In 2008 if the voting majority was sufficiently conscious to vote their conscience we would have avoided the resulting presidential failure.
Hello rozemist, I support your decision to base your vote on your principles and conscience. If that leads you not to vote for either Romney or Obama, then so be it. I wanted to address the "lesser of two evils" theory. I have heard that position also. However, I will be voting for President Obama, not because he is less "evil" and Romney is more "evil", because I truly believe NEITHER candidate embodies evil at all. I disagree with Romney's platform and policy positions, but that isn't a condemnation of his character, it is merely a contrasting perspective of what could best serve our country. Like you, I am voting on my principles. But my principles and conscience are at peace with supporting President Obama. When Republican pundits such as Sarah Palin ask, "How's that hope and changey thing workin' out for ya?", I reply, "Just fine, thanks". You see, I never thought that "hope" meant that ALL Obama's goals and ideals, no matter how lofty, would actually be achieved within 4 or even 8 years. But the concrete step in outlining what the goals and ideals were lays the foundation for change to occur. Even if the goals aren't fully attained, partial success is better, to me, than not trying to change or reach beyond the "same old, same old" at all. Like all humans, Obama is flawed, but in my opinion, he accomplished or made good strides in many of the promises and goals he set out (killing Bin Laden, Healthcare reform, ending the war in Iraq, are some standouts). The Middle East situation is complex. That region has been fighting among themselves for thousands of years. I did not expect even the best intentions of President Obama to really eradicate the problems. I believe that President Obama has both the vision and temperament to tackle the problems that we still face (like a slow economic recovery). I believe in his quest for cleaner energy alternatives ( like any innovative ideas and start-up companies, there will be some failures as well as successes along the way). I like how he sees the United States as a cooperating partner in the world community, with America often leading by example, but wise enough to learn from other nations also. He and his team have made great strides in foreign policy. I appreciate his steadfast defense of women's right to choose and to live with the responsibility of their choices. I applaud his evolution in thinking and personal belief that led him to embrace the idea of publicly advocating for gay marriage. I could go on, but the point that I really want to make is that it is more important to vote for a candidate based on his or her beliefs and actions, rather than in a negative reaction to the "opposing" candidate. I respect your right to view this issue or my assessment of President Obama differently. I hope that you find a third party candidate that engages you, whom you can enthusiastically support, as I do President Obama. Sincerely, Karen
I always welcome your perspective on issues.They are always fair to all sides,I admire that.
I've taken a lot of hits from people that I know,even a family member for making a decision to not vote for either of the 2 party favorites,this is I suppose why I wrote my blog,I wondered about how others like myself are being told some of the things I've been told simply for not"following along"
Somethings that are said can be quite harsh,and it puzzles me that if I and others who feel similar can respect anyone else's right to vote for a Party favorite then why is it so difficult to not give us the same understanding.I'm not asking anyone to believe as I do,but where does the condemnation and judgement come from just because you decide to follow a different tune.
Voting is such an important privileged,it is the way that each of us can speak our minds and make a choice.So should it be that if you choose not to vote because you can't in all good conscious vote for the available choices (maybe your lack of voting is a form of protest),or you cast a vote in a third party direction,all these ways of voting are just as equally important if its done on your principles .
The phrase"lesser of two evils" doesn't mean that I'm basing it on the characters of either party,like you I don't believe either represents evil,it's their ideas,the record of what they have done,or have failed to do that make me not want to vote for either.
It's true that we are all human,and the President of the United States is just as vulnerable to making mistakes as anyone else.
I understand this,I just personally have felt for such a long time,even before President Obama that the same mistakes keep getting made over and over again,everyone must learn from mistakes so that they don't keep getting repeated,that is just my personal feelings on it.
I've reached a crossroads ,and yes discouraged,but I still believe that there can be change(the kind of change that I'm looking for)that I can believe in again.
Some have found it in President Obama,I'm glad they feel as they do it's important to have that faith in the person you voted for.
For anyone like you and others that voted their conscious and principles I commend because no vote should be cast for any other reason.The way that you talk about President Obama and your enthusiasm and faith is as it should be for the person you vote for,this is exactly how I want to feel again.
I did vote once for a someone that I didn't care for,I didn't want to go against party line,it was a decision that still bothers me.
Friendo's comment above would like to cast the blame of all our problems with President Obama this is something I know to be simply not true.
All the problems we are facing now couldn't of possibly been formed in 4 years but has grown through several administrations
I hope for a better tomorrow.
I will be forever hopeful,discouraged doesn't equal not hopeful:)
Hello rozemist, I'm sorry that you have been put in such a defensive position by your relatives and friends, feeling that you must somehow justify yourself. My take is that, with a projected close election, some partisan voters feel extremely vulnerable or threatened by the possibility that the "opposition" candidate may triumph. Fear is, unfortunately, a powerful motivator. I admit that I am not immune to this kind of thinking and do have serious concerns with some of the stated goals and intended policies promoted by Romney. Perhaps your relatives see your personal decision to vote for neither major candidate as a defection that will hurt the chances of their favored choice. One of my sons was thinking about not voting for Obama this time because he was disappointed in some of Obama's actions (or, more precisely, lack of decisive action) involving Republicans. However, he decided, after watching the Democratic convention, that he would be willing to give the President another shot, I think, in part, because he was so against Romney after listening to his platform. I was glad for this change of heart, but I had told him that he should vote as his conscience dictates. Hopefully your relatives will come to realize that you are taking a principled stand and recognize that your choice should be respected, even if they disagree with it. Take care. Sincerely, Karen
What I think that I've learned through this is that when somebody (in my family) or amongst friends in the future asks 'Who are you voting for" I will just say politely " I prefer not to discuss that" and then leave it at that.
My dad wasn't so subtle,he told people straight out "its really none of your business" thereby avoiding con*flict .
It seems that I can discuss politics more openly here in the forum with you,Sovereign,Larry,then I can with family.
I understand Politics,religion very strong subjects and they evoke strong emotions ,but I don't understand getting ones self to a point that you become angry or rude,of course each person is different.
Your take on the situation I think is accurate the closer we get in this election the more urgency is going to surface in people's feelings,and there is that "Partisan thing as well".
I'm glad you told your son to vote his conscience ,that's exactly how you are here always open minded to all sides.
It's important to respect others their right to choice as we want that right for ourselves(without having to agree with it is fine) ,after all if we were all the same it probably wouldn't be very interesting.Imagine if we all thought alike in everything ,how uninteresting might that be.
Sadly after taking a long look at some of the comments on other blogs that have been posted over several weeks,and seemingly today is "yet another day" of the same,I would say that that urgency,and partisan emotions are running to the extreme.
I have no taste for this,because when it comes to the point of out and out insults and rudeness I prefer to change the subject,why bother trying to discuss anything if all you get is insulted and ridiculed ,what can ever be learned from that.
Hopefully after the election is over ,and the winner takes all (whom ever that will be) people can all get back to normal.
Hello rozemist, Your well thought out rejection of Obama was certainly not made in haste and you should be commended for having the courage to vote your conscience and certainly not be swayed by polite subtle persuasion. Good for You!!!
And contrary to Karen's comments I don't hold Obama responsible for all the nations problems. However, I do hold him accountable in large part due to his presidential ignorance he does not know how to correct or resolve national issues...he only makes them much much worse. SHAME ON YOU KAREN!
If you go back and re-read "my comment" I stated "Friendo's comment above would like to cast the blame of all our problems with President Obama this is something I know to be simply not true."
"Nowhere" in any of Karen's comments was your name even mentioned,so your comment "shame on you Karen" was unkind,and misdirected.You might wish to give a Sorry Karen her way.
I interpreted your original comment "in 2008 if the voting majority was sufficiently conscious to vote their conscience we would have avoided the resulting presidential failure." to mean that we're where we're at because of President Obama.
Your saying that you don't hold President Obama responsible for all the nations problems,so I owe you an apology for an assumption that that was what your comment meant.Now if you need to direct a "shame on you rozemist" ,I will accept this for my error in misinterpreting your comment.
As for the very nice comment directed towards me,Thank You,I appreciate that.
Hello rozemist. You are understanding, willing to forgive and easy to get along with. Those favorable qualities are very admirable. Sincerely, friendo
Hello rozemist, I admire how you are a secure enough person to sincerely apologize when you realize you have made an unintentional mistake. Unfortunately, not everyone is capable of such mature behavior. To model the desired example of accepting personal responsibility and holding yourself accountable for your words is truly a service to everyone who reads these posts on this forum. Sincerely, Karen
Politics and family have the tendency to not mix very well if there are disagreements. Thankfully my family never pushed any ideology onto me, let me piece things together by myself. But since everybody in the family is old enough to have their own opinion politics is something that comes up every so often, especially around election season. I've actually had a cousin literally disown me because I told him my vote wouldn't go towards Ron Paul or any libertarian because I consider libertarianism a regressive movement. He'll probably come around soon since Ron Paul really has no chance now, at least I would hope so because I love the guy to death. It's going to be an awkward Thanksgiving lol!
But I also get this all the time rozemist, not just from family but from friends, coworkers, etc. If I don't support Obama Romney could win and vice versa. Or when people who don't know my politics try and see where I stand by asking "but if you HAD to choose, who would you choose," gets pretty annoying. But I believe if things are to sufficiently change you're not going to get it through always voting for the guy who won't be as bad as the other guy. Through always voting for two parties with track records that aren't very good(in my opinion, but when someone says the other guy is worse it seems they are saying their party sucks too you know).
Now usually I wouldn't abstain from voting but I don't see Roseanne Barr as someone the red flag can get behind and other socialist/socialist leaning parties don't have ballot access in California :(.
"in my opinion, but when someone says the other guy is worse it seems they are saying their party sucks too you know" -BINGO, I agree 100%
I used to be told by a mentor of mine "You can't make yourself look better by making the other guy look bad" which I always took away as it matters more what you do and stand for, so promote what it is you do and stand for and present a better product that people will gravitate towards. If only polititians lived by this statement it would be a whole different process.
Sov, Are you actually claiming that you personally adhere to this statement?
"You can't make yourself look better by making the other guy look bad"
I am not promoting a "side" I am addressing the "side" that is solely based on making themselves look better by making the other look bad.
I have been consistent in stating that the two parties have failed us, and that we need alternatives. I have seen where you have tried to point out the rhetoric as substanceless but you have a side, and to defend that side you need to accuse me of promoting the other. You need the duopoly to exist in order to give the movement something to contrast off of without needing results to support what they say. That is why you on the right hate it when there is a third choice, because you actually need to mean what you say or be rendered irrelevant.
When anyone comes here and spouts off what they hear on their favorite right wing propaganda media, like "socialism", or "apologizing for America" or "he isn't from here, he isn't one of us," then I am not taking a "side" when I point out the rediculousness in those statements, I am pushing back on those who are easily manipulated and false. I don't have the issues with this president that you have, since my party didn't loose when he won. I differ with some of his goals and of his tactics, but I would differ with the current candidate of my choice since there is no perfect candidate for 300 million people. Even Geo. Washington, or FDR would not make every citizen happy, but we as citizens do not need to bear false witness because of it.
Capitalist how perfectly your statement summed it up,and also describes what I've been feeling about this lesser of two evil saying people like to throw out there to try to justify why it's just fine and dandy to vote for somebody you don't believe in.
"in my opinion, but when someone says the other guy is worse it seems they are saying their party sucks too you know"
And to borrow Sovereigns reaction "BINGO"
and BINGO again!!
First, No vote that is cast is wasted. The only way to waste your vote is to not vote at all.
Second, contrary to the two major parties and the media, there are more choices for President. There are candidates from the Green, Peace & Freedom, American Independent, and Libertarian parties.
I will not be voting for Obama or Romney, But I will be voting.
