3-4 years later, after being strongly anti-Obama....I will be voting for him for a second term.

page: 23
65
<< 20  21  22    24  25  26 >>

log in

join

posted on Jan, 29 2012 @ 03:24 PM
link   
reply to post by vasaga
 





How do you know? And how does voting fix anything? Newsflash. The government does not care about you.


How can it care for those whom are apathetic and have no say?




So half-truths are still truth?


If they are telling no lie, then yes.




Are you sure?


quite.




posted on Jan, 29 2012 @ 04:03 PM
link   

Originally posted by Gorman91
reply to post by vasaga
 





How do you know? And how does voting fix anything? Newsflash. The government does not care about you.


How can it care for those whom are apathetic and have no say?
You're presuming that voting is having a say and that not voting is having no say, and that the ones who don't vote are apathetic, which is bullsh1t. Look at what just happened with PIPA and SOPA. No voting from the public, yet, they clearly had a say and influenced the outcome. Voting is nothing more than an excuse for people to pretend that they have an influence and that they did everything that they could to change their country. It's a good reason for people to sit on their ass instead of trying something to actually change this broken and outdated system.

And nice way of avoiding the first question. I'll ask it again. How does voting fix anything?


Originally posted by Gorman91


So half-truths are still truth?


If they are telling no lie, then yes.
So deceptions are not lies then?


Originally posted by Gorman91


Are you sure?


quite.
If you say so.. I doubt it though, but whatever.
edit on 29-1-2012 by vasaga because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 29 2012 @ 04:33 PM
link   
Hey Dave,
are you saying you are better off NOW, than you were 4 years ago?

He himself said if things didn't start improving in three years, he would be a one term proposition.
Well it's now four years and it should be evident by now you can't fix things by throwing money at it.
Even the much hated one percenters have a budget, yet this Prez spends and spends, wastes and wastes with no real results.



posted on Jan, 29 2012 @ 05:38 PM
link   
reply to post by vasaga
 





You're presuming that voting is having a say and that not voting is having no say, and that the ones who don't vote are apathetic, which is bullsh1t. Look at what just happened with PIPA and SOPA. No voting from the public, yet, they clearly had a say and influenced the outcome. Voting is nothing more than an excuse for people to pretend that they have an influence and that they did everything that they could to change their country. It's a good reason for people to sit on their ass instead of trying something to actually change this broken and outdated system.



This is incredibly naive thinking, if not outright ignorant.

It was the elected officials whom listened. This is what a representative government is. You vote in people to listen to what you want.

We do not allow the mob to vote on bills, because the mob is a bunch of idiots.

This is not a democracy. This is a republic.




So deceptions are not lies then?


You are calling it deception. Perhaps it is, but for the most part it is simply spinning what is true in order to sway opinion.
edit on 29-1-2012 by Gorman91 because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 29 2012 @ 08:02 PM
link   

Originally posted by Gorman91
reply to post by vasaga
 





You're presuming that voting is having a say and that not voting is having no say, and that the ones who don't vote are apathetic, which is bullsh1t. Look at what just happened with PIPA and SOPA. No voting from the public, yet, they clearly had a say and influenced the outcome. Voting is nothing more than an excuse for people to pretend that they have an influence and that they did everything that they could to change their country. It's a good reason for people to sit on their ass instead of trying something to actually change this broken and outdated system.



This is incredibly naive thinking, if not outright ignorant.
And yet I just gave you an example that just worked a few days/weeks ago...


Originally posted by Gorman91
It was the elected officials whom listened. This is what a representative government is. You vote in people to listen to what you want.
Listen? When was the last time Obama listened to what the people want?


Originally posted by Gorman91
We do not allow the mob to vote on bills, because the mob is a bunch of idiots.
Then why is voting for a president, the supposed highest position, justified to be done by the mob? And you do realize you are part of the mob too?


Originally posted by Gorman91
This is not a democracy. This is a republic.
Both titles are mind games. What you have now is fascism + police state.


Originally posted by Gorman91


So deceptions are not lies then?


You are calling it deception. Perhaps it is, but for the most part it is simply spinning what is true in order to sway opinion.
edit on 29-1-2012 by Gorman91 because: (no reason given)
So you are aware that the media is trying to sway opinion. Now, tell me. What stake do these news networks have in this, to go through the trouble of swaying opinion? Isn't their job just to report? And why is it always in favor of one or the other, and almost never outside it?



posted on Jan, 29 2012 @ 09:15 PM
link   
reply to post by Gorman91
 


I don't know about the Tea Party being non-establishment. As the main author the SOPA bill was a Tea-partier...



posted on Jan, 29 2012 @ 09:37 PM
link   
reply to post by vasaga
 





And yet I just gave you an example that just worked a few days/weeks ago...


