It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

10+ Reasons Not To Re-Elect Obama

page: 2
41
<< 1    3  4  5 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Apr, 18 2012 @ 10:54 AM
link   
reply to post by sageofmonticello
 



First and foremost.. I think it is necessary to point out that this is not a Pro Romney Argument.


Prove it...let's see your top 10 reasons not to vote for Mitt Romney.


Believe me...I'm not expecting you to really do this...because it is clear you are just an Obama hater.




posted on Apr, 18 2012 @ 10:54 AM
link   

Originally posted by getreadyalready
reply to post by sageofmonticello
 


Since you say what you say in your OP, why not change the title to "10+ Reasons not to vote for Obama or Romney."

By saying not to re-elect Obama, you basically default to Romney, which happens to be even worse!


I feel like I already answered this question in my OP. You see it as a default to Romney, I don't. I understand your position though. Once again though, I feel like I have already addressed that in the OP.

Romney deserves his own thread as to why I won't be voting for him and why I think nobody else should either. When I have had the opportunity to apply the necessary amount of time to create a valuable list, I will do so.
edit on 18-4-2012 by sageofmonticello because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 18 2012 @ 10:57 AM
link   

Originally posted by sageofmonticello
reply to post by SaturnFX
 





if you 'accidently" had to drive, your not exempt from requiring insurance...


Yes, except you will be covered by the person who owns the car you are driving, assuming you didn't steal it.

The difference is that I can choose not to own a car if I don't want auto insurance. I would have to choose not to continue living if I don't want to have health insurance. If you can't understand that difference I don't know how else to explain it.

They are very different topics. Some people choose not to have health insurance because they want to pay out of pocket. why should they no longer be allowed to do so? I don't have health insurance because I am young and don't get sick often and would rather save money than waste it on something I don't currently need, why should I be forced to buy it?



Same reason your forced to pay for roads, hotels of politicians, general infrustructure, etc.
You know what I have no use for? War in Afghanistan, or drone patrols over Pakistan, etc...yet my taxes, that are ripped from me, are used for that. You may not own a car, or drive, yet you pay for some company to sell cement mix so the state can pave roads...why? Since when is it ok for the state to have you pay for something you don't use? I personally don't go to parks...yet the state takes the money from my pocket and pays for their maintenance, etc.
Point is, you are forced into buying services all the time, be it from the state, or whomever the state subcontracts.

This was the liberal plan..just don't even ask the people...tax em all, then take the money and set up a sort of roadwork of healthcare they can or cannot use for free if they want...the republicans didn't like it. Therefore the republicans introduced the choice of mandated health insurance...eventually the libs gave up and folded..saying fine...

And now of course the republicans are complaining that that sucks also (it was their plan!).

Yes, you already buy stuff (without choice) you don't use. With health care, you will use it though.
And btw, young means nothing..tell a drunk driver one night that your young right before he clips you..maybe you won't get injured.
If you fall off a ladder, tell gravity your young, therefore invunerable and must not need a hospital..maybe gravity will go easy on you
tell that slightly uncooked pork your young and therefore food poisoning shouldn't effect you.

Thing is, if you come across a person dying on the floor, you don't ask them if they have health insurance, you call 911 and get that person help. And there you go...the starting of (already) tax payer health care..because the person will be treated either way, and if they can't, (or wont) pay, the state absorbs the cost and gives the hospitals payment for loss...so your paying either way.

And what does that mean?

It means if you buy a loaf of bread, your taxes you pay on top of that is ALREADY paying for health care of others...just at full cost with no deal...so, we already live in a system where everyone is treated anyhow..the choice is, do you try to cut costs, or not...not if you go with or without.



posted on Apr, 18 2012 @ 10:59 AM
link   

Originally posted by OutKast Searcher
reply to post by sageofmonticello
 



First and foremost.. I think it is necessary to point out that this is not a Pro Romney Argument.


Prove it...let's see your top 10 reasons not to vote for Mitt Romney.


Believe me...I'm not expecting you to really do this...because it is clear you are just an Obama hater.


The day I worry about what you think...

Yes, I do hate Obama. I also hate Romney, I will make the thread when I have had a chance to research the thoughts in my head more and have the energy needed to provide the effort. I love how not liking Obama is the same thing as liking Romney in your mind.