Good point Dan, and good to see you comment.
We need to move away from the "herd mentality" that Americans tend to follow. It's asking a lot since most people don't get as involved with politics until it is time to vote, and then they only want to pick a winner, so they look at who is in the lead. It's human nature, but for a people who claim they want choices, they seem to always limit them to just two.
It's good to see you back again.
I'm not sure I can follow that "The only way to waste your vote is to not vote at all." because then individuals have to go back into the "have to vote for someone,anyone no matter what ideology "
As I stated in the blog there might be circumstances that a voter might feel there is no acceptable candidate worthy enough ,this would mean doing one of two things cast your vote for "anyone" just to vote because this is what one may of been told is the "American Way" which I have heard this said often.The second circumstance is that a voter might feel to "withhold their vote" is a sign of protest by not casting a vote for anyone unless it's a candidate of choice.
I would say that the only wasted vote would be to vote for anyone other then someone you have faith in,and believe is the best person to fill the job.
"Voting",or deciding to "not vote" if done on principle,and as your conscience dictates can never wrong.
It's unfortunate that our elected officials only need to receive 50 + 1 percent of all ballots cast in order to win as opposed to 50 + 1 percent of the voting age population. At least that way a non vote would carry as much weight as a vote. If someone does not gain the required quantity of votes then the election is held again with different candidates, or possibly one or both of the original candidates with a clearer message.
This would possibly drag out the election season, and force the country to go a period of time without a person holding the office in question.
This concept wouldn't flydour to Americans being conditioned to simple and orderly elections between only two choices, but it is an out of the box concept that would bring more weight to those who are dissatisfied with the status quo.
Just think if this concept was in place for constitutional amendments in the state of California, prop 8 would not have passed, and a segment of our population would not have had their liberties trampled on.
What criteria does a person use when they vote?
How or from what did they form that criteria?
Is it from emotions, self financial, social programs that. serve ALL, their "properly" formed religious beliefs?
How do they prioritize what issuses are most important and trump others?
Conscience - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Below from wikipedia's site:
Conscience is an aptitude, faculty, intuition or judgment of the intellect that distinguishes right from wrong. Moral judgment may derive from values or norms (principles and rules). In psychological terms conscience is often described as leading to feelings of remorse when a human commits actions that go against his/her moral values and to feelings of rectitude or integrity when actions conform to such norms. The extent to which conscience informs moral judgment before an action and whether such moral judgments are or should be based in reason has occasioned debate through much of the history of Western philosophy.
Always vote for principle, though you may vote alone, and you may cherish the sweetest reflection that your vote is never lost. - John Quincy Adams
I favor casting a vote that has the greatest chance to provide me with genuine and meaningful political impact rather than the wasted emotional vote that is intended to supply me with cherished sweet reflections. If you are looking for cherished sweet relections stay away from the voting booth.
So if not a vote that you describe in your opinion as a "meaningful,political impact" then are you saying why bother ?
Remember Friendo,the impact your expecting isn't going to be the same as what someone else might be looking for.A vote different,or a vote to not vote doesn't diminish the importance that it serves to each individual.
Picking a winner or someone who may not have a chance at all what matter if its something you believe in.
I'll take that sweet reflection any day
I can live with that an not have regret
Yes rozemist I agree. And if someone believes in the political capabilities of the Tooth Fairy then by all means they should vote for him or her...a pricipled vote of course. Now thats what I would call that a meaningful political statement!
Such simpleminded people the Conservatives are, but then as Santorum has pointed out, they don't attract the intelligent ones.
Hello rozemist, According to an earlier post by Friendo, (Sep 17, 2012 at 22:36 PM) "You are understanding, willing to forgive and easy to get along with. Those favorable qualities are very admirable." I completely agree. Where Friendo and I differ, however, is his obvious disrespect for your right to share your opinion about taking a principled stand on who you plan to vote for. Instead, he seems to think it is perfectly acceptable to RIDICULE a person of acknowledged favorable and admirable qualities in order to make his point. How unfortunate that some are unable to express disagreement with the perspective of others without resorting to an ambush of snide comments and insults. Sad, really, that some must tear others down to build themselves up. I know that you are a strong willed individual who will not be swayed by the demeaning behavior of others, but I just wanted to point this deplorable behavior out, since I consider it a form of unprovoked bullying. Sincerely, Karen
Your concern is appreciated ,thank you!
If friends or family weren't able to sway my course,or make me doubt it Friendo surely can't.
There are others who like Friendo would rather resort to comments like the one above then have a meaningful discussion about how they might not agree with my decision,give their reasons why they don't,give some idea of what it is they believe in as well, and yet still respect my right to have my own beliefs .Just as I respect their right to have a different opinion then mine.
It's unfortunate that one must resort to ridicule to make any point ,it serves no purpose,and only sheds an unfavorable light on the person dispensing it.
I understand that my beliefs regarding this particular issue are certainly not popular ,as you said the closer the election gets to the end the more people are behaving with a sense of urgency and fearfulness of not knowing if the outcome is going to be as they hope.
If throwing snide remarks my way is what makes people feel more secure I suppose that's what they'll do ,however in "my opinion" it's just poor behavior,and whatever the reasons behind it are certainly not excusable.
I agree that it is indeed 'unfortunate that some are unable to express disagreement with the perspective of others without resorting to an ambush of snide comments and insults. Sad, really, that some must tear others down to build themselves up.'
Your point is well taken, others would do well to take notice.
I agree with you as well that 'it's unfortunate that one must resort to ridicule to make any point ,it serves no purpose,and only sheds an unfavorable light on the person dispensing it.'
Too bad that the ones most guilty continue to dispense their 'poor behavior'.
"Nothing is more terrible than to see ignorance in action." - Johann Wolfgang von Goethe
You need to stop with the hypocrisy. LarryBacca and I asked you direct questions without any malice, insults or anything. You response was to relentlessly insult the two of us.
Open your eyes; YOU are the biggest problem here. YOU need to take notice, not other. We are all very aware of your games.
Hi rozemist. My response was intended to ridicule the political ineffectiveness of the wasted principled vote...as I see it and was not intended to ridicule you for your actual voting decision. I applaud your political courage for casting your vote with your political convictions in mind and expressing it in this forum. We can agree to disagree on the effectiveness of the principled vote and the sun will still rise tomorrow. I think my response was misunderstood and I hope these remarks will clarify my previous comments. Sincerely Friendo
Thank you Friendo
I'm glad you clarified this for me.
You were not directing your comment at my voting decision.
However (yes there is a however) :)
I understand your stand on the "principled vote" ,I have listened to many sides from many people who are close to me and I can say that I appear to be walking a road everyone feels is a wrong direction.And that's putting it nicely compared to what I've been told.
Your tooth fairy comment was mild compared to some I've heard.
It's not difficult for me to have people disagree with my beliefs,I can take opposing thoughts , but it becomes difficult when my belief is made into a joke,instead of just giving simple reasons to me of why its not agreed with.
I really do have a sense of humor,but sometimes on serious issues such as this in particular the humor may be touching an exposed nerve,or get lost completely because I didn't get what you were saying and it went over my head ,my blog is very revealing of how my decision in favor of the "principled vote" has been difficult.But I'm at peace with this now ,and feel for me personally it's the right choice.
It's never crossed my mind once to turn to the people who oppose my idea and say to them that their vote will be a "wasted vote" " or a "ineffective vote",I simply do not believe this to be true,because how can it be wasted if this is what they "sincerely" believe in.
If I can say to people "I respect your right to vote anyway that you feel,because it is their right",and not make light of their decision, isn't it the very least that I can expect the same in return.
We will continue to look at this differently and it's ok,like you said the sun will still rise tomorrow.
We all tend to believe or would like to believe that our one vote will make the difference, and it should... To ourselves. Our vote is just an opinion that gets counted, and if we are just voicing everyone else's opinion, then it isn't ours. There is that fear in humans that if we don't go along we will be left out, our that we will not be a part of a winner.
Here is the reality, your vote really doesn't count towards electing the president. There is a process in place to elect representatives who will then cast their vote for that office. This process even accounts for a tie vote by these representatives, by putting the responsibility into the hands of other representative, the House of Representatives. this isnt a hypothetical process, its been used in the past to determine who will be President. One needs to keep in mind that we do not have a democracy we have a representative form of government. You directly vote for your representatives in Congress and on local levels, but even then, those elected as representatives are not required to represent your opinion. This fact is obvious with the current and recent Congresses, or even at a local level such as the case in Bell, Ca.
So, with the understanding that at best your opinion on Election Day is just a little more than an opportunity to voice what you think or feel, why waste it by accepting and representing the opinion of a group? Here is the one time to express your principles, and have it counted. The reality is if you vote for one of the two major candidates, an upstart third party candidate, or yourself, it only counts as one, but that one came from you, and it counts. Instead of not voting, in the past I have simply written in my name, which may sound arrogant to some, but I cast my vote for the only person who best represented my principles and my opinion at that time as opposed to the options available at that time.
One of the hallmarks of Americanism is our strong sense of individualism, our ability to go it alone, so why be unAmerican and succumb to group think? How are you wasting your vote, when the reality is its your one opportunity to be counted for what YOU think, and not what others think. Roze, it's refreshing to see others who have a similar outlook towards the value of their vote, and their principles.
Sov, I think your words here have helped to define the 'Feel Good Vote'...On an electoral level it won't get you too far but man oh man it really makes you feel warm inside. What you sacrifice in political effectiveness you make up for in emotional satisfaction. It's a sure guarantee to feeling good during every election. To thine own emotional self be true!
It must be hard for you to go through life never feeling good, never having a positive outlook on life and what can be achieved. You seem to have a very Conservative outlook of just settling for whatever is offered to you regardless of how damaging it will be since you have an attitude of its never going to be good again.
You have a very dark Conservative Party way about you. How sad for you.
Every decision you make - every decision - is not a decision about what to do. It's a decision about Who You Are. When you see this, when you understand it, everything changes. You begin to see life in a new way. All events, occurrences, and situations turn into opportunities to do what you came here to do. - Neale Donald Walsch
"Nobody will ever deprive the American people of the right to vote except the American people themselves and the only way they could do this is by not voting." - Franklin D. Roosevelt
I'll repete myself from another post here as it is VERY pertinent:
Here is a quote from Bull153 a few days ago:
"... it is indeed 'unfortunate that some are unable to express disagreement with the perspective of others without resorting to an ambush of snide comments and insults. Sad, really, that some must tear others down to build themselves up.'"
Here is Bull153 TODAY:
"shut the f--k up, you ignorant little communist."
Bull153 has a MAJOR problem of saying one thing and then doing the exact opposite.
It is sad and pathetic that Bull153 so easily finds faults with other, yet, REFUSES to see the same faults in himself.
FDR left off .... Or live in a state with a Conservative Governor and a Conservative majority in the state legislation. 225 years and all of a sudden they need to purge the people who are minorities, students, or of a different party other than the GOP. The funny thing is when they do prove voter fraud, it's typically a right winger trying to stack the deck.
Sov likes to intentionally misrepresent and mischaraterize conservatives in the same way obama attempted to mischaracterize Romney until Romney had the opportunity to correct the intentional character assassination targeted at him by obama and his henchmen.
and Romney has???...The ability to recognize and remember his previous online comments as well as the ability to access an online account by intelligently using his password to log in. Romney also has the ability to correctly spell the word 'henchmen'. :)
Hello Friendo, Does Romney also have the ability to correctly spell the word "mischaracterize" (not "mischaraterize", as you posted)? If we are going to start correcting one another's spelling errors, we are all going to be kept pretty busy because all of us get a bit careless, from time to time. Sincerely, Karen
They had their doubts, but Romney proved that he is the perfect Conservative candidate. He flip-flopped, and etch-a-sketched his way through the night. So which Romney do you believe, the one from the last 12 months, or the one from last night?
