ArtsAutosBooksBusinessEducationEntertainmentFamilyFashionFoodGamesGenderHealthHolidaysHomeHubPagesPersonal FinancePetsPoliticsReligionSportsTechnologyTravel
  • »
  • Politics and Social Issues»
  • United States Politics

Why No One Should Vote For Mitt Romney, Not Even Mitt Romney!

Updated on December 7, 2013

Two-Faced Chameleon!

© 2012 VVeasey Publishing

05/08/12

If you look in the dictionary under two-faced chameleon there will be two pictures of Mitt Romney. One looking to the left and one looking to the right.

Someone wrote a hub about 10 reasons blacks shouldn't vote for the Democrats. Well we only need one reason why no one should vote for the Republicans... Mitt Romney.

Romney has changed his political position so many times, even he doesn't know where he stands. Romney shouldn't even vote for himself. The man is delusional, or so out of touch with reality, he thinks republican voters will vote for him no matter how many times he does and an about face or contradicts himself...hmm..maybe he's not that delusional. Many of these people have such a delusional hatred of President Obama they will probably vote for Romney anyway.

Mitt's latest about face and arguably the most crass and lowdown is he's now demanding credit for the success of the auto companies when he was originally dead set against giving them the bailout,

Romney said, "Let Detroit go bankrupt," . " IF General Motors, Ford and Chrysler get the bailout that their chief executives asked for yesterday, you can kiss the American automotive industry goodbye. It won’t go overnight, but its demise will be virtually guaranteed."

But now that General Motors and Chrysler are posting record profits, Mitt states, "I pushed the idea of a managed bankruptcy," "And finally, when that was done, and help was given, the companies got back on their feet. So I'll take a lot of credit for the fact that this industry's come back."

Can you believe this guy! Is anybody with any sense going to vote for this opportunistic_______you fill in the blank.


Giving Credit To Bush For What Obama Did

But this is just par for the course for the Republicans. Remember Dick Cheney trying to give credit to Bush when Obama successfully got Bin Laden killed?

Bush failed to capture or kill Bin Laden when he was in office. When Bush was asked about his plans to capture Bin Laden or have him killed. Bush nonchalantly said "Who knows if he’s hiding in some cave or not. We haven’t heard from him in a long time. The idea of focusing on one person really indicates to me people don’t understand the scope of the mission. Terror is bigger than one person. He’s just a person who’s been marginalized. … I don’t know where he is. I really just don’t spend that much time on him, to be honest with you."

He didn't spend that much time thinking about Bin Laden, but now Bush should get credit for having Bin Laden killed? I don't think so.

I think we see a pattern with these people.

The tea party conservatives, Cheney, Fox News talking heads, etc, don't want to give President Obama credit for anything that will make him look good to the American public. If they were originally for a policy or idea that Obama supports, they're now against it.

They are intentionally trying to deceive and delude the public,to keep President Obama from being re-elected. You can't trust them. You can't trust Mitt Romney. He'll say anything to get elected. Romney is the new poster boy for all of this political non-sense.

This one reason trumps 10 or 100 reasons why anybody should vote for the Republicans and definitely not for Mitt Romney.


Romney And Jobs

Update: Romney cites as his main reason for running for president is that his Bain Capital experience qualified him to be able to improve the economy and create jobs. But he cried "no fair" when his record of bankrupting companies and shipping thousands of job overseas is brought up. He only wants us to talk about the part of his Bain Capital record that he wants us to talk about. The Republican leaders, Fox news and others support this nonsense and hypocrisy.

But the truth is being revealed for all to see if they really want to see it

Here's a quote from the Washington Post

" During the nearly 15 years that Romney was actively involved in running Bain, a private equity firm that he founded, it owned companies that were pioneers in the practice of shipping work from the United States to overseas call centers and factories making computer components, according to filings with the Securities and Exchange Commission."


Romneycare And Obamacare

Amazing! But wait there more!