That kind of simplistic thinking is what I expect out of an Obama propagandist.



posted on Apr, 18 2012 @ 10:59 AM
link   

Originally posted by sageofmonticello

#1
Obama has added $6 trillion to the national debt in his one term.

#2
NDAA. Indefinite military detention, no attorney, no trial. Nothing else needs to be said. He could of easily vetoed the bill and had it go through congress again with this section removed.

#3
He signed an extension to the patriot act despite running on a platform that attacked the Patriot act and promising that if the extension crossed his desk he would not sign it.

#4
Libya. Obama authorized military action in Libya (otherwise known as war) without consulting congress, this alone is an impeachable offense in my eyes. His reasons for not consulting congress, he wanted to legitimize the UN... His words.

#5
Obama care. No other president in the history of the country has ever assumed that they have the power to force american citizens to purchase a product. The federal government obviously does not have this power.

#6
Obama has authorized the use of military drones to attack country's we have not declared war with. We are killing innocent people with these drones in Pakistan, Yemen, Somalia and only god knows where else.

#7
Despite Obama claiming to be against SOPA, he went ahead and signed ACTA.

#8
Eric Holder and the "Fast and Furious" debacle.

#9
The Bailouts.

#10
The seizure of GM and Chrysler, the transfer of bondholder wealth to unions, and the dumping of the GM stock at a loss


So there is my list. What is on your list?


edit on 18-4-2012 by sageofmonticello because: (no reason given)


#1 - Due in a large part to economic policies started by GWB, such as the unfunded Bush tax cuts.

#2 - This was proposed and maintained by GWB before it was maintained by Obama.

#3 - PATRIOT was established by GWB, in his first term, less than 9 days after 9/11, with very little debate, and the American people responded by re electing him. PATRIOT violates more Constitutional freedoms than any other act before it, and the American people thanked the President that came up with it by re electing him to another four years in office.

#4 - GWB had Congress (AND the United Nations) authorize war in Iraq based on false evidence (that he knew to be false at the time) presented before them. Much worse than not getting authority for war is lying to Congress (an impeachable offense) to get your war.

#5 - Put in place by Mitt Romney in his home state when he was Governor, before Obamacare.

#6 - GWB authorized use of military drones in many countries USA did not declare war with, including Sudan, Somalia, and Pakistan.

#7 - GWB pushed for more no-warrant-needed Gov't control over the internet with PATRIOT.

#8 - Bank bailouts were first done by GWB (in the modern age, at least). The other President who was known for a massive bank bailout? Abraham Lincoln - a Republican - and not many people know that old Abe had one of the biggest transfers of money to the banks in history.

#9 - GWB awarded several no bid contracts to Haliburton, a company previously chaired by VP Dick Cheney. "Saint" Ronald Reagan gave weapons to Iran Contras AND trained Saddam Hussein in advanced biological warfare, and gave him the weapons that would later be used on his own people. GWB administration also illegally diverted $700 million in Afghanistan funding to Iraq. The scandal list under GWB's administration is long.

#10 - GWB transferred massive amounts of money to his banker friends, without any accountability for where or how it would be spent. Far more than Obama has sent to the unions. GWB bailed out AIG with similar circumstances to how Obama bailed out GM and Chrysler.



posted on Apr, 18 2012 @ 11:04 AM
link   
reply to post by babybunnies
 


Blaming things on Bush is the same thing as saying two wrongs make a right. Two wrongs do not make a right. People can come up with whatever excuses they want to, it doesn't change the facts.

Anyhow, I am not hear to defend the list, this is my list of why I will not be voting for Obama, I realize people can have different opinions than me. These are mine and I have formed them in a logical and acceptable way according to my own values and research.



posted on Apr, 18 2012 @ 11:05 AM
link   
Guys, this is what Obama wants... He wants us to vote for different people so he can stay in office... This anti-Romney rhetoric is going to give us another for Years of the comrade.

seriously... Romney was a gov. Obama was a senator.... executive experience trumps legislative everytime...

we need to focus on BEATING Obama this year
edit on 18-4-2012 by DrNotforhire because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 18 2012 @ 11:05 AM
link   
Why is it nearly 4 years later everything is still blamed on GWB? Its ok in the first year two to blame the outgoing president. But were nearly 4 years in now and still blaming him? Things have gotten worse, not better. Where I am from we call that a trend. I am not saying go vote for Romney either but just like last time, its time for a change because four more years of this and believe "this" is going to get worse, isnt what I am looking forward to. But its time to stop blaming GWB. Heck why not blame Clinton, He was there before Bush. Time to stop playing the blame game and own up to it.



posted on Apr, 18 2012 @ 11:06 AM
link   
I wholeheartedly agree with the OP. We should all know by now that those at the helm will allow only their puppets to take the stage. I must state that in my personal opinion that the only way anyone can back either of the two parties is for nefarious reasons! The simple fact that TPTB push these people should set off warning bells.

