The All New, Super Nice, Obama/Romney 2012 Thread

[gareth19]

Gary Johnson.
Not for a Win, but to make a sound that one of the big two needs to pay attention to the Progressive/Occupy sorts.
This, as an investment in the Progressive voice for 2016.

And what would this sound do? Remember 2000 and the fools who voted for Ralph Nader to make an environmental point because Al Gore wasn't green enough for them? They ended up with baby Bush, a raped environment, an unwinnable two-front war, and a bankrupt economy.

The realistic choice is between a lackluster Obama and a demonic Willard M. Romney (yes, his real name is Willard, like the rat). Romney has promised to confront the Russians and Chinese, as foolhardy a notion as Bush's obsession with Saddam Hussein and Iraq (and look what that delusion got us). He pledges to end the first attempt at national health care, and promises to try once again to stimulate the economy by giving even more money to Dick Cheney and Paris Hilton, a move that you recognize never works. Do you really want to give this man a chance at fucking the country up even more than it is right now just to teach the Black Man to remember his place. I thought you had more sense.


At least Obama, a disciple of Milton Friedman, has learned that the master was full of bullshit and that supply-side economics doesn't work. He is no longer repeating the mantra that a rising tide floats all boats, and has specifically proposed limiting tax cuts to those making under $250,000 and letting Dick, Paris, and Willard more of their exaggerated share for economic pie. Do you think Willard would progress as far?

[Riverwind]

Gareth, Moi wanted Ron Paul but sense he dropped out he has a new guy, now it makes sense for moi, like you he lives in California which is solid in the Obama camp, so he figures his vote does not count, but I don't live in California and its very important that we put Obama back in the White House for another 4 years.

Obama has made mistakes, but not real bad ones. NO worse then any other president and much better then most. I will vote for Obama again and proudly so, if for no other reason to see Mitch McConnell turn red and not be able to talk for a week.


River

[Riverwind]

So Obama this week said cut taxes or leave them the same for people making 250k or under but raise the tax for the 1%, he added raise the tax for people like me. That is putting your money where your mouth is, the Republicans had a fit, then for the 32 time they passed a bill to end the health care bill which was DEAD on arrival to the senate AGAIN. So our republican led house is wasting our tax dollars passing bills that cant even get a look in the senate.


Go figure,


River

[moi621]

Tax cuts for those making under 250K.
Only months before the election.
Sorry, not impressed.

Moi

[Riverwind]

Moi, where have you been, he has been talking about this for three years, did you just now turn on the TV.

River

[moi621]

Well he certainly didn't do it very loudly.

Psst. Hey. I wanna cut taxes for those who make less then 250K

[kristoff]

Well he certainly didn't do it very loudly.

Psst. Hey. I wanna cut taxes for those who make less then 250K

He has never said cut them (again). he has said keep the tax cuts (Bush) already in place, but only for the middle class. let the cuts for the rich fucks expire.

[Riverwind]

Well he certainly didn't do it very loudly.

Psst. Hey. I wanna cut taxes for those who make less then 250K

The following is part of the STATE OF THE UNION ADDRESS 2012, How loud do you think he should be? Or did you not watch it?

When it comes to the deficit, we’ve already agreed to more than $2 trillion in cuts and savings. But we need to do more, and that means making choices. Right now, we’re poised to spend nearly $1 trillion more on what was supposed to be a temporary tax break for the wealthiest 2 percent of Americans. Right now, because of loopholes and shelters in the tax code, a quarter of all millionaires pay lower tax rates than millions of middle-class households. Right now, Warren Buffett pays a lower tax rate than his secretary.
Do we want to keep these tax cuts for the wealthiest Americans? Or do we want to keep our investments in everything else –- like education and medical research; a strong military and care for our veterans? Because if we’re serious about paying down our debt, we can’t do both.
The American people know what the right choice is. So do I. As I told the Speaker this summer, I’m prepared to make more reforms that rein in the long-term costs of Medicare and Medicaid, and strengthen Social Security, so long as those programs remain a guarantee of security for seniors.
But in return, we need to change our tax code so that people like me, and an awful lot of members of Congress, pay our fair share of taxes. (Applause.)
Tax reform should follow the Buffett Rule. If you make more than $1 million a year, you should not pay less than 30 percent in taxes. And my Republican friend Tom Coburn is right: Washington should stop subsidizing millionaires. In fact, if you’re earning a million dollars a year, you shouldn’t get special tax subsidies or deductions. On the other hand, if you make under $250,000 a year, like 98 percent of American families, your taxes shouldn’t go up. (Applause.) You’re the ones struggling with rising costs and stagnant wages. You’re the ones who need relief.


State of the Union Address 2011

And if we truly care about our deficit, we simply cannot afford a permanent extension of the tax cuts for the wealthiest 2% of Americans. Before we take money away from our schools, or scholarships away from our students, we should ask millionaires to give up their tax break. It's not a matter of punishing their success. It's about promoting America's success.