It appears the fact checkers are in full drive picking apart all the fabrications and mis truths he laid out yesterday. Like I said, the perfect Conservative candidate, never saying what he means, and never meaning what he says.
Is anyone curious as to why the 47% subject wasn't brought out by the President?
Do you think this was an oversight,or was it intentionally not brought out.
Do you think it should have been ,wouldn't it of been in the Presidents favor?
Hi rozemist, I don't think it was an oversight that President Obama didn't mention the 47% subject. I believe that the President wanted to focus on policy difference and the difference in visions for the country between Romney and himself, rather than go for the obvious "gotcha" moment. I know some political pundits were disappointed that he didn't "go there", but I respect his decision. It also refutes Romney's earlier claim that Obama is a man filled with anger and hate. I don't think it is in Obama's nature to get "down and dirty" or he would have gone for the jugular, made things personal, and sought to embarrass Romney because of his gaffe. Instead, both men attacked and challenged each others's policies and plans (or lack thereof) rather than personal character (with the exception of Romney's "not entitled to your own facts" dig, which made him look vindictive and petty, in my opinion). Both men remained fairly civil to each other (despite each interrupting the other) because they have their PACs to do the dirty work with negative ads on both sides. We will see how the next set of debates shake out. I just don't think that aggressiveness always translates well. It may give the APPEARANCE of control, but real competence doesn't have to rely on that. Plus, I am going to research some fact-checking sites because, from what I saw and heard, Romney stretched and distorted the truth beyond recognition and misrepresented some of his policies (especially Education). Sincerely, Karen
Roze, I have to agree with Karen, except for her characterisation of the 47% remark as a Gaff, I believe it wasn't a Gaff at all but it is exactly what Romney believes.
Fredo, I was aware of the henchmen spelling as soon as I hit enter, you might have noticed it has happened to me more than a few times, you see about 3 weeks ago, I sliced about a quarter of my ring finger off while slicing zucchini on a mandeline without using the safety slide. Yes, that was really a dumb move on my part, anyway, since then I have been wearing a protective cover on that finger so it makes one finger extra fat, thus the extra, misplaced letters, so you can probably expect more of the same....so what's your excuse? :-)
I too agree to some degree with what Karen stated. Obama is the president, and in at least the first debate he was playing "Rope-a-dope" and taking the punches.
Romney was well scripted for this debate, but I have to believe he used all of his ammo in the first round. With all of the flip flopping and misinformation that he laid out, he only gave Obama material to work with in the next debate.
Maybe the President is saving the best for last ? and maybe using the 47% would have come off as being too aggressive ,even so I've heard a lot of people say that they wanted him to bring it up.
Fact Check certainly has been taking Romney's statements apart.
I don't understand ,do they not "get it" that all this stuff is going to checked and then checked again over and over.
Hello rozemist, I believe there was a quote from the Romney campaign about (and I am only paraphrasing here) not running their campaign based on the "fact-checkers". I sometimes think that the strategy is "Make the desired impact", whether it is true or not. Fact-checkers will bring forth the truth, but how many people bother to keep informed or are just content to accept the veracity of their favored candidate's statements? According to the research that I did, both Obama and Romney had some "truth stretching" (to put it politely) moments. But it is troubling to me that Romney is claiming plans and policies during the debate that bear little or no resemblance to what he has said on the campaign trail. One example is where he claimed that he would not cut the Federal Education budget, a statement that totally contradicts what he said a week earlier about shifting the burden to the states. (The Modesto Bee had an article on this yesterday). Things are not adding up. It was interesting to note that according to today's Manteca Bulletin (page A-3), in a Fox News (surprise, surprise) interview the day after the debate, Romney said that if he HAD been asked about his 47% statement he would have admitted that he was "just completely wrong". Nice that he could FINALLY acknowledge this after days of spinning with the 'it's not what I really meant' comments and conservative columnists (L. Brent Bozell III - "Impolitic? In a private meeting with donors, no. Untrue? Again, no.") and pundits insisting that 'he is right, there was nothing wrong with that statement'. I guess widespread political fall-out can really bring a politician to a "come to Jesus" moment and change his mind (or at least, his tactics). Maybe Obama will come out like a tiger in the next debate (Ha!) because of the perception that he wasn't hard-hitting where he should have been. We shall see. Sincerely, Karen
I have a slightly different take. For years, Mitt Romney has had the reputation of changing his opinion the moment to say what people want to hear and then retroactively correcting his statements.
You can't debate that and win. Mitt will - and did - just change his position in the moment.
Now, combine that with Obama's staggeringly high probability of being re-elected and we can postulate an interesting debate strategy - softball the first debate. The reson for this is simple, it helps expose Paul Ryan in the second debate.
That is my take at least. Let me know if anyone would like me to expand on my thinking.
Interesting, I think I see your point of exposing Ryan but I think Obama should have kicked him in the groin, but that's just me...
Just like Bobby K. said to Jack K. right?
Nixon and Kennedy are two very different candidates than Romney and Obama. Say what you want about Richard Nixon, at least it was VERY clear where he stood on issues. Romney can't hold a candle to Nixon.
If you beet Romney, who cares? No one cares about Romney, ESPECIALLY Republicans.
But, if you get a real chance at the "Golden Boy," THAT might actually mean something.
At least, that is what I think. If Romney looses, so what, if he wins, who cares. Now, if RYAN - and his policy - looses, it is absolutely over. Not just over for the Presidential election but for the Senate and just maybe the House as well.
Yes FB, I was peeling potatoes earlier this week and I'll be darned if I wasn't peeling too fast and really messed up two of my fingers. After a few sutures and bandaging, typing is difficult at best. I was also aware of my error as soon as I hit post.
I have a feeling that Obama might be a little more forceful next time...He did expose a couple of Willards lies but he had plenty of chances, around 27 of them I just found out.
I am one who enjoys watching the process, and my distaste with the process is that any real debate is lost on keeping things safe. Whether Obama is playing rope a dope, or Romney is lying through his teeth, there is a game of manipulation going on between the two parties and the press.
Did you really hear anything new, or that will move us away from where we have been in these debates? I didn't. We are hearing about a bounce in the polls but 4%, that is not a bounce, that is a blip. There is no reason for a bounce because nothing was said that would make either candidate seem believable.
Watch and listen to these two Gary Johnson videos and then imagine how vibrant and changing the debates could have been. Real issues with real possibilities.
It doesnt mean that Johnson could or would win, but the conversation would be very uncomfortable for the lesser of the two parties.
"LIBERTARIAN PRESIDENTIAL NOMINEE GOV. GARY JOHNSON RELEASED THE FOLLOWING STATEMENT LAST NIGHT IN RESPONSE TO THE PRESIDENTIAL DEBATE:
We didn’t see a debate tonight. We saw two slightly differing versions of defending the Republican and Democrat status quo that has given us war after war after war, a $16 trillion debt, and a government that is the answer to everything.
Nowhere was there a real plan for reducing government, balancing the budget any time in the foreseeable future, or a path that will actually put Americans back to work.
We heard two politicians arguing over which of their plans for government-run health care is less bad. We heard fantasies about balancing the budget while not reducing Medicare costs.
Barack Obama and Mitt Romney are nibbling around the edges of the nation’s problems. We don’t have time to nibble — we need to devour them.
Americans deserve real debates and a voice who will actually tell the truth about what it will take to put this great nation back on track."
Same here Sovereign, I heard nothing NEW
And I'm not even the least bit surprised that it was the same old spin, if it of even shown something, anything now that would of surprised me.
LIBERTARIAN PRESIDENTIAL NOMINEE GOV. GARY WHO??? I am so disgusted with this whole presidential election that I am seriously considering voting for Pat Paulsen's son Monty. My vote won't be wasted because it will make me feel all warm and snuggly inside. That's what voting is really all about...right?
I have yet been convinced that voting for the Conservative candidate is not just a wasted feel good vote. The Conservative Party is in a tail spin and it is looking as if they will be seeing a set back in their numbers in Congress, and are on the verge of becoming a regional party mostly dominant in the southern states.
Even though the Libertarian Party does not get the media coverage of the lesser of two evils parties, it's popularity is a polar opposite of the Conservatives showing rapid growth among a number of varying demographics, young people being one of the largest. Both parties need to realize that Americans care more about fiscal responsibility and the reinforcement of our liberties, and not the path of fiscal distraction and having our rights taken away for the benefit of those parties as we have seen over the last three decades, especially in the last decade.
So the way I see it, a vote for a Conservative candidate is a wasted sentimental vote with no real opportunity to make any type of worthwhile contribution to the nation or its citizens.
I would rather "waste" my vote on the future than waste it on the past.
Now for the truth...A Conservative President will be elected in November as will the majority of state governors.
Sov you are such a Debby Downer.
PROPSITION 34 to decide to vote yes is very simple. The person convicted of the murder can never get out of prison to harm anyone else. (life w/o the possibility of parole) So as a Christian I just have to look @ the beginning of the Gospel according to John chapter 8. 5 Now in the law Moses commanded us to stone such. What do you say about her?" 6 This they said to test him, that they might have some charge to bring against him. Jesus bent down and wrote with his finger on the ground. 7 And as they continued to ask him, he stood up and said to them, "Let him who is without sin among you be the first to throw a stone at her..." RSV-CE.
Who among us is without?
As a humanist, none of us are perfect enough to decide others should die. Two wrongs do not make a right... unless you are talking about Conservatives, then two wrongs do make a Right... winger
Today in a speech in Ohio, President Obama mentioned Mitt Romney which as expected drew a chorus of 'Boos' from the partisan crowd.
Mr. Obama then chastised the audience "No, no, don't boo! Vote! Vote! Voting is the best revenge!"
Voting is the best revenge? I thought it was a time honored Constitutional requirement to select the leader of our nation. I think Mr. Obama's comment was rude, inappropriate, and not at all what the leader of the United States should be saying.
I suppose when one is losing and getting more desperate, one will say anything to spur on his supporters. Mr. Obama may find his own words haunt him Wednesday...
I fail to see how anyone can be 'pro-life' and also support the death penalty. Thanks for having the intellectual honesty that some here severely lack.
Bull,"I suppose when one is losing and getting more desperate, one will say anything to spur on his supporters."
Guess that explains why Willard took every side Obama did in the last debate. :-)
So you have no issue with the 'Voting is the best revenge' comment? Or is it just more liberal deflection and avoidance?
Hello Bull153, I won't speak for Larry Baca but I, personally, have no problem with the "voting is the best revenge comment" which is a take-off on "living well is the best revenge". The suggestion is for people to let their displeasure be known not with boos, but with the power of their votes. In Ohio, where Romney's disingenuous jeep ad outraged the leaders of GM and Chrysler and many autoworkers, the President is calling on his constituents to harness their voting power to send a clear message about what is acceptable to them and what is not. The "revenge" part is voting against candidates who engage in flip-flopping, fake storm relief donations and soup kitchen "volunteerism" which are little more than photo-ops, and tout a supposed "plan" that has few, if any details, spelled out. You have the right to voice your opinions through your vote as do we all (who are registered). The outcome of the election remains to be seen. By the way, for one who chastises crimeriddendump for name-calling and insults, when you write, "is it just more liberal deflection and avoidance", that is nothing more than blatant stereotyping and partisan false generalization. I find that comment "rude, inappropriate and not at all what" a contributor of this forum "should be saying". Sincerely, Karen
Nice to see you've finally hopped off the fence. I am surprised you find Mr. Obama's 'vote for revenge' comment acceptable. It is clear what the President was doing - it's politics. I still find it amusing how both sides play commercials that are false, misleading, and often plain insulting, but it is OK if your side does it but not the other. There are opposing views of the validity of Mr. Romney's Jeep ad, that really isn't the issue. As Rozemist pointed out, words have meaning and words matter. Our president telling his constituency to 'Vote because voting is the best revenge' should be insulting to BOTH sides.