Romney says he going to end Obama Care If he becomes president but wouldn't cha know it. Obama Care is based on Romney Care! Mitt tries his best to deny it, but Obama used the same guy who helped Romney create Romney Care, to help him Create Obama Care! They're virtually the same plan! (Can somebody say two-faced chameleon)


Romney And Bain Capital

7.12.12

Romney, always insists that he left Bain capital in 1999, so he's not responsible for anything Bain capital did after that date. But a report in the Boston Globe, states that according to filings Bain capital made with the Securities and Exchange Commission. Romney was with Bain until 2002. He was the only stockholder, chairman of the board, chief executive officer and president of the company. (Can somebody say two-faced lying chameleon)


Racial Pandering

7.25.12. A Romney campaign adviser told the U, K, Telegraph

“We are part of an Anglo-Saxon heritage (read white) and he feels that the special relationship is special,” “The White House didn’t fully appreciate the shared history we have”. (What!)

Is he suggesting that President Obama has to be Anglo-Saxon (read white) to appreciate our shared history with Britain? Is this openly biased, racist pandering and racial snobbery or what!


Romney's "Foreign" Policy Tour

7.27.12

Romney is on his so-called "foreign" policy tour, because he has no foreign policy experience, this was supposed give Mitt something to tout when he continues his campaign back in the U.S.

But boy!, oh boy!, has he F*cked up big time, this time! He questioned the readiness of Britain to host the Olympic Games! And they've fired back at Mitt with the Big Guns!

The Sun Tabloid called him "Mitt the Twit," and a "wannabe president." Ha ha ha ha! whooo!That's cold! I could've said it better myself!

The Independent, called Romney's trip, "Romney shambles" saying in addition to Romney committing a diplomatic gaffe, he did the "the cardinal sin of U.S. politics, flip-flopping" on his criticism.

Ha Ha Ha Ha...the British are doing us proud! They can see thru Romney's B.S.better than most Americans!

The Daily Telegraph said, Romney's ineptness has overshadowed his purpose for coming to London. (That ain't nothing but the truth!)

Yeah buddy!

Even the conservative Daily Mail called Romney " devoid of charm, offensive and a wazzock (a foolish or annoying person). Ha ha ha. I didn't know what that was either...I had to look that one up! But it's fits! Ha ha ha ha!

In his interviews, Romney, is just so transparent and phony and seems to think he can just "charm "his way out his flip-flopping...but it ain't working! Ha ha ha ha ha ha!


Corporate Raider

That a corporate raider like Mitt Romney is masquerading as the common man's politician is outrageous...but his flip flopping....Priceless!

Romney made Paul Ryan his Vice Presidential running mate!

9.11.12. The Republicans are supposed to be the party that big on the support of our military but during their convention they barely mentioned the military but the Democrats acknowledged our fighting men and women in a big way. Mitt and his pals didn't even thank or show any appreciation for the troops fighting in Afghanistan.

Mitt's' response asked about this omission, "I only regret you’re repeating it day in and day out. When you give a speech you don’t go through a laundry list, you talk about the things that you think are important and I described in my speech, my commitment to a strong military unlike the president’s decision to cut our military. And I didn’t use the word troops, I used the word military. I think they refer to the same thing".

Mitt doesn't think that acknowledging our military men and women fighting in harms way is important?

9.11.12.There was poll that asked who people thought was more responsible for getting Osama Bin Laden About 16% said Mitt Romney! Can you believe that shit?

34% said they were not sure who was more responsible for getting Bin Laden! Wow!

These fools need educating and Romney the Republican sure as hell aren't gonna do it!

9.13.12. Romney falsely accused President Obama of sympathizing with the attackers of American Embassy in Libya!

Mitt said "The Obama administration's first response was not to condemn attacks on our diplomatic missions, but to sympathize with those who waged the attacks," (Outrageous!)

But none of that was true (surprise, surprise, surprise!).

Neither the American Embassy nor Secretary Of State Clinton offered sympathy for the attackers.

In fact, the Cairo Embassy condemned the anti-Muslim religious violence before the embassy was attacked. Secretary of State Clinton representing the Obama administration's first response to the violence, explicitly condemned the attack and the death of a State Department official.

So Romney in his eagerness to score political points against the President, jumped the gun, and didn't know what the hell he was talking about, and got a lot of justly deserved criticism from both democrats and republicans for his outrageous remarks.

9.14.12, Mitt says "I think the challenge that I'll have in the debate is that the president tends to, how shall I say it, to say things that aren't true," What! Ha ha ha ha!

Mitt never says things that aren't true or flip flops...Right?...Right!!!

9.18.12

Mitt's caught on tape at a private fund raiser for millionaires saying that 47% of the American voters are irresponsible, want hand-outs and see themselves as victims because they won't vote for him! He's said he's not concern about those voters. See the video below!