I did not see such an example.




Listen? When was the last time Obama listened to what the people want?


... Really?

No significant presence in Libya, ending the Iraq war, concluding the Afghanistan war, focusing on the middle class, cutting the military spending, reorganizing the military to be a lean fast killing machine (something that should have been done in the early 90s), an tons others.




Then why is voting for a president, the supposed highest position, justified to be done by the mob? And you do realize you are part of the mob too?


It isn't done by the mob. It's done by the electorate college. However, this is highly influenced by the mob. And the reason for this is that the president is supposed to be a populist trending position.

The US government has a conservative branch, a populist branch, and a local branch. The judiciary, the president, and the congress.




Both titles are mind games. What you have now is fascism + police state.


Between the year 1776 through the 1790s, the US was a police state, as well as during the reconstruction period after the civil war.

Being a police state, hell even being fascist, is not indication that you are evil. Every government can work well, or work badly, to serve the people. It depends on the culture, and the issues at hand.

One of the benefits of a republic is the fact that the government can quickly become fascist, police state, representative, free, closed, or whatever, depending on the conditions that are at hand.

Do you not know that all freedoms given to the people are not actually in the constitution, but rather, the amendments? Because the founding fathers simply wanted a flexible government. They had no idea if a time would come when those rights would need to be suspended, thus they did not place those rights in the actual government. We, the citizenry, are charged with the responsibility of ensuring those rights issued remain. That security is done via voting for the right people.





So you are aware that the media is trying to sway opinion. Now, tell me. What stake do these news networks have in this, to go through the trouble of swaying opinion? Isn't their job just to report? And why is it always in favor of one or the other, and almost never outside it?


Conservationism mostly. Journalism has always been about constructing the social divide between the normal and the abnormal. Reporting is simply the way this construction is done.



posted on Jan, 29 2012 @ 09:40 PM
link   
reply to post by mnmcandiez
 


Plenty of people claim things. That doesn't make them part of it.

After all....Ron Paul claims to be a republican. But how many republicans hold true to his values?


You judge them by their fruits. And, promptly execute their careers should they show spoiled fruit.

It follows, Lamar Smith is only on the committee for the tea part caucus. A committee also including Ron Paul. Being part of something doesn't mean you know what you are part of.



posted on Jan, 30 2012 @ 07:39 AM
link   

Originally posted by Gorman91
reply to post by vasaga
 



And yet I just gave you an example that just worked a few days/weeks ago...

I did not see such an example.
Of course you didn't.. Whatever..


Originally posted by Gorman91


Listen? When was the last time Obama listened to what the people want?


... Really?

No significant presence in Libya,

Despite repeated assurances from President Obama and military leaders that the U.S. would not send uniformed military personnel into Libya, four U.S. service members arrived on the ground in Tripoli over the weekend.

Read more: www.foxnews.com...

Oh right.. Fox lies right?


Originally posted by Gorman91
ending the Iraq war, concluding the Afghanistan war,
And yet he's sending troops to other countries...


Originally posted by Gorman91
focusing on the middle class,
Really?


Originally posted by Gorman91
cutting the military spending,

Obama Disguises Military Budget Increase as a Cut


Originally posted by Gorman91
reorganizing the military to be a lean fast killing machine (something that should have been done in the early 90s), an tons others.
Is that something that the people asked, and why is it a good thing? And why is it so easy to find counter examples for most of your arguments?


Originally posted by Gorman91


Then why is voting for a president, the supposed highest position, justified to be done by the mob? And you do realize you are part of the mob too?

It isn't done by the mob. It's done by the electorate college. However, this is highly influenced by the mob. And the reason for this is that the president is supposed to be a populist trending position.
So the retarded stupid mob still has a high influence.. How is that any different? By degrading the mob you just showed your logical inconsistencies and contradictions, but, whatever..


Originally posted by Gorman91
The US government has a conservative branch, a populist branch, and a local branch. The judiciary, the president, and the congress.
And the point is..?


Originally posted by Gorman91


Both titles are mind games. What you have now is fascism + police state.