You find 'liberal deflection and avoidance' rude and not what a contributor to this forum should be saying? I find that almost laughable since you seem to have little issue with other's comments recently that are far worse. When you jump off the fence, be careful what you land on.
I agree with Karen 100%....
I find your statement "There are opposing views of the validity of Mr. Romney's Jeep ad.." hilarious, as if the Jeep ad has a shred of validity, IT'S A BLATANT LIE...PERIOD...
"I still find it amusing how both sides play commercials that are false, misleading, and often plain insulting, but it is OK if your side does it but not the other." - See, they are BOTH doing it, I guess this means that we aren't going to see the Conservatives take the high ground anytime soon since they are telling us the Democrats are acting the same way. Should the bar be so low?
So which one is the less of the two evils?
"I still find it amusing how both sides play commercials that are false, misleading, and often plain insulting, but it is OK if your side does it but not the other." - See, they are BOTH doing it, I guess this means that we aren't going to see the Conservatives take the high ground anytime soon since they are telling us the Democrats are acting the same way. Should the bar be so low?
So which one is the lesser of the two evils?
Hello Bull153, Could you please explain what "fence" I have supposedly hopped off of? I'm puzzled as to why you find my acceptance of Obama's comments surprising, after I have clearly stated my reasons. You may, of course, disagree with my interpretation, but I don't see anything "surprising" in it. Why are you settling up straw arguments? I never said that it was OK if one side, but not the other, produces false, misleading or insulting commercials. Superpacs on both political sides have presented some appalling ads and I am frankly sick of them. I brought up Romney's jeep ad as part of my explanation of why I don't find Obama's "revenge" comment offensive. Just because, IN YOUR OPINION, Obama's words are insulting doesn't mean they "should be insulting to BOTH sides". That is like saying you have the only worthwhile opinion and everyone should agree with you. Lastly, you take issue with what I find rude (because it is not what YOU find unacceptable?) in your post, because "other's comments... are far worse" and I am supposedly not chastising them. So you are seriously going with the "I'm not so bad, they are much worse than me" defense? That excuse never really worked when my kid's tried to use it, but if that is all you've got... And for someone who claims not to be "championing" Romney, you sure put up spirited arguments in an valiant attempt to put him in a more favorable light. Sincerely, Karen
Like TheSovereign says, both sides are well known for their false, deceptive, and misleading ads. It is all part of the political gamesmanship.
The lesser of the two evils is the one you decide to support.
As for the Jeep ad itself... it is factually accurate but misleading.
Its amazing the lack of integrity of those who associate themselves with with one of the evils as opposed to requiring their "side" to rise above. I guess that evil is acceptable because it is reflective of the follower since it is a representative process. It is this lack of integrity that I see in those who claim "values.' No one thinks that some right wing clown with a button that says "I vote my values" actually has any. There is no reason to believe they do, especially if they claim to be a Conservative.
"It is all part of the political gamesmanship." - This may be acceptable to some, but not to me, we are talking about our lives, and our nation, it isnt a game for us, but it may be for the lawyers that make up the greater part of congress and those who run the parties. I don't want to be manipulated, or to manipulate, so why do you? Why are the two evils afraid of honesty?
"As for the Jeep ad itself... it is factually accurate but misleading."
What part is factually accurate and what part is just misleading?
Here is the whole audio portion of the ad:
Barack Obama says he saved the auto industry. But for who? Ohio, or China? Under President Obama, GM cut 15,000 American jobs. But they are planning to double the number of cars built in China — which means 15,000 more jobs for China.
And now comes word that Chrysler plans to start making jeeps in — you guessed it — China. What happened to the promises made to autoworkers in Toledo and throughout Ohio — the same hard-working men and women who were told that Obama’s auto bailout would help them?
Mitt Romney grew up in the Auto Industry. Maybe that’s why the Detroit News endorsed him, saying: ”Romney understands the industry and will shield it from regulators who never tire of churning out new layers of mandates.” Mitt Romney. He’ll stand up for the auto industry. In Ohio, not China.
You ask what fence you've hopped off of. As long as I've been blogging here you and Rozemist have been the reasonable voice of moderation. Yes, you have shown your left leaning side occasionally, but by and large you two have been the moderation between those on the left and those on the right.
When you make statements like "The "revenge" part is voting against candidates who engage in flip-flopping, fake storm relief donations and soup kitchen "volunteerism" which are little more than photo-ops, and tout a supposed "plan" that has few, if any details, spelled out," defend the President's divisive language, and are offended by 'liberal deflection and avoidance'; you have clearly hopped, jumped, or climbed down onto the left side of the fence.
If you have always been on the left, then I apologize, but until now, you have always appeared to be impartial and fair minded.
You said "See, they are BOTH doing it, I guess this means that we aren't going to see the Conservatives take the high ground anytime soon since they are telling us the Democrats are acting the same way." and asked which one is the lesser of the two evils...
I answered generically that it was whichever one you (the individual) decides to support. If you are a Democrat, it would be the Democrats, likewise if you are a Republican, it would be the Republicans. If you are an independent, it would be whichever one you would choose.
I resent being told I am being manipulated, I am no more manipulated than anyone else here. I am not a Republican, nor a Democrat as you know. But you are so left leaning I'm surprised you don't fall over. You ridicule the right wing and conservatives but don't have a bad word to say about left wing liberals. And yet you talk about integrity and honesty.
You ask what parts of the ad are factual and what parts are misleading.
According to the Huffington Post:
""What's in there that's false? Are they building Jeeps in China or not?" an aide asked BuzzFeed. "I think a lot of Ohioans are wondering why we can't make Jeeps here and ship them to China, just like they are wondering why we can't make — insert product here — in this country and export them to China."
"This is a defense by technicality. The exact language of the ad may fall within the boundaries of truth, but the message it imparts is fanciful and misleading."
Washington Post fact-checker Glenn Kessler notes, “The series of statements in the ad individually may be technically correct, but the overall message of the ad is clearly misleading – especially since it appears to have been designed to piggyback off of Romney’s gross misstatement that Chrysler was moving Ohio factory jobs to China.”
Kind of like the Obama campaign's 'Mitt Romney killed my wife' ad, huh?
I forgot to address the rest of your comment...
You accuse me of making straw man arguments. Just like you're sick of appalling ads, I'm sick of the dismissive attitudes of people with opposing views. You said because I find Mr. Obama's 'revenge' comment offensive it "is like saying you have the only worthwhile opinion and everyone should agree with you." That is not true, you explained your reasoning. Based on you posting history I'm not allowed to find that 'surprising'? Hey, it's just my opinion. I'm not making any excuse or offering a defense. It sure is odd that you find my comment offensive, yet are fine with others. That's my opinion as well. You are welcome to disagree.
As for championing Mr. Romney, there is a big difference between offering a rebuttal to other's viewpoints and 'championing'. While crimeriddendump can make his arguments that the Bulletin is very right wing biased, I can make the same argument that these blogs are left wing biased. All I am trying to do is offer reasoned opposition to all of the left wing attacks and derisive comments about Mr. Romney. I've been outnumbered as well as attacked with derisiveness, but that's OK. It's just my opinion. Objecting to false statements about Mr. Romney is not championing him, it's just my opinion. Clarifying his actions in the face of ridicule is not championing him, it is just my opinion. I've not said for anyone to vote for him, that would be championing him. Saying that he can decide where to put his feet up in the oval office in January... well, that's just my opinion too!
It amazes me how many seem to "champion" lies and attack actual facts. I guess if you repeat an even completely ridiculous or irrational opinion enough the bullheaded somehow come to just take it as gospel (double entendre intended).
It's sad that simple intellectual honesty is so hard to come by. Why do some have this need to shun simple civilized discussion and turn it into an immature 'I'm right, your wrong" shouting match.
Unfortunately, until some learn the generally agreed upon definitions of facts and opinions, I find getting to the "civilized" part of conversation harder and harder to arrive at.
I saw a sign at a university today that made me think of your blog here.
"Elect Cthulu: Don't vote for a lesser evil"
Just what do you mean 'giving us someone else's opinion'?
You are still not ignoring me... Whatsa matter, just can't resist, can ya!
This obviously baiting is both funny and sad. That type of attitude does not demonstrate that one is wanting a mature conversation, but is instead yearning for confrontation. As I said above, playing these "gotcha" games servers no purpose. Hopefully, we can collectively agree on the best way to handle these types who are only wanting to disrupt the community, not be a part of it.
Also, I just realized I spelled "Cthulhu" incorrectly above. My apologies to 'The Whisperer in Darkness.'
Hello Bull153, Being "on the left" and "fair minded" are not mutually exclusive things. That would be like me saying that because you are a "moderate conservative" you can not be fair minded.That would be a presumptuous as well as ridiculous statement. I have never made a secret that I am left-leaning and have stated as much in past postings. On my first post of this very blog I have voiced my strong support for President Obama. I have never claimed impartiality, so I will accept the apology which you extended.
Please go back and read the ENTIRE sentence about the "that is like saying you have the only worthwhile opinion and everyone should agree with you" quote that you referenced. I did NOT, as you assert, say this regarding your right to voice your displease with President Obama's word choice. I said this in reference to that fact that YOU wrote, after expressing your OPINION that YOU found the President's words insulting, his words "should be insulting to BOTH sides". It is not your saying that you find the "revenge" comment insulting that is the problem, since we are all entitled to our own opinions. It is EXPECTING "BOTH sides" to agree with you by asserting that they "should", that prompted my observation. I hope this clarifies things for you.
Speaking of clarification, here is the definition of "champion" (when used as a verb):"to defend, support, or promote a cause or person". To claim that you are not "championing" Romney seems disingenuous to me. Championing does not only mean that you are committed to voting for a person. It surprises me that you are in such denial about your words and actions. Offering "reasoned opposition", "objecting to false statements about Mr. Romney", and "clarifying his actions" (all YOUR own words) fit well within the definition of "championing". Why not just admit it? You needn't be so defensive about your opinions. I may not (and do not) agree with you, but you definitely have the right to voice your perspective. Sincerely, Karen
Bull, you know what I mean...
Karen, good reply...can't see how anyone can disagree with that, but I bet Bull will...:-)
The impetus for my vote is love of country and not for revenge. Revenge lends itself best to failed presidents.
"“The federal government’s response has been great…The President has been outstanding in this and so have the folks at FEMA.”" - "New Jersey Governor Chris Christie, one of the leaders faced with most difficult post-Sandy reconstruction"
“FEMA is a very different organization than it was during Katrina…[FEMA] was proactive, and it didn’t used to be. It doesn’t wait for the storm to hit; it pre-positions personnel, equipment, food supplies, water, etc.” - "Senator Joe Lieberman (I-CT), who chairs the Senate’s Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs Committee"
“from what we’ve heard from the governors, they’re working well with FEMA” and that “there’s a good working relationship between the state and the federal government.” - "Ed Gillespie, a senior adviser to Mitt Romney’s Presidential campaign"
So, it wasn't just one hurricane that slowed Romney's momentum, he had to defy the first one and face the wrath of a second, even greater hurricane.... A SUPER HURRICANE!!!!!! And then the worst thing possible happened, Government worked, and it worked efficiently, like we expect it to do. No wonder those on the Right call Obama divisive, its dividing their party judging by the quotes above.
Darn, that Obama!!! Stop making government work the way the citizens expect it to!!!!! See, now how are we going to complain about those being wasted tax dollars. Is there a list of private sector companies that were there during the storm competing with FEMA to work with the state or the local municipalities to provide relief to those stricken by the storm? Can we point to a company that is standing out for providing more services more efficiently during this storm than FEMA did?