It occurs to me that if the two party idea is the system of the elite, it should be our duty as supposedly free people to throw a wrench into the machine in any way that we can! I have seen major "vote-bending" throughout my lifetime and realize voting is likely a sham altogether but at least the message would be sent to the elite that many more of us are awake and we have our collective "all-seeing eye" on them!



posted on Apr, 18 2012 @ 11:10 AM
link   
reply to post by SaturnFX
 



What part of I can pay for my health cost out of pocket is not sinking in. Health Insurance is not a necessity in order to receive health care.

Trust me, the doctor will take your money, you do not need health insurance.

I also think Income tax is unconstitutional, that covers the rest of your argument, at least they had the respect to amend the constitution in order to bring us the income tax. When The constitution is amended to allow for Obama care, then you will have a point. I don't see that happening any time soon.

It is only an assumption that what government pays for cannot be created in any other way. A false assumption.



posted on Apr, 18 2012 @ 11:10 AM
link   
reply to post by sageofmonticello
 


I'll reply one by one to your false list like I did in the other thread.


#1
Obama has added $6 trillion to the national debt in his one term.


Obama had to spend money to bring us out of a recession and to continue to pay for Bush's wars and tax cuts.



#2
NDAA. Indefinite military detention, no attorney, no trial. Nothing else needs to be said. He could of easily vetoed the bill and had it go through congress again with this section removed.


NDAA is not an evil make you dissapear act. The paranoia and mis-information is the only reason this is an 'issue'. And yes...obama even had to sign an EO to combat the right-wing mis-information campaign.

How many people have 'dissapeared' due to the NDAA???



#3
He signed an extension to the patriot act despite running on a platform that attacked the Patriot act and promising that if the extension crossed his desk he would not sign it.


No, he didn't campaing as President to not sign the Patriot Act. Despite your source of claimng that in 2003...yes...2003...he was "against" it.

Here are some facts for you.

www.politifact.com...

"As president, Barack Obama would revisit the PATRIOT Act to ensure that there is real and robust oversight of tools like National Security Letters, sneak-and-peek searches, and the use of the material witness provision."


He had to compromise on this...well...because that is what good leaders do.

So yes...this one from you is a flat out lie.



#4
Libya. Obama authorized military action in Libya (otherwise known as war) without consulting congress, this alone is an impeachable offense in my eyes. His reasons for not consulting congress, he wanted to legitimize the UN... His words.


No matter how much you call this a "war"...it was not.

The President doesn't need congress to authorize every single use of the military...it is within his powers to use it without congress in certain cases.

Again...another flat out lie.



#5
Obama care. No other president in the history of the country has ever assumed that they have the power to force american citizens to purchase a product. The federal government obviously does not have this power.


We will see what the SCOTUS says.

Either way, Obama actually did something about the problem instead of just ignoring it. The ACA has a ton of great things in it for everyday Americans...no more pre-existing conditions, no more "caps" on insurance payouts, insurance companies can't dump you know for getting sick, millions of kids now have health insurance, and college kids now have health insurance after they graduate while they are still looking for a job.

Doesn't matter what the SCOTUS says...Obama wins on this.



#6
Obama has authorized the use of military drones to attack country's we have not declared war with. We are killing innocent people with these drones in Pakistan, Yemen, Somalia and only god knows where else.


It is within his power to do this.

I don't agree with us being the world police...but that is how it is. I disagree with Obama on this...but I don't expect to agree with him on everything.



#7
Despite Obama claiming to be against SOPA, he went ahead and signed ACTA.


And I agree with him on this.

Idiots have ruined the freedom of the internet...people can't act like civilized adults and feel like "stealing" isn't "stealing" if it is online.



#8
Eric Holder and the "Fast and Furious" debacle.


And Holder isn't running for President. If Holder is found responsible, he will resign. Obama isn't a mind reader...he can only appoint based on past performance...not future performance.



#9
The Bailouts.


George Bush.

Get your facts straight.