Between the year 1776 through the 1790s, the US was a police state, as well as during the reconstruction period after the civil war.

Being a police state, hell even being fascist, is not indication that you are evil.
Wow... Just wow.. Governments are fundamentally evil. It relies on violence to get what it wants, and it will always put itself before the people. How people get the idea that the government is somehow benevolent is beyond me.


Originally posted by Gorman91
Every government can work well, or work badly, to serve the people. It depends on the culture, and the issues at hand.
All governments work badly. That's just how it is. The difference is in the degree.


Originally posted by Gorman91
One of the benefits of a republic is the fact that the government can quickly become fascist, police state, representative, free, closed, or whatever, depending on the conditions that are at hand.

Do you not know that all freedoms given to the people are not actually in the constitution, but rather, the amendments? Because the founding fathers simply wanted a flexible government. They had no idea if a time would come when those rights would need to be suspended, thus they did not place those rights in the actual government. We, the citizenry, are charged with the responsibility of ensuring those rights issued remain. That security is done via voting for the right people.
Yeah right.. How's that working out for ya?


Originally posted by Gorman91


So you are aware that the media is trying to sway opinion. Now, tell me. What stake do these news networks have in this, to go through the trouble of swaying opinion? Isn't their job just to report? And why is it always in favor of one or the other, and almost never outside it?

Conservationism mostly. Journalism has always been about constructing the social divide between the normal and the abnormal. Reporting is simply the way this construction is done.
So you are aware that it is intended to cause division. Ever heard of divide and conquer?



posted on Jan, 30 2012 @ 12:04 PM
link   
reply to post by vasaga
 


Oh boy 4 soldiers. I bet they could take over all of Libya with that.

lol Newsmax? I get their newsteller, mostly for laughs. Their entire agenda is against Obama, and they've lied more then a few times.

A cut is a cut. Just because its increasing slower doesn't mean it isn't a cut.

As for the middle class, plenty of folks here have posted the data that shows job growth.




Is that something that the people asked, and why is it a good thing? And why is it so easy to find counter examples for most of your arguments?


I don't know dude. I haven't exactly seen anything substantial to your "counters". News max, fox, etc etc. News organizations that are a laughing stock.

Why is a smaller leaner military better?

Because all of history says it is. the Romans made this an evident fact in many points in their time. Caesar on a few occasions managed to defeat large armies with fractions of the size for his own forces.




So the retarded stupid mob still has a high influence.. How is that any different? By degrading the mob you just showed your logical inconsistencies and contradictions, but, whatever..


You would say that because you are very subjective, not willing to think before you speak.

The electorate college means local communities decide, not the mob. The fewer people in a decision factor, the higher intelligence is present. If the mob in totality voted, they'd always go for short term gain and populism, and we'd probably be a dictatorship by now. The electorate college ensures a certain level of individual intelligence.




And the point is..?


If you have to ask that, you don't understand how government works.




Wow... Just wow.. Governments are fundamentally evil. It relies on violence to get what it wants, and it will always put itself before the people. How people get the idea that the government is somehow benevolent is beyond me.


When did I say government was good? And why are you saying all governments are evil?

All governments are corrupt to some degree. Good? Evil? That's for history to decide.




All governments work badly. That's just how it is. The difference is in the degree.


All governments are corrupt to a degree. Some governments work brilliantly. If you look at Hitler's Germany, it was one of the best governments every created. It turned a 3rd world country into a 1st world super power in 10 years. but they also slaughtered millions of innocent people. This government was evil but efficient and worked good.




Yeah right.. How's that working out for ya?


I'm doing dandy.




So you are aware that it is intended to cause division. Ever heard of divide and conquer?


Without division, there is no progress.



posted on Jan, 30 2012 @ 01:14 PM
link   
Not to mention that every single republican candidate stood by and did nothing when an openly gay soldier who was just asking them questions was BOO'd by the audience.. Not a single one of them stood up for this man who served in Iraq; defended the United States; defended the conservative idiot's right to stand on that stage; I was DISGUSTED!!! And I'm sorry guys but not even RON PAUL said a word! I will not sit back and watch one of these idiots run our country; our bedrooms and our lives!! &*%$ THE REPUBLICAN PARTY!!!

OBAMA 2012



posted on Jan, 30 2012 @ 02:23 PM
link   
First, let me say that I'm a registered unaffiliated voter. Next I have to say that with so many right wing wack jobs on here, this was a surprising topic to create on ATS.