" You ridicule the right wing and conservatives but don't have a bad word to say about left wing liberals." - So read above, is that enough ridicule of the "left wing liberal" President for ya? So what are you saying, that I am not an equal opportunity Party ridiculer? Well, maybe if your movement didnt take up all of my time with their ridiculousness I may have found the time to spread it around some.
"But you are so left leaning I'm surprised you don't fall over." - I know, all Americans look that way to you Foxnews Conservatives.
To read the whole article that the quotes came from, follow this link"
Really, Hoffman? "That type of attitude does not demonstrate that one is wanting a mature conversation, but is instead yearning for confrontation." It is funny and sad seeing that it is coming from an individual who was banned from these very forums for a considerable time, has used so many aliases it is difficult to remember them all, and has the audacity to be offended when called out on his deceptive, disingenuous, demeaning, and disruptive behavior. But that's OK, Hoffman. All of the people here know who and what you are. They may have no problem letting you play, but I do.
Hoffman, I knew it would be impossible for you to do as you said, one more lie to add to your Nobel Prize resume' for being the biggest jerk to have ever participated here. So I will do it for you. Keep making your silly and stupid comments about me, I'll just ignore you. After all Curly, there still is Larry and Moe left to converse with.
I agree that being on the left and being fair minded are not mutually exclusive. Unfortunately there are others on this blog who don't seem to get that being conservative and being fair minded are also not mutually exclusive. I admit misunderstanding your position, now I know you are a left leaning liberal. I was mistaken that like many others, you were an independent that was supporting Mr. Obama. That's on me.
You have clarified the 'revenge' comment. No problem. You are right that while I have every right to find it offensive, I was wrong that liberals might not. Sorry.
Finally, using your definition of champion, I agree I am championing Mr. Romney by clarifying his actions and objecting to false statements about him. So here is the admission you seek. I'll try and not be so defensive about my opinions, even though I am quite outnumbered here on the forum. You know what? That's fine with me.
I wouldn't have asked you if I knew what you meant. It looks like you are accusing me of plagiarism, or at the very least not having my own opinion and position. That's not only false but insulting. Coming from you I suppose it is to be expected. If you want the others to speak for you, OK.
By the way Larry, about that bet... You lose.
Yes, government worked. FEMA did what it was supposed to do, and would do no matter who the President is. We learn from every disaster... what worked, what didn't, what needs to be improved.
You have a false contention that these quotes mean the Republican party is being divided by this catastrophe. Maybe you'd like that. But I can assure you for those people on Staten Island, in remote locations in New York and New Jersey, and the people who after a week still have not seen any FEMA, National Guard, or local emergency help, a divided Republican party is the least of their concerns.
I guess you missed the news conference when Governor Christie stated that people shouldn't misunderstand his praise of President Obama. You see, he gets it. It doesn't matter who is in the White House during a disaster, what matters is that we all come together to help. Governor Christie was quite clear, he endorsed Mitt Romney 13 months ago, he believes Mitt Romney has the best chance to move our nation forward, and he is voting for Mitt Romney on Tuesday. Kind of takes that 'Kumbya' moment away, now doesn't it.
You criticized Mr. Romney for his relief efforts. Mr. Obama was disingenuous following the hurricane. He showed up for a photo op helicopter tour with Governor Christie, had their moment at the press conference, and Mr. Obama took off on the campaign trail. Funny, he did that right after the Benghazi terrorist incident, too.
I'm not a Fox News conservative, just a plain old one. I manage to find sources for my comments that have nothing to do with Fox News, but all you come up with is hardcore liberal extremist sites. Then you have the nerve to try and appear fair? Don't make me laugh anymore, that's too pathetic.
By the way:
"FEMA is not the team, but part of a team. That team includes federal partners, state, tribal and local officials, the private sector, non-profits and faith-based groups and the general public.
FEMA’s mission is to support our citizens and first responders to ensure that as a nation we work together to build, sustain and improve our capability to prepare for, protect against, respond to, recover from and mitigate all hazards."
I'm voting because I've voted in every election since I was of legal age to vote. I'm voting because it is an obligation to help determine the people and the laws that govern this great country. I'm voting because if I don't vote, others will make serious choices for me and I will have no grounds to complain. I'm voting because this nation cannot afford four more years of Barack Obama.
I'll repeat what was on the other blog as it unfortunately applies even more in this section.
Remember this quote from http://community.mantecabulletin.com/... :
"I'd referred to them as the 'Three Stooges' - Larry (LarryBaca), Moe (TheSovereign), and Curly (Crimeriddendump). I stopped because (1) it wasn't funny after the first couple of times and (2) some might find it offensive. "
Does the author he now suddenly think it is now (1) al l the sudden funny, or (2) no longer offensive? Or, might I suggest (3) the original statement was completely disingenuous.
I'm starting to see a real pattern of anti-social, personal attacks and insults. And this time, I a can say with 100% conviction, I have had nothing to do with it.
What do you see as the best solution for helping rude and selfish people become contributive members to the community rather than distractors and detractors?
It's just some people's nature to lash out when they are faced with their own reality, they just can't help themselves. We see it here from those on the right all of the time.
In regards to Prop 34. I pasted from the Catechism of the Catholic Church for anyone that may or may not be Catholic.
No.2267 Assuming that the guilty party's identity and responsibility have been fully determined, the traditional teaching of the Church does not exclude recourse to the death penalty, if this is the only possible way of effectively defending human lives against the unjust aggressor.
If, however, non-lethal means are sufficient to defend and protect people's safety from the aggressor, authority will limit itself to such means, as these are more in keeping with the concrete conditions of the common good and are more in conformity to the dignity of the human person.
Today, in fact, as a consequence of the possibilities which the state has for effectively preventing crime, by rendering one who has committed an offense incapable of doing harm - without definitely taking away from him the possibility of redeeming himself - the cases in which the execution of the offender is an absolute necessity "are very rare, if not practically non-existent."
"I'm voting because this nation cannot afford four more years of Barack Obama."
Sorry to disapoint you but your vote for Romney in this state is like spiting in the wind. Ca. is a Blue State and is, according to all the polls, in the bag for Obama...
Oh that statement you made about FEMA's performance would have been the same with any President...Maybe you didn't catch the "Relief" rally piece "Faking It" where Romney himself describes how simple it would be to do the clean-up, you know, "like cleaning up after a football game"...Hilariuous...
hey, Larry! I know that California is a left wing liberal state... that's sad. But your comment that voting for Romney is like spitting in the wind makes the assumption that I am voting for Mr. Romney because I am not voting for Mr. Obama. I've never said I was voting for Mitt Romney. There are other presidential candidates besides the 'big two'. Hell Larry, I might have even been off my meds enough to vote for Roseanne Barr -NOT!
But seriously, Larry. Some would consider your comment voter intimidation! Telling me because the 'Great Obama' has the state sewn up, my vote is pointless. Let me clue you in, NO vote is pointless, no matter where it is made and for whom it is made. It will take more than the likes of you to try and keep me from voting. By the way, I vote absentee, and I have already cast my ballot, so you are a tad late, Larry.
Larry, as for the FEMA remark, Mr. Romney kept the analogy simple so people could understand it. It figures he would have to have been more specific for a yukster like you. Have been involved in many similar disaster relief activities while in the service, I can assure you his comments were factual, just on a larger scale. How would YOU plan and carry out relief activities? The first thing you do is scale out the affected areas and designate zones. The outlying zones are usually less affected and need less help, while those closer to the main disaster need more help. I'm sorry it went over your head, I really am. But Larry, there is hope! You can always go to the FEMA website. They'll have a lot of information on what they do and how they handle disasters. And Larry, there's no nyuk, nyuk, nyuk about that!
I appreciate your feelings and your input regarding Prop 34.
What surprises me is that on the day before the national election, other than your posts on Prop 34 and many comments from others on the bias of the Manteca Bulletin for the GOP, there are no posts on the many other local, state, and national people and issues.
There have been many who have complained about the corruption of the Manteca City Council, but no input on those running for the two seats. People complain about the lack of school funding, but no one has anything to say about the propositions that are supposed to help our schools or those running for the school boards. The same can be said for the county supervisor's race, state senate and assembly races, our congressional races, and the senate race.
I'm just as guilty. I haven't said much if anything besides the presidential race. It seems that Mr. Obama versus Mr. Romney has overshadowed everything else. That's the sad part.
Yeah! Why is that!!!
"It seems that Mr. Obama versus Mr. Romney has overshadowed everything else. That's the sad part." This is the sad part, so let me take a moment to bring to your attention, Libertarian candidate for President of the United States, Gary Johnson - www.garyjohnson2012.com
Do you really believe in a small and efficient government, do you really believe in fiscal responsibility, most of all, do you believe in Liberty, equal rights for all citizens? Then stop pretending the lesser of two evil parties are ever going to honor these American principles and look to someone like former Governor of New Mexico, Gary Johnson - www.garyjohnson2012.com. He has a reputation of winning in a highly Democratic state, and was able to work with both parties to bring fiscal stability to New Mexico.
So if you are tired of settling for one of the lesser of the two evils Party, if you are just now realizing that repeating the same thing over and over again expecting different results is the definition of insanity, then its time to look at your third choice, Libertarian candidate for President, Gary Johnson - www.garyjohnson2012.com
Remember to get out an vote tomorrow, its one of the few times where you are being asked your opinion and it counts, even if it only counts as one.
Thank you for that heartfelt promo for the Libertarian candidate, there Moe.
Kinda still misses the point about all the propositions and the other national, state, and local races. That's OK, Moe, it's too late now anyway.
Hey Moe, people are looking for someone to endorse Roseanne Barr... Do you think Larry could, or is he too involved with Curly's campaign? Nyuk, Nyuk!
I dont see any of these from you. Where are your blogs on the propositions? Another feeble Conservative attempt to belittle a promoter of someone other than their dying movement by changing the subject.
If you are tired of the same old game playing coming from the lesser of the two evils party, then go to the web site of Libertarian candidate for President of the United States, Gary Johnson - www.garyjohnson2012.com. Look at what his record has been as Governor of New Mexico, and look at his different views such as the Fair Tax - www.fairtax.com.
You have a third choice, Libertarian Gary Johnson - www.garyjohnson2012.com
I think all that these folks have left is feigned indignation and rude attempts at insults. Seems to be getting worse. I guess they have nothing intelligent to add.
Hey, Moe... Open your eyes! Or did Curly jam one of his fat digits into them?
I clearly took myself to task - "I'm just as guilty. I haven't said much if anything besides the presidential race." What about Curly, Moe? He's been on the Manteca City Council's case for as long as I've been blogging here. Where are his blogs?
So, which of you is going to endorse Roseanne? You are almost out of time, Nyuk, Nyuk!
We'll see who's movement is dying over the next few days. "Curly for President - 2012"!
Hey Moe! Game not lost! Romney 76 electoral votes..Obozo 64. Nov 06 2012 @ 6:00 PM PST. Yipeeee!!!! Game is looking good.
SAVE TAX DOLLARS!!! Vote for Romney so we won't have to waste precious tax dollars on Obama's impeachment and removal from office.
Hey Moe!!! Update.
Nov 06 2012 @ 6:10 PM PST...Romney 141 electoral votes to Obozo's 109.
I appreciate your enthusiasm, however a word of caution. Remember the proverb 'Don't count your chickens before they are hatched.' That way you avoid egg on your face. I'm not crowing until Mitt Romney has 270 electoral votes...
I find it somewhat troubling that within only 30 minutes of the polls closing on the west coast, all of the experts are declaring a re-election victory for Barack Obama. That well may be the case, I am in no position to dispute their wisdom, math, crystal balls, or other methods used.