#10
The seizure of GM and Chrysler, the transfer of bondholder wealth to unions, and the dumping of the GM stock at a loss


He saved an American industry, he saved thousands of jobs during a recession, and now the American car industry is going great.



Now let's see that top 10 list for Romney...that is if you truly aren't just an Obama hater trying to disguise yourself as a unbiased commentator.
edit on 18-4-2012 by OutKast Searcher because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 18 2012 @ 11:12 AM
link   
reply to post by sageofmonticello
 



What part of I can pay for my health cost out of pocket is not sinking in.





Mitt...is that you???



posted on Apr, 18 2012 @ 11:12 AM
link   
reply to post by DrNotforhire
 


Romney doesn't have a chance, even the republicans don't like the man. Sometimes I wonder if the GOP heads want another 4 years of Obama. Why else would they force on us such a weak candidate.

Actually, i don't wonder, the GOP in power and the Dems in power have little they disagree on. It is all rhetoric, Romney will be no different than Obama. Show me something in Romney's voting record that says that isn't true, not something he says mind you but something he has done.



posted on Apr, 18 2012 @ 11:14 AM
link   
reply to post by OutKast Searcher
 


Yea, because you have to be a muti-millionaire to pay for health expenses. I had a kidney stone last year and the bill was around $3000 bucks. Ever hear of payment plans?

More hyperbole coming from the Obama truth camp.



posted on Apr, 18 2012 @ 11:16 AM
link   
reply to post by sageofmonticello
 


I honestly dont care what you show me... I've seen it first hand.. in Mass when he was Gov. he did a great job... and I will be voting for him... Since I want Obama out, and saying hes NOT going to win isn't what the polls are showing these days
edit on 18-4-2012 by DrNotforhire because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 18 2012 @ 11:17 AM
link   

Originally posted by TheTardis

Many of the programs that people do or do not qualify for cut off at 50k.

Oh this is sweet.
Don't vote for Obama..because he is a socialist..and if he is re-elected, you won't be able to use the social programs anymore.
lol...man, I don't think I could even have made that up in jest...
Yes, the socialist will be removing your socialist programs to you because of capitalism.

I am still thinking this is either satire, or a parody you are arguing from


And in the past they have referenced that as a wealthy point. I know I dont qualify for crap but if the tax cuts fall of I will be taxed a lot more than I am now. Romney wants to remove tax deductions for the rich which would do the same thing but only affect the very rich rather than affecting me. If I am wrong I apologize but in the past many of the programs they put in place to help the middle class or to tax the wealthy have been cut at 50k household income.

Your facts are misplaced.
The only plan Romney has in place is to cut the corporate tax rate, thereby giving us a nice debt swell of another trillion in lost revenue, and sort of kind of make up for it by firing a ton of people, and clipping benefits and programs even more.

Seriously, stop listening to rhetoric and start digging for unbiased news sources for views, plans, etc.
I don't doubt you are not up to speed on where people are standing..its hard to gauge every stance that every candidate holds (especially the likes of Romney, whom switch by the day)..so you need to understand ideals then as the guiding post until they cement down their plans. Idealistically, the right is for less programs, less middle class stimulus, all the breaks going to corporations. This is called "Trickle down economics"..basically give the giants all the breaks and wealth will trickle down from their pockets to the underling middle classes..yes, this actually is their economic principles.
In turn, you don't need all these social programs, like free clinics, shelters, perscription med help, etc etc etc...the giants will give you a job with all the billions they save in taxes (surely) and voila..problem solved...just make sure to pay your taxes though, because with all the million and billionares not paying jack, someone has to make up for it.



As far as Obama and Socialism. Most of what he has said have been through his actions and his support of socialist programs and I cant find the exact quote

Those programs your upset you won't be qualified for?
And no, you will never find a quote..because Obama is (sadly) a corporate centerist.



I was looking for where he said something to the affect that he though Socialism was a great way to live or something along those lines but here is an article that spells out some of his social beliefs.

rightwingnews.com...

If you skimmed so far, read this bottom bit for meat and perspective

Few issues here
1) a news source named rightwingnews. They have a dishonest agenda.
2) The idea of progressive tax rate = redistribution of wealth.
3) We have been redistrubuting wealth since the beginnings of capitalism..the argument is, why does it have to always be taken from the bottom and given to the top? Capitalism is for the poor, Socialism is for the rich.