I complete agree with you.

I never understood how Americans year after year vote for the Millionaire party. You would think that after 30 years of "trickle down" economics, that all it takes is one look around to understand what Republicans stand for. Yet every election Republican candidates wrap themselves in religion and our Flag and manage to keep themselves in power, even if they invade a country that never attacked us. Do you guys realize that 40% of those Republicans still think Saddam Hussein attacked America and had weapons of mass destruction?

Congress has so adopted it's "No wins for Obama" policy that if Obama proposed a bill for better tax distribution or to enforce in place trade laws, they would all vote against it regardless of what it's doing to the middle class in America.

In fact Republicans are the Anti American party and have been since Reagan introduced "Free Trade" Policies 30 years ago and it's about time people wake up and tune out limbaugh and hannity.

The Largest threat to American was never Iraq or Iran. Our largest threats are listed here in no particular order:



The National Defense Authorization Act

The Patriot Act

Our Trade imbalance

Our budget deficit

Our income disparity

Free Trade

Trickle Down economics

All of which are Republican boiler plate. Republicans are the largest threat to America.


Brave thread, and I'm glad you put it here. I'm voting for Obama as well.

.


edit on 30-1-2012 by averageGuy505 because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 30 2012 @ 02:31 PM
link   

Originally posted by mnmcandiez
reply to post by Gorman91
 


I don't know about the Tea Party being non-establishment. As the main author the SOPA bill was a Tea-partier...


The Tea Party is what I believe is referred to as 'astro-turf'. A fake 'grassroots' movement that covers up the usual wealthy, powerful conservative suspects.



posted on Jan, 30 2012 @ 03:45 PM
link   

Originally posted by David9176

You need to lay off the Glen Beck stuff man.


None of that is Glen Beck stuff... It is the truth...

Look it up, you might be amazed by what you find...

You see, when people like you make responses like this to the truth, it shows how informed you really are...

But go ahead and vote for Obama... Under his administration the Feds "lost" $9 - $13 trillion dollars... Next time his administration will destroy completely the Republic...

BTW, you do need to lay off the leftwinger stuff...it is poisoning your mind...



posted on Jan, 30 2012 @ 03:48 PM
link   

Originally posted by FlyingSpaghettiMonster

The Tea Party is what I believe is referred to as 'astro-turf'. A fake 'grassroots' movement that covers up the usual wealthy, powerful conservative suspects.


RIIIIIGHT... Is that why the Tea Party had more support by PEOPLE than the OWS movement?...

Not to mention that the OWS movement had to use dirty tactics, like give "free food paid for by the TAXPAYER" to inflate their ranks and make it look like all those people were there because they agree with the leftwingers of the OWS...



posted on Jan, 30 2012 @ 03:59 PM
link   
reply to post by FlyingSpaghettiMonster
 


You are wrong on many levels, plus you are about three years behind the curve.

Astro turf was the name given to the Tea Party initially by the folks on the left.
At least until it grew roots and started growing and growing.
Then the left tried to brew their own version called the Coffee Party, but coffee wasn't hot like tea.

Then folks on the left started getting scared so naturally they began call them racist white rednecks, when actually The Tea Party consists of people from all walks of life, and yes it even has many of minorities as well, including blacks and Hispanics.

You would know and see that if you were objective enough but I guess it's easier to simply throw the race card.


The main difference between the Tea Party and OWS is civility, no pooping allowed at Tea Party events.



posted on Jan, 30 2012 @ 04:49 PM
link   
Considering the situation Obama took over, and what he has had to work with, he has done a pretty good job. His only big mistake was trying to work with the Republican party, which becomes ever more shrill.

The republican candidates are all so completely awful, only mainstream republicans will support them. Even true conservatives are going to vote for Obama this time around. How can people continue to buy their lies is beyond me.

What Obama needs to find a younger running mate to groom as his successor.



posted on Jan, 30 2012 @ 05:25 PM
link   

Originally posted by Gorman91
reply to post by vasaga
 


Oh boy 4 soldiers. I bet they could take over all of Libya with that.

lol Newsmax? I get their newsteller, mostly for laughs. Their entire agenda is against Obama, and they've lied more then a few times.
Appeal to ridicule.


Originally posted by Gorman91
A cut is a cut. Just because its increasing slower doesn't mean it isn't a cut.
That's basically saying that we slowed down the comet coming to destroy the earth, and that that's a good thing, instead of trying to divert it.