If President Obama has in fact won re-election, then congratulations to him and those who supported him. I am saddened that someone else better equipped (in my opinion) to lead us forward did not win. I foresee a terrible four years ahead with more divisiveness and inaction between the ruling parties. I see fewer jobs, more regulation, and prices skyrocketing. I hope I am wrong.
I do not want four more years of Barack Obama... the last four have been hard enough to take. But if the people have truly spoken, and want President Obama to occupy the White House for four more years, then I will accept that decision and carry on.
I'd caution those who are already cheering an Obama victory on one thing. Granted, it was many years ago and under less technologically advanced times, but errors can be made. I still remember seeing the photograph in the history books of President-elect Truman holding up the Chicago Tribune with the front page headline "DEWEY DEFEATS TRUMAN". It would be quite ironic if history were to repeat...
Hey Larry!!! You're wrong again as usual... If Barack Obama has been re-elected, we have all lost (my opinion) and the next four years will prove it. And Larry... that's no Nyuk, Nyuk, Nyuk...
I knew the candidate I voted for never had a chance, no third party will until such a time comes that a change, a drastic Change takes hold. I'm going to continue to be hopeful that day will come.
I feel good about how I voted, it was the right thing for me.
I'm leary about President Obama being re-elected, I will wait cautiously to see if he has learned from mistakes made during his first term, I pray he has, for everyones sake.
Hello Bull153, You have claimed over and over again that you were not championing Romney or necessarily going to vote for him. Yet here you are admitting that you are "saddened" that "someone else better equipped" (in your opinion, as you rightly noted) "to lead us forward did not win". Rather than predict your "doom and gloom" scenario about the next four years under President Obama, I wish you could emulate the grace, simplicity, and honor of Romney's concession speech where he stressed the need for both parties to work together for the good of the country. His sincerity was refreshing, as was the generosity of spirit that he displayed. The way he handled himself during the speech, his heart-felt praise of Paul Ryan (rather than trying to shift blame to him for the loss), his expression of appreciation for his family, staff, and supporters, and his obvious love for our country, were all admirable and worthy of respect. I honestly hope that his supporters take his advice to heart about seriously working across party lines for the good of the country. Sincerely, Karen
I'm glad you participated and feel good about your vote. I feel good about mine. I am also leery about the President's re-election. We both will be waiting to see what if anything he has learned. I hope transparency and honesty are among them (again, my opinion).
You bring up a valid concern about third parties, and I agree. I wish I knew a simple and fair solution. As I've said in the past, there is something to be said about Europe's multi-party system. Our electoral system is governed by a 200+ year old document and based on society at the time. We have moved beyond the antiquated electoral college system and have the technology to hold elections based on the popular vote. I fear we'll never see such changes in my lifetime because the political apparatus is so entrenched there is no way for the two parties to relinquish power.
We'll now have four more years of President Obama and his policies. Let us all hope we move forward and not backward. I am glad the election is over, no more party biased commercials, no more attacks and false accusations. I am not happy with the outcome, but I am glad I participated.
Yes, I am saddened that Barack Obama was re-elected. I've made no secret that whether it was Mitt Romney or Gary Johnson, or even Roseanne Barr, I did not want another four years of President Obama. Knowing this, as you well do, why would you expect anything other than my feelings about the next four years? You call it 'doom and gloom', I call it optimistic pessimism based on the past four years.
I'm not Mitt Romney. I didn't run for any office. I'm not a campaign worker, nor a journalist. I am what I am. I'm sorry you wish I'd emulated Mr. Romney, but I'm not a politician. Don't expect me to act like one.
I join you in hoping the President and Congress do actually work across party lines for the benefit of the great nation we have. They sure haven't during the past four years...it would be a great change.
"Our electoral system is governed by a 200+ year old document and based on society at the time. We have moved beyond the antiquated electoral college system and have the technology to hold elections based on the popular vote. I fear we'll never see such changes in my lifetime because the political apparatus is so entrenched there is no way for the two parties to relinquish power." - The American system is just so foreign to Conservatives. First question, did you ever read the document called the Constitution, and if you did, did you understand it? Its not an antiquated document nor is the electoral college antiquated. We have a representative government for a union of states.
The electoral college keeps in tact that it is 50 states (it couldn't be too antiquated to be able to adjust to an increase from 13 to 50 states and still work) that are voting for the President, and not the individual citizens of the USA. There is even a process for when the electoral college votes a tie, and that is the House of Representatives vote until there is a winner. It doesn't fall back to the popular vote, it stays with the representatives. If I was a party member and my party just lost the Presidential race, I may be saying that the system is old, but I know better.
There is a reason why our President is elected by the states and not by the citizens of the nation, and that is so the smaller states do not gain more sway over the larger states. It was all about the states when the country was founded, and now its about Parties. Look at the map of which states voted how, and you see that the moderate and small states (population wise) voted for Romney, and the larger more populated states voted for Obama. The system worked, the larger states decided who will preside over the government. It could have been any combination of states, but look at how the vote went and this time around the higher populated states decide the victor.
I voted for Gary Johnson, and I am satisfied with that, and the prospects that I will live long enough for a different party to be a contender. In all due honesty, we may see the GOP start to break a part and see smaller more focused parties come from it. Its not a new phenomenon, its happened before in our history, and I see the GOP to be ripe for a break up. That isnt the only possibility, you may see a massive move to the center and a purge of all things tea party. If that should happen, maybe we will see the country move forward.
As far as our future goes, we were already in the ditch before this President won the first time, we had a major failed foreign policy before he took office, we had major record breaking deficits before he took office, so to believe anything will be worse is just the fearful nature of the Conservatives. My guy may not have won, but we could have done much worse by having the alternate candidate win. This just goes to show that Abe Lincoln was right, you can't fool all of the people all of the time.
Oh, and Friendo, where ever you may be hiding, you were wrong, Obama won.
Take the emotion out of it and follow the process. The hand writing was on the wall that Obama would win. Even with all of the effort by the GOP to keep people from voting, even with their attempts to drive the country into the ground just to keep Obama from being reelected, there were signs showing who would win. You just chose to play the game and not understand the signs.
And Canative, you too were wrong, here is election day and you predicted a different outcome. You need to pull your head out of the sand, or turn Foxnews off, and look around for a change. As long as you stay with a small group who all agree all of the time, you will never understand how small your group is.
The electoral college is anti-democratic, the electoral college should be gotten rid of. California is going to have more of a voice than Nevada whether the electoral college exists or not.
Thank God the election is over so we can finally get back to talking about real politics!
What worries me is the President will be facing the very same division ,possibly worse since they know he's second term I wonder ? Congress comes back from its election "vacay" oops I mean "recess" next week,and on the agenda $400 billion in higher taxes and $100 billion in automatic cuts in military and domestic spending to take effect in January(or $600 billion depending which news site)if Congress doesn't throw a wrench in the works to head them off. Economists warn that the combination could plunge the nation back into a recession.
Congratulations from Minority Leader Mitch McConnell to President Obama goes as follows,and does it really sound like a congratulations or what do you think.
“The American people did two things: they gave President Obama a second chance to fix the problems that even he admits he failed to solve during his first four years in office, and they preserved Republican control of the House of Representatives.
“The voters have not endorsed the failures or excesses of the president’s first term, they have simply given him more time to finish the job they asked him to do together with a Congress that restored balance to Washington after two years of one-party control.
“Now it’s time for the president to propose solutions that actually have a chance of passing the Republican-controlled House of Representatives and a closely-divided Senate, step up to the plate on the challenges of the moment, and deliver in a way that he did not in his first four years in office.
I don't know but that's a pretty "odd" congratulations ya think.
I didn't vote for the President,but if I know anything its that he alone didn't create the problems we're facing,he walked into a mess to begin with,a lot falls on the rigid and uncompromising Congress .
If right out of the gate they're going to put out statements like the one above that doesn't sound optimistic.
you said "I fear we'll never see such changes in my lifetime because the political apparatus is so entrenched there is no way for the two parties to relinquish power."
I prefer to remain optimistic ,and hopeful that in my lifetime (and I'm probably older then you) that such a change is possible.
You never know what changes might be in store even within the next 10 years ,and I hope to still be around.
Now that the election is over, I hope some here - and everywhere - can begin to actually be intellectually honest and sincere rather than hypocritical and disingenuous.
A major thing that gets the Fox News types - and its avent repeaters here - seemed to be 100% confident that the polling was "skewed" or the "books were being cooked" when the end result was an election that when almost EXACTLY to the numbers of the aggregate of the national polling numbers state-by-state. IN OTHER WORDS: Science and FACT proved triumphant over superstition and unfounded, baseless opinions.
Could this election be a major teachable moment for the people who seem to struggle with the basic difference between facts and opinion and how scientific methodology yields more consistently accurate results than wishful thinking? I hope so.
We don't live in a democracy, so it really doesn't matter if the electorial college is viewed as anti-democratic. The office of t he president is the weakest of all three by design. The strongest being the legislative body is elected directly by the people, and they are the ones who write the laws and appropriates the money. That should matter more to the pro-democracy crowd.
Sad/happy day in the city of Lathrop and in the state. I don't really care to comment on the national scene.
As far as the state it's sad that in a "modern" society that we still demand that "blood" be taken. (prop 34). My wife and I are happy that 35 passed.
Then there is the Lathrop election. The tax increased passed which I voted against but let the majority rule on that.
The last thing is the mayoral election in Lathrop. The current mayor claimed innocence sine the grand jury said it was too close to the election so they did not indict him and wanted the citizens of Lathrop to decide. We have decided. Congradulations on your HUGE landslide victory Sonny Daliwal. No bullies or their buddies in Lathrop.
Also to Martha and Steve.
I think that if we were to constitutionally hold the president accountable for his actions or inactions involving the Benghazi attack he could be removed from office...of course we then get Chuckles the Clown as our fearless leader. Also, does the Bush blame game officially come to an end now or will Obama continue to blame Bush for his new presidential term guaranteed to be chock full o presidential leadership failures?
To think that at one time in our nations history we actually held our presidents accountable for their actions, inactions and cover ups. It's no longer about leadership it's about popularity.
I'm not sure if you payed attention to the news yesterday, but, extremist and the myopic lost. Not even letting one day go by before going back the same empty well of ignorance that left you wanting yesterday.
Frankly, have you considered that just MAYBE you - and the people that feed you the lines of garbage you repeat - could be the ones in the wrong? Just a thought.
Also, your whole Benghazi nonsense has been proven to be nothing more than an invented fantasy. Grasping on to this does not make your comments sound rational at all.
I guess maybe you are having some issues coming to grips with the reality fox and friends was trying to convince you did not exist. May I be the first to officially welcome you back. I hope maybe your next post - after a reasonable cool down period - will be more grounded.
Crimeriddendump, don't hold your breath, Fredo is generally opposed to science, rational thinking, and all manifestations of commom sense....right, Fredo?
Oh and Friendo,
Let's pretend your imagined scenario is not just a work of GOP fan-fiction;Which part of the Constitution are you talking about specifically?
Larry @ Fredo.com,
You silly little stooge, Bull153 already told you the score, Last night WE ALL LOST!!!
Hoff your attempt to downplay the president's constitutional responsiblity in a deadly embassy attack and just make it go away is expected because leadership and accountablity are not qualities that are favored by at least one of the major political parties. When your political party is driven in lockstep by personal popularity and paybacks, leadership and accountabiltiy become adversarial to truth.
Whether we're a democracy or a republic, the people of this nation should vote upon who the leader of the nation is, not an electoral college.
Which part of the Constitution are you talking about specifically when you say "constitutionally hold the president accountable for his actions or inactions involving the Benghazi attack he could be removed from office."