So go with actions

GWB bailed out banks and wall street. Republicans were saying grimly..yes, it must be done. yes, lets do it, green light any sum of money they want...aka, corporatists were in trouble, so our tax dollars were pushed to them...why were they in trouble? because of rampant corruption,

Later on, GM, a car company..blue collar stuff was in equal trouble and needed a bit of help...not a corporatist. Obama said alright..and gave them a bit of floating cash and told them to sort it out quick.
Republicans exploded, screaming about socialism, redistribution of wealth, etc...Why were they screaming? because GM is not a corporatist asking for help..it wasn't wall street, it was main street.

So yes, lets judge by actions.
The right wing are very much in favor of redistribution of wealth...they just want it going from bottom to top.
So...if the debate isn't about a philosophy of yes or no to redistribution, but about which way it should flow considering it simply will be flowing one way or the other..the question begs to be asked, which way do you personally want the distribution to flow? top to bottom to strengthen the foundation, or bottom to top, to support a few stock holders and international corporatist?



posted on Apr, 18 2012 @ 11:17 AM
link   

Originally posted by sageofmonticello
reply to post by OutKast Searcher
 


Yea, because you have to be a muti-millionaire to pay for health expenses. I had a kidney stone last year and the bill was around $3000 bucks. Ever hear of payment plans?

More hyperbole coming from the Obama truth camp.


I really hope you don't have a MAJOR medical issue...it's not going to be $3,000 and they aren't going to put you on a payment plan that you can handle.

Hilarious that you think everyone can just pay out of pocket.


It just shows how out of touch you are...I'd be very surprised if you aren't voting for Romney....which is why you won't create the thread on the reasons not to vote for Romney.



posted on Apr, 18 2012 @ 11:22 AM
link   
reply to post by OutKast Searcher
 


I don't have the energy nor do you have enough of my respect to reply to your propaganda responses twice, so I will just link to my previous response to you.

www.abovetopsecret.com...

The truth of my list stands on its own two feet. You can have whatever opinion you want and spin things however you feel necessary, I could care less about bickering with you until I am blue in the face, it doesn't serve much purpose. You have said your thoughts and readers can make up their own mind.

My opinion is your argument is a very weak one. I imagine your thoughts on mine are similar. We can leave it at that.

On a side note, your condescending tone speaks volumes to your character.



edit on 18-4-2012 by sageofmonticello because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 18 2012 @ 11:24 AM
link   
reply to post by OutKast Searcher
 


It is hilarious that you think people don't get medical care because they can't afford it. You do realize it is already against the law for a hospital to turn patients away? Your grasp of reality is astounding.


Keep challenging me on my Romney comments all you want to, I will make the thread when I am good and ready. For a Obama fan, you sure do like to bully people around. I thought you folks were trying to outlaw bullying?

I doubt you will give me an apology when the thread is published. That is the type of person you are from all the evidence I can gather on this site.
edit on 18-4-2012 by sageofmonticello because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 18 2012 @ 11:27 AM
link   

Originally posted by TheTardis
Why is it nearly 4 years later everything is still blamed on GWB? Its ok in the first year two to blame the outgoing president. But were nearly 4 years in now and still blaming him?


Dude, it depends on the issue.

If Nixon caused some catastrophy, then its approprate to blame Nixon for the problem.
Each POTUS after answers for what they did to counter the problem, but the root is never forgotten.

Clinton actually does share some blame in the economic and corporate issues that effected all of this, however, Clinton basically put a pot on the stove. GWB let it boil over and ruin the counter.

The issue of why people cry out over Bush is because of many reasons...for instance, we face a debt crisis because GWB took a surplus and turned it into a massive deficit immediately. He kicked the foundation out from under us, flat out. And we are STILL dealing with the GWB "stimulus" that was meant to expire ages ago. That is one of many issues that is legacy of the previous administration.

I liked GWB..sort of..in that thought he was a down to earth sort of guy. I don't "hate" him..I can't hate him, I don't know him personally. But, his policys were categorically disastrous for the country and world, and there is not an economist alive whom would disagree with this. We are still feeling the massive ripples of this, and will be for potentially decades more unless we act in unison to mitigate the losses.
And we won't..because politics isn't about mitigating losses, its about spinning reality and amping up losses, then blaming the other side for the loss.

Our entire political system has gone rogue.




top topics



 
41
<< 1    3  4  5 >>

log in

join