove this quote wrong rather simply. I'll show you how;

I disagree.

Done.

Society is a cool thing, though. But it's a human construct like any other and individuals should be free to choose if they want to take part of that (and reap the benefits of it and accept the drawbacks). Unless you're into slavery of course. I mean, that's what that quote says 'you're born a slave to others'.

A lot of people who believe in that quote though, not you necessarily, believe that THEY are the only ones genius enough to figure out that 'working together in a society' is beneficial to people. Societies form not because someone who happens to wield a gun thinks it's a good idea and the plebeian masses (too stupid to understand why) reluctantly comply. They do because they themselves see the benefit of it.

[LACE]

some american dude was on icelandic news today (probably just some random choosen for the ''who are you gonna vote for question'') and he says ''my choice is romney because i think obama is leading us down a path of losing our national identity.'' i mean what the fuck does that even mean, he's a fucking american!

you guys can continue, but that kind of shit coming from some people voting for romney is just gaaahhhhh

[Genevieve]

some american dude was on icelandic news today (probably just some random choosen for the ''who are you gonna vote for question'') and he says ''my choice is romney because i think obama is leading us down a path of losing our national identity.'' i mean what the fuck does that even mean, he's a fucking american!

you guys can continue, but that kind of shit coming from some people voting for romney is just gaaahhhhh

I'd rather have someone vote for Romney for that than someone voting for Obama for peace.

[LACE]

yeah yeah i know you hate obama.

..still gonna vote for him though. =D

[nowaysj]

I mean, that's what that quote says 'you're born a slave to others'.

Closer from homie's speech. ^

[Genevieve]

yeah yeah i know you hate obama.

..still gonna vote for him though. =D

It's not Obama that I hate as much as people who don't mind bloodshed for as long as 'their guy' does it.

[LACE]

your opinions are as worthless as mine

[Genevieve]

I mean, that's what that quote says 'you're born a slave to others'.

Closer from homie's speech. ^

Hahahaha, got me there. I thought, coming from you, it had a more center-left connotation to it. But in the context of the Ludwig Von Mises quote, I think it means that if society is in a violent decline, that you should do what you can to resist that violence.