Hello Bull153, I am sorry that you think that the positive things about Romney's concession speech that I said I wish you would emulate, namely: grace, sincerity, honor and the willingness to put the good of the country above the good of any single political party, is only how politicians "act" ("I'm not a politician. Don't expect me to act like one"). I believe that ALL of us, no matter what our profession or station in life is, have the capacity for enormous good or great evil, depending on our choices and deliberate actions. In a time of personal defeat, Romney chose to rise above pettiness and whining and embrace words worthy of any statesman. I respect that he set an example of true patriotism for all to follow. Sincerely, Karen
Hello rozemist, When one compares McConnell's comments to Romney's concession speech, the contrast is glaringly apparent. While McConnell chose to spin the evening's events to paint the outcome in the best possible light for his political party (barely acknowledging that Democrats retained the majority in the Senate), as if the voting results were some sort of "mandate" for the Republican agenda, all the while taking petty partisan swipes at President Obama, Romney used his moment in the spotlight to urge all Americans to work together across party lines for the good of the nation. As President Obama noted in his acceptance speech, the road back to prosperity will not be without its bumps and detours. McConnell's speech was one such pothole on the road to this country's recovery. Hopefully, enough members of Congress will get the message of BOTH Obama and Romney that our country should come FIRST, a sentiment shared by many American citizens. We shall see what develops. Sincerely, Karen
Fredo, apparently there were enough "Silly little stooge" types to get four more years...:-)
Oh, in case you didn't hear, the score is something like 333 to 203...He also took the popular vote so you can forget that argument.:-)
After that romp, all that was left was a pile of magical underwear and a bottle of black hair dye....
I love it when I wake up and Obama is STILL PRESIDENT....:-)
Hey, Moe! Yes, I've read the Constitution and I understand it. I'm not a Constitutional lawyer nor an expert. If it is so clear, so current, then explain to me why a nine member Supreme Court and hundreds of lower level legal experts have to constantly decide what is Constitutional and what isn't. The electoral college is just one aspect of the Constitution and our election process that I think a lot of people would like to see changed. It is sad that in a day when the national deficit is over 16 trillion dollars and people fight over disaster funding, the two candidates for president spent over two and a half BILLION dollars on their campaigns. Factor in the money spent on every other race nationally, statewide, and locally. One wonders how much better spent that money could have been... and Moe... that's NOT funny!
I still believe the electoral college system needs revision. Even now some states are winner take all, while others divide the vote. We are the only nation where we vote on everything, people all over the world marvel at the complexity and yet we manage to do it successfully every two years. I just think we can do better.
I'm glad you are happy with your vote, Moe. I would have thought Curly had your vote in the bag. I could be wrong, but I fear we won't be moving forward for another four years. We'll see, Nyuk... Nyuk!
Hey Moe, you are right about Lincoln! Seems like you can't fool all of the people all of the time, but more than half the country got fooled again. Nyuk... Nyuk!
Small group, Moe? Oh yea, it was a small group... some 48% of the nation's eligible voters didn't vote for Barack Obama... How many millions is that? Did you run out of fingers there, Moe? Nyuk... Nyuk... Nyuk!!!
I don't think Mr. McConnell was offering congratulations, Mr. Romney had done that and done it quite well. I believe Mr. McConnell was doing what Mr. Romney had asked, to start the process of trying to work together by being blunt and honest about the President's second term. Rather than a mandate the people spoke that half the nation still is unsatisfied with the direction our country is taking and President Obama has been given four more years to fix what he wasn't able to during the first term.
He may have walked into a mess four years ago, but the mess he has to face in January is one he is responsible for.
I'm glad you are optimistic and see the change you hope for. In deference, I won't ask your age, but I will say I was born during the Korean War. Now you know who may be older, and it is a secret you may keep to yourself.
I don't know about the next ten years, but this election helped me make a decision I'd been holding off on. I've been offered a position in Australia working with their Ministry of Defense and Air Force on force protection, airfield and aircraft security, and other military planning issues. It is an initially three year position with an option for a second three year tour. I turned them down three years ago, but I think it is a great opportunity to work in a foreign land and avoid what I perceive are going to be four rough years here. So sometime in the next few months as things are finalized, I'll be moving on to brighter and better things.
I agree, a sad and happy day in many places. I respect your views, but I voted no on 34 and 35. As a resident of Manteca, I was disappointed to see the city council seats remain with the two incumbents. That is the beauty of our system, for the most part the people's voices are heard.
Hey Larry... You really need Friendo to tell you the score? And you have always claimed to be so smart! Nyuk... Nyuk!
Socialism, redistribution, and deceit = 2
Truth, justice, and the American way = 0
And, Larry... that's NOT funny!
You are on solid ground with your argument that President Obama could certainly be subject to impeachment under the Constitution because of his actions (or inactions) regarding Benghazi.
While there are still only two proven facts, should the investigation reveal the truth that President Obama was aware of the security lapses, failed to provide adequate security, and failed to promptly respond to the attack, among other things, he could be impeached.
"Impeachment is a fundamental constitutional power belonging to Congress. This safeguard against corruption can be initiated against federal officeholders from the lowest cabinet member, all the way up to the president and the chief justice of the U.S. Supreme Court. Besides providing the authority for impeachment, the U.S. Constitution details the methods to be used. The two-stage process begins in the House of Representatives with a public inquiry into allegations. It culminates, if necessary, with a trial in the Senate. State constitutions model impeachment processes for state officials on this approach. At both the federal and state levels, impeachment is rare: From the passage of the Constitution to the mid-1990s, only 50 impeachment proceedings were initiated, and only a third of these went as far as a trial in the Senate. The reluctance of lawmakers to use this power is a measure of its gravity; it is generally only invoked by evidence of criminality or substantial abuse of power."
There are those who have already decided to give Mr. Obama a free pass even before the investigation is complete. You better believe that if Richard Nixon could be impeached (he resigned instead) for theft and perjury, Bill Clinton could be impeached for lying about where he was placing his cigar, then Barack Obama could be impeached over the Benghazi murders.
I find it difficult to understand you at times. You take what I say and you interpret it as having only one meaning. It makes having discussions difficult.
You say you are sorry that I feel that the good in Mitt Romney's concession speech is only how politicians act. That's ridiculous. Just look at the speeches presented by John Boehner and Mitch McConnell. They are politicians and neither speech came close to Mitt Romney's.
I don't need to be a politician to emulate grace, honor, or sincerity. In my case it depends on the circumstances I find myself in at a given time. I would hope that if I were a candidate who had lost, I would emulate Mitt Romney. But I am not, and I will converse, discuss, and debate based on the given circumstances of the moment. That's who I am.
Your quote says "it is generally only invoked by evidence of criminality or substantial abuse of power." Could you elaborate on what CRIMINAL activity - even assuming your already disproven conspiracy theory is anything more than fantasy - the President has conducted?
It is one thing to vote against a person and another to try and conspire to undermine his term hours after the election. Frankly, you don't act like someone who wants this country to prosper, you just seem to be someone who wants Obama - or anything you label 'liberal' - to fail. That to me is incredibly selfish, unhelpful and unpatriotic.
The source I cited from the link above said also the following from Minority Leader Mitch McConnell
Here is what McConnell said:
“I extend my sincere congratulations to President Obama and Vice President Biden on their hard-fought victory, and I would like to thank Mitt Romney and Paul Ryan for running a great campaign based on concrete solutions to the tremendous economic challenges we continue to face."
Your saying you don't think Mr.McConnell was offering a congratulations , maybe your right because it didn't come off as a congratulations .Instead the same rhetoric we have heard from McConnell all along but labeled a congratulations.
I understand disappointment of not having the candidate of ones choice not picked but I already knew my choice wouldn't be elected and it is done and it is time for everyone to start hoping that this country can be united enough to make the decisions that need to be made,and set aside the bickering .
I said I was leery about this re-election but I'm not going to throw my hands up now and say this will never work,that nothing can be fixed.I don't know that,none of us do.
I'm hoping it will work because it has to.
I hope that "everyone involved" have learned from the mistakes made,and will not repeat them.I will continue to pray that all our Leaders will make responsible decisions on the behalf of the American people and the United States.That they can set aside the blind partisanship and do the job that they have been elected to do.
All this talk of impeachment is just exactly what we don't need,maybe the people who are putting this out there should listen to what Mitt Romney said,or what Speaker John Boehner said
"If there is a mandate in yesterday’s results, it is a mandate for us to find a way to work together on solutions to the challenges we face together as a nation."
"Let’s challenge ourselves to find the common ground that has eluded us."
"Let’s rise above the dysfunction, and do the right thing together for our country in a bipartisan way.”
Wishing you success Bull on your new position,Australia is a beautiful Country from what I've seen only in pictures .
Bull if you are really going to Australia that sounds pretty cool. You're the only person that actually said "If Obama wins I'm moving out of the country" and meant it lol.
I think you're right that Obama doesn't have as much of a mandate, especially not as big a one as he was handed in 2008, but neither do the Republicans in the Senate or House. Altogether I think this election cycle has proven that the nation is in a political gridlock, the correlation of political forces have not changed for but a few seats here and there in the Senate and the House. The president got 50% of the popular vote(The one that should matter imo) and Romney got 48%, that's not a huge difference at all, around 2 million votes give or take a couple hundred thousand. That being said a lot of people who voted for Obama in 2008 did not vote for Obama in 2012. He lost about 10 million voters while the Republican presidential candidate had around 2 million less voters than the 2008 elections. Considering that votes for third parties stood at about the same levels as the last election cycle that means about 10 million former Democratic supporters and 2 million Republican supporters decided to just not show up to vote. Now this isn't very scientific, it's just something I cooked up in five minutes at midnight, but if you're in the presidents shoes and you see these figures which group of people do you want to satisfy more? The side which is totally unwilling to compromise with you or the followers who were unsatisfied with your performance the first time around? I fear it will be the former and not the latter because Obama has shown that "compromise" essentially means accepting everything the Republicans want, which isn't real compromise.
Now Bull I agree with you that Obama is going to have to take responsibility and that he can't blame everything on Bush but I think the reason we see a lot of that happening is because Republicans don't want to take any responsibility in the mess that they have created. There is about zero accountability for their actions if it has a negative effect. Politically this means you have one side who sits there and blames just about everything on Obama the minute he steps into office. If you're Obama and you want to take responsibility for some of your actions but you're blamed for everything under the sun that's bad why are you going to agree with them? So Obama's stuck in this situation where he has to half accept responsibility for his actions while also pointing out that he wasn't the one that created the situation in the first place and that Republicans continue to not work with Democrats to try and solve the problem. So what's he supposed to do accept responsibility for everything? I don't think that's a very good political strategy, take the blame, while the opposition takes none whatsoever.
Of course this is because we can't have an honest discourse on problems, not the politicians anyways. I don't think the problems we face are Obama's fault, Bush's fault, etc, we don't live in that kind of society where there is a central authority and while they are are elected leaders I believe they don't have sufficient power to make every decision in this country. There are so many issues, so many problems that need to be taken care of on a daily basis that it's impossible for any president or government to sufficiently solve every problem 100% of the time. Mistakes are made by all and we live in a country with an economic system that is based around chaotic principles.
I respect and admire your optimism. I really wish I could feel optimistic about the next four years, but since the middle of the Bush era I have seen nothing but dysfunction and despair in our government and our economy. Like I said, I suffer from optimistic pessimism, I'm positive it will be worse before it gets better.
We don't have children at home, and after long discussions we have decided that a move is the best course of action. I am excited at the prospect of being able to spend so much time living in a part of the world that I have had limited experience in. I visited Australia several times during Air Force missions there (delivering equipment to NASA tracking sites and to RAAF installations) but never had the chance to spend much time. It will be an interesting three to six years. Thank you for your kind wishes.