Originally posted by Gorman91
As for the middle class, plenty of folks here have posted the data that shows job growth.
Job growth and the value of the dollar keeps decreasing, so the income isn't enough anyway.


Originally posted by Gorman91


Is that something that the people asked, and why is it a good thing? And why is it so easy to find counter examples for most of your arguments?

I don't know dude. I haven't exactly seen anything substantial to your "counters". News max, fox, etc etc. News organizations that are a laughing stock.
Another appeal to ridicule.


Originally posted by Gorman91
Why is a smaller leaner military better?

Because all of history says it is. the Romans made this an evident fact in many points in their time. Caesar on a few occasions managed to defeat large armies with fractions of the size for his own forces.
It's good that you know that.


Originally posted by Gorman91


So the retarded stupid mob still has a high influence.. How is that any different? By degrading the mob you just showed your logical inconsistencies and contradictions, but, whatever..

You would say that because you are very subjective, not willing to think before you speak.
I'm subjective? Really? Tell me. Where is there an objective thing called a president and a government?


Originally posted by Gorman91
The electorate college means local communities decide, not the mob.
So you're admitting that voting is actually just to make yourself feel better because the mob lacks influence..?


Originally posted by Gorman91
The fewer people in a decision factor, the higher intelligence is present. If the mob in totality voted, they'd always go for short term gain and populism, and we'd probably be a dictatorship by now. The electorate college ensures a certain level of individual intelligence.
The government is always working for short term. Otherwise they would've abolished the Fed a long time ago.


Originally posted by Gorman91


And the point is..?

If you have to ask that, you don't understand how government works.
I know exactly how government works. It's an opinion with a gun. Nothing more, nothing less.


Originally posted by Gorman91


Wow... Just wow.. Governments are fundamentally evil. It relies on violence to get what it wants, and it will always put itself before the people. How people get the idea that the government is somehow benevolent is beyond me.

When did I say government was good?
If it's not good, why support it? You have to believe it's good to support it.


Originally posted by Gorman91
And why are you saying all governments are evil?
Because it's fundamentally based on violence.


Originally posted by Gorman91
All governments are corrupt to some degree. Good? Evil? That's for history to decide.
No, that's for logic to decide. You can't tell your children it's bad to use violence to get what you want and then say that it's good if the government does it. That's creating an exception to the rule.


Originally posted by Gorman91


All governments work badly. That's just how it is. The difference is in the degree.

All governments are corrupt to a degree. Some governments work brilliantly. If you look at Hitler's Germany, it was one of the best governments every created. It turned a 3rd world country into a 1st world super power in 10 years. but they also slaughtered millions of innocent people. This government was evil but efficient and worked good.
Oh so we can forget the slaughtering of millions of people because it changed the country into a super power? So, you're saying power is the main goal of governments? What about the people? Weren't governments made to serve the people instead of the other way around? Which is it currently?


Originally posted by Gorman91


So you are aware that it is intended to cause division. Ever heard of divide and conquer?

Without division, there is no progress.
Really? There is more progress by division than by collaboration?
edit on 30-1-2012 by vasaga because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 30 2012 @ 05:29 PM
link   

Originally posted by ElectricUniverse.....Not to mention that under a liberal democrat as president, Franklin Delano Roosevelt, the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission was set up to regulate Wall Street, and what exactly has it done?... ...


Well, it used to protect us, the small investor until the GOP staffed it with "corporations are people" types. Once that happened, the largest fraud of them all, Bernie Madoff couldn't get himself arrested if he stood naked in Time Square with an "I have a bomb" sign around his neck.

Your party has ruined the middle class of America, and here you are defending them. If it wasn't so pathetic and moronic this would be funny.

By the way "Fox News" isn't news, and limbaugh and hannity are entertainers, not pundits. You'd be better served by reading actual news and stay off the right wing wack job sites.Spouting their slogans makes you appear uneducated which I'm pretty sure isn't the case.

edit on 30-1-2012 by averageGuy505 because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 30 2012 @ 05:35 PM
link   
reply to post by vasaga
 



You are assuming using violence to get something is always wrong. I am not convinced of this. It usually is wrong. But sometimes it is the only way left.




Really? There is more progress by division than by collaboration?


Did you miss the whole 1950s-1980s?





top topics
 
65
<< 20  21  22    24  25  26 >>

log in

join