I guess you missed this one too.

and

State of the Union Address 2010 he said

We will continue to go through the budget, line by line, page by page, to eliminate programs that we can't afford and don't work. We've already identified $20 billion in savings for next year. To help working families, we'll extend our middle-class tax cuts. But at a time of record deficits, we will not continue tax cuts for oil companies, for investment fund managers, and for those making over $250,000 a year. We just can't afford it. (Applause.)

So moi, it would seem that the only person not listing is you.

How loud should he be?

OH MOI, I only have one more thing to add,

State of the Union Address 2009 when he first took office he said.

In this budget, we will end education programs that don't work and end direct payments to large agribusiness that don't need them. We'll eliminate the no-bid contracts that have wasted billions in Iraq and reform our defense budget so that we're not paying for cold war-era weapons systems we don't use. We will root out the waste and fraud and abuse in our Medicare program that doesn't make our seniors any healthier. We will restore a sense of fairness and balance to our Tax Code by finally ending the tax breaks for corporations that ship our jobs overseas.
In order to save our children from a future of debt, we will also end the tax breaks for the wealthiest 2 percent of Americans. Now, let me be clear--let me be absolutely clear, because I know you'll end up hearing some of the same claims that rolling back these tax breaks means a massive tax increase on the American people: If your family earns less than $250,000 a year, a quarter million dollars a year, you will not see your taxes increased a single dime. I repeat: Not one single dime. In fact--not a dime--in fact, the recovery plan provides a tax cut--that's right, a tax cut--for 95 percent of working families. And by the way, these checks are on the way.

Poor moi, I am going to guess this is why he is voting for a nobody, but MOI, he has talked about this in every state of the union address he has ever given, all 4 of them.

River

[moi621]

He did not push it hard enough.
A once a year or so memorial to the working poor doesn't cut it.
Part of his ineffectual leadership or intentional fumbling for his wealthy supporters?

Moi

[Riverwind]

Give me a break moi, now you are being dumb about this, the president talks about this all the time, its been the one constant about his presidency. You want more action on it, you like it, then vote for him, else shut it.


River

[gareth19]

He did not push it hard enough.
A once a year or so memorial to the working poor doesn't cut it.
Part of his ineffectual leadership or intentional fumbling for his wealthy supporters?

Moi

Short of assassinating John Boehner or throwing Michelle Bachman under a bus what other pushing could he do? Do you remember that all bills concerning revenue musy originate in the House, which is controlled by ... the Republicans. If there is any ineffectual leadership it resides in the House. What don't you understand about the nightmare of the last four years? The Republicans are doing everything possible to sabotage the economy in the belief that public is dumb enough to blame it on Obama and return control to the fucked up incompetents that they are.

[moi621]

Short of assassinating John Boehner or throwing Michelle Bachman under a bus what other pushing could he do? Do you remember that all bills concerning revenue musy originate in the House, which is controlled by ... the Republicans. If there is any ineffectual leadership it resides in the House. What don't you understand about the nightmare of the last four years? The Republicans are doing everything possible to sabotage the economy in the belief that public is dumb enough to blame it on Obama and return control to the fucked up incompetents that they are.

Run against Congress.

Don't let Congress Summer '09 recess without ObamaCare. It cost him his momentum and us a better ObamaCare.

Address the American people as FDR did but by newer technologies.
Recruit people's support and intimidate Congress & Republicans.

Create a check list of wonderful programs and give follow ups, like "stalled in Congress".
Imagine Obama with these big Ross Perot charts laying it out.

Recruit Occupy rather then ignore them.

The most benign thing I can say about this administration is it suffers a "failure of leadership" .

Moi
I will not vote for Obama again, regardless.
California will go his way without Moi and the Moister crowd.
So y'see I can be bolder about it since it truly does not matter.

[moi621]

Because this is a Moi's Super Nice thread,
here is something to cheer all of you up.

Obama leads 333-205 in most recent Electoral College map projection with polls July 10
President Obama has gained a larger lead in the most recent Electoral College map projection, winning with 333 electoral votes compared to 205 for Mitt Romney. The last update gave Obama 314 votes compared to 223 votes for Mitt Romney. The change entirely is attributed to a projected victory for President Obama in Ohio, where new polls show him with a small lead.
http://www.examiner.com/article/obam...ion-with-polls

Isn't it more fun to play nice.


Now all of you who were fretting about the Obama re-election can relax.
Hey, you don't even have to vote because it is in the bag.
Especially if you live in Ohio, Wisconsin, Michigan, Pennsylvania, Iowa or Florida.
Don't worry. Relax.

[Cainanite]

I am worried, but I can't vote. Canadian.

I sincerely hope that everyone who can vote, does. It is going to be a very important election. It will decide if the future will be all about the rich, or all about investing in our people and futures.

Neither candidate can solve the problems, but they can set a tone that spreads far beyond the borders of the USA. The USA is still the economic power drive for the rest of the world. As goes the USA, so goes the world.

So maybe don't say, "Don't worry." Instead say, "Don't panic."

Please use your democracy while you still have it.

[Riverwind]

True wise words my friend.

River