I think it will be 'cool'... I have to correct you on one point. I know you are probably kidding, but unlike those entertainment flakes who have threatened to move and didn't, I don't recall ever making the same challenge. If I did, I was kidding, or drunk, or being sarcastic.
If it were not for this wonderful opportunity to work in Australia, I doubt I'd be leaving either.
This blog is now officially HILARIOUS!!!! Personally, I know quite a bit about Australia's business climate as I have an office in New South Wales. A 'three to six year' work visa (which they call a work PERMIT) for someone who is NOT a resident of the commonwealth is something that HARDLY happens especially with their 'POINTS" based immigration system. Further, Australia is fairly conservative domestically and there are a host of business rules that prevent a company from bringing in outside work without proving to the state that a suitable domestic match for the work was attempted. Also, it does cost over $3,000 USD just for the permit application not including Government fees and processing charges.
I guess Canada would have sounded too cliche? Oh well. Next time Bull153, try Belize. You could have the same timezone AND they speak English too!!
I'm "cautiously optimistic' I have for many years now been disillusioned with the way our Country has been run,and it didn't start with President Obama's administration ,but long before that.
However having cautious feelings in me,knowing how mistakes have been repeated for more years then I can recall,that fact isn't going to allow me to tell myself that this Country can't pull itself together and start fresh.
But it will take both sides to do it,it cannot be all one sided.
Is this possible,well I have to say yes .
When people work together for the betterment of the Country a lot of things can be possible.
United we can accomplish so many things that is positive,but divided and it will be extremely difficult .
This is why when I already see statements put out by certain Political people it really is frustrating to see because its like a line in the sand is being drawn again,that is not away to start over.
I can't let myself get trapped in feelings that we will fail ,I will watch and wait and see what happens,I don't have any idea what that might be,but I choose to "hope" because hope is necessary for all people I think.
So much to do and so little time to do it. I occasionally read this blog during my breaks @ work. But maybe IF we look outside of ourselves and focus on the needs of others, maybe society will improve for the good of ALL humanity. Feed & give aid the poor, clothe the naked, visit our many seniors placed in convelescent homes, help those who are vulerable, help the immigrant that is kept on the outskirts of society because of their status and yes even visit those who are in prison. These men and women are paying their debt to society but as I've come to know some of them through the Catholic Chapel @ D.V.I. I've fought the majority of them repentant and with great concern/remorse for the victims of their crime. They are still human beings born in the the image and likeness of God. Find a need outside yourself and fill it. God bless.
Leo, I support what you are saying. Our national motto should be "We take care of our own!" It amazes me how everything you point to is in your bible, but so many who claim to believe in this book ignore everything you point out. If I remember correctly, these things you say are the teachings of Jesus. They should be first and foremost of anyone who believes in your bible. They should be a way of life for the followers instead of using the book as a means to control and accumulate power.
Its the weak that abuse power, the strong should be humble with their strength and take care of others to the best of their abilities.
" I was kidding, or drunk, or being sarcastic." - DRUNK! That explains everything. Well, the first step to recovery is accepting your problem.
Yo, Moe! It only explains everything IF I said I was leaving if Barack Obama was re-elected. It's that pesky if-then paradigm you have such trouble comprehending! Nyuk... nyuk... nyuk...
Hey Moe! So when do you start your recovery and accept your problem? You 'member...Curly! Nyuk... nyuk... nyuk...
Curly... the stooge that has the biggest difficulty comprehending the truth. Hey Moe, you gonna keep poking him in the eye, bopping him on his head, and slapping his silly face? Nyuk... nyuk... nyuk...
Go lay down until the hangover passes. You are still acting like you are drunk. At least it explains the constant need to act juvenilely on your part.
At least you are admitting that drunk is a reason for the erroneous things you say. It the first of many steps to getting better.
So Bull is leaving the country because Obama WON!! Thanks for making our day, as lame as an excuse as that is...:-)
Yeah I was just messing with you Bull.
Who hasn't ever been on here drunk? I've done it before, no one could tell. Although it obviously isn't very hard to point out where canative was wrong, that guy was a walking contradiction.
I think someone accidentally posted his travel plans here instead of under the more appropriate blog "Faking It."
So Fredo now that Bull is faking leaving the Country and Native has apparently already faked it, what are you going to fake?
....and what is that score now????
Yo, Moe! I'm fine, thanks... which is more than I can say for you stooges. I think Curly bopped you one time too many on the head! Nyuk... nyuk... nyuk!
Hey Moe! I've never said anything erroneous to blame being drunk on! I've admitted nothing... when will you admit you stooges are ridiculous? Nyuk... nyuk... nyuk!
Moe! Did you smack Larry too many times? I'm leaving for a better job and a wonderful life experience while the three of you get to bop, slap, and poke each other silly!!!! I'll take my trip over yours any day! Nyuk... nyuk.... nyuk!
And Moe, be careful where you poke Curly... he's totally lost it. First he loses the election - then his mind. Remember, you poke Curly, Curly bops Larry, and Larry slaps you. It's really simple memory, should be simple for such simpletons! Nyuk... nyuk... nyuk!
Hey Larry! Take off the magic underwear and quit faking having some intelligence! I think Moe smacked, bopped, and poked you one too many times! Nyuk... nyuk... nyuk.
Go give Curly a hug... he's lost his mind and his election. He actually thinks he has something credible to say... poor stooge. He's been irrelevant for such a long time. Hey, Larry... put the magic underwear on Curly! Maybe it'll help the 'liar, liar, pants on fire!' Nyuk... nyuk... nyuk!!!
I know, we're cool.
I don't try to explain Canative... I spend too much time trying to explain things to the stooges. That alone can be an exercise in futility... ;)
I think a particular "moderate" might have had an aneurysm or something after the election. Seems like he has completely lost his mind ...
I fail to see how he - or anyone - would think the last three post above are worthwhile on any level. It is nothing but a pile of immature, insubstantial nonsense. What was the goal of this "moderate?" If it is to make himself look like a complete fool, he he succeeding.
Just in case Bull hasn't heard due to the noise coming from his fake packing for his fake trip....
Fredo just reported the latest score:
...and the beat(ing) goes on....:-)
Question: How many Fringe members can fit into the Fortress of Solitude if all insist on curling into the fetal position?
Hey, Larry! The only ones succeeding at looking foolish are you three stooges! Nyuk... nyuk... nyuk!!!
Fake noise coming from fake packing for a fake trip? Nyuk... nyuk! I actually was gone over the Veteran's Day Weekend... You 'member veterans, you three who so honorably served their country by paying taxes and voting!!! Slap... poke... bop!!! You gotta quit listening to Curly! He lost the election! He's so broke up he'd say anything and you stooges would buy into it... For crying out loud - work visas? 30,000 dollar payments? Emigration requirements? That only applies to work in the private sector, geniuses! Nyuk... nyuk... nyuk!!!
Yo, Larry... the score's still wrong. Barak Obama - 2, America - 0.
We'll see as the next four years play out, but I'm pretty confident you won't be singing the President's praises once the truth about the economy, Obamacare, and redistribution comes out and takes effect. Hope you stooges have salted away some of your show receipts to pay for your health care. taxes, and fines. There's no funny nyuks about that. The beating is coming and everyone is gonna feel it...
"Question: How many Fringe members can fit into the Fortress of Solitude..?" Answer: Just about as many stooges as fit into a Mini-Cooper and can still bop, poke, and slap each other! Nyuk... nyuk... nyuk!!!
If I remember correctly, Larry did serve in the military. You may not know this because Larry doesn't wear it on his sleeve like some do since it wasn't the only thing he did in his life, it was just one event in his life.
" We’ve also had enough of this dumbed-down conservatism. We need to stop being simplistic" - Gov Bobby Jindal.
When do we ever get to see dividends from Conservatism? All we have seen is deficits and debt from the Conservatives, no dividends. There is no history of this country benefiting from Conservatism, that is just another fantasy that they want us to believe.
“The president was elected on the basis that he was not Romney and that Romney was a poopy-head and you should vote against Romney,” ...Grover Norquist
Hey, Moe... If Larry served in the military then I thank him for that service and appreciate it. As for wearing it on my sleeve... well, Moe, it may seem like that to you, but if you recall I only brought up my service when it was questioned, demeaned, or belittled by you clowns. When I would make a point having to do with the military, YOU fools were the ones saying 'How do you know?' or 'He was never in the military"... that's when I mentioned my service.
I'm not going to apologize for being proud of serving my country. I spent more that 20 years, but no matter the length of service, anyone who chooses to don a uniform and go into harms way deserves to be recognized and thanked for that service.
If that is wearing it on my sleeve, so be it. At least when I have my grandkids on my lap and they ask what I did to serve my country, I won't have to say simply "Well, I paid taxes and voted."
Personally at this point, I doubt Bull153 was ever in the military himself. So far, he has posted nothing but disingenuous garbage and immature rumors. Would not surprise me in the least if he is also stretching the truth about this as well in a desperate attempt to be relevant.
"If that is wearing it on my sleeve, so be it. At least when I have my grandkids on my lap and they ask what I did to serve my country, I won't have to say simply "Well, I paid taxes and voted."" - No, you will say that you went to foreign exotic lands and saw exotic people and you killed them because corporations needed to continue making bullets and bombs to keep padding their profit margins that were coming from tax payer dollars after the war was over.
There is a difference between defending our country from foreign invaders, and fighting to keep the war machine going. You chose the latter, when the former is the respectable action. You may try and minimize how much you wear your service on your sleeve, but you have been doing it since you started on this blog.
A tool doesn't know that it is being misused, it just does what the wielder requires of it. Tools don't think, they're just used.
Bull, " If Larry served in the military..." You are starting to sound like those other wackos who replied in the same way when asked if they really believed Obama was not born in America. "Well, duh...he sez he was, so I guess we have to believe him..duh..."
Hey, Moe! You got in wrong again! I swear you need one of those padded helmets if you are gonna let Curly keep bopping you on the melon! You make no sense! Nyuk...nyuk... nyuk!!!
You have no idea what I will say, but it will be something about being honorable, serving my nation, and protecting the rights and privileges that people like you love to enjoy. You can call me whatever you wish, you can believe what you will, you can demean and belittle the honorable military service of millions of veterans, it doesn't change a thing. I am a patriot... and you? Well, other than being a Stooge, I'll let others make that call.
"A stooge doesn't know that it is being abused, it just does what any stooge does. Stooges don't think, they just bop, slap, and poke each other." Nyuk... nyuk... nyuk!!!
Hey Larry! if you served, thank you. If you didn't, that's OK. Not everyone is capable of the dedication, courage, and sacrifice required of military service. They can be like Moe, serving this great nation by paying taxes and voting. Or like Curly, making cash donations to every single charity within Manteca. Now, that's patriotism!
Get off your high horse. What you say you had was a simple job. Anyone can apply, anyone could be a security guard at Walmart and anyone can be a rent-a-cop on a Army base. You somehow suggesting that you are more patriotic - or overall superior - because of your chosen profession is quite bigoted. It shows a real lack of character.
Bull, I guess you missed this..."Bull, " If Larry served in the military..." You are starting to sound like those other wackos who replied in the same way when asked if they really believed Obama was not born in America. "Well, duh...he sez he was, so I guess we have to believe him..duh..."
" Now, that's patriotism!" - if only you were able to live up to our level of what a patriot is. You big government spending conservatives kill me, so out of step with the general public.
While you're waiting, read a book and expand your horizons. Take a deep breath, you'll be fine.
Curious that Bull153 seems to not think LarryBacca does not deserve the same respect for serving in military as Bull153 seems to think he deserves. What an odd hypocrisy.