9.20.12

Ha ha ha ha! Now Romney is saying forget what he said about 47 percent of people, because he's for 100 percent of the people! (What!) Is anybody buying this? I hope not!

Now you see why I call him a two-faced chameleon?

Even more reason why no one should vote for the Republicans or Mitt Romney, not even Mitt Romney, himself


One More Reason No One Should Vote For Mitt Romney

News Alert! 11.1.2012

Mitt has changed his position so many times that now even the largest newspaper in Romney's backyard, The Salt Lake Tribune, has endorsed President Obama for reelection as president

click this link to read it for yourself or just read the article below

http://www.sltrib.com/sltrib/opinion/55019844-82/r

Tribune endorsement: Too Many Mitts

Obama has earned another term

First Published Oct 19 2012 12:13 pm • Last Updated Oct 24 2012 03:41 pm

(Nowhere has Mitt Romney’s pursuit of the presidency been more warmly welcomed or closely followed than here in Utah. The Republican nominee’s political and religious pedigrees, his adeptly bipartisan governorship of a Democratic state, and his head for business and the bottom line all inspire admiration and hope in our largely Mormon, Republican, business-friendly state.

But it was Romney’s singular role in rescuing Utah’s organization of the 2002 Olympics from a cesspool of scandal, and his oversight of the most successful Winter Games on record, that make him the Beehive State’s favorite adopted son. After all, Romney managed to save the state from ignominy, turning the extravaganza into a showcase for the matchless landscapes, volunteerism and efficiency that told the world what is best and most beautiful about Utah and its people.

In short, this is the Mitt Romney we knew, or thought we knew, as one of us.

Sadly, it is not the only Romney, as his campaign for the White House has made abundantly clear, first in his servile courtship of the tea party in order to win the nomination, and now as the party’s shape-shifting nominee. From his embrace of the party’s radical right wing, to subsequent portrayals of himself as a moderate champion of the middle class, Romney has raised the most frequently asked question of the campaign: "Who is this guy, really, and what in the world does he truly believe?"

The evidence suggests no clear answer, or at least one that would survive Romney’s next speech or sound bite. Politicians routinely tailor their words to suit an audience. Romney, though, is shameless, lavishing vastly diverse audiences with words, any words, they would trade their votes to hear.

More troubling, Romney has repeatedly refused to share specifics of his radical plan to simultaneously reduce the debt, get rid of Obamacare (or, as he now says, only part of it), make a voucher program of Medicare, slash taxes and spending, and thereby create millions of new jobs. To claim, as Romney does, that he would offset his tax and spending cuts (except for billions more for the military) by doing away with tax deductions and exemptions is utterly meaningless without identifying which and how many would get the ax. Absent those specifics, his promise of a balanced budget simply does not pencil out.

If this portrait of a Romney willing to say anything to get elected seems harsh, we need only revisit his branding of 47 percent of Americans as freeloaders who pay no taxes, yet feel victimized and entitled to government assistance. His job, he told a group of wealthy donors, "is not to worry about those people. I’ll never convince them they should take personal responsibility and care for their lives."

Where, we ask, is the pragmatic, inclusive Romney, the Massachusetts governor who left the state with a model health care plan in place, the Romney who led Utah to Olympic glory? That Romney skedaddled and is nowhere to be found.

And what of the president Romney would replace? For four years, President Barack Obama has attempted, with varying degrees of success, to pull the nation out of its worst financial meltdown since the Great Depression, a deepening crisis he inherited the day he took office.

In the first months of his presidency, Obama acted decisively to stimulate the economy. His leadership was essential to passage of the badly needed American Recovery and Reinvestment Act. Though Republicans criticize the stimulus for failing to create jobs, it clearly helped stop the hemorrhaging of public sector jobs. The Utah Legislature used hundreds of millions in stimulus funds to plug holes in the state’s budget.

The president also acted wisely to bail out the auto industry, which has since come roaring back. Romney, in so many words, said the car makers should sink if they can’t swim.

Obama’s most noteworthy achievement, passage of his signature Affordable Care Act, also proved, in its timing, his greatest blunder. The set of comprehensive health insurance reforms aimed at extending health care coverage to all Americans was signed 14 months into his term after a ferocious fight in Congress that sapped the new president’s political capital and destroyed any chance for bipartisan cooperation on the shredded economy.

Obama’s foreign policy record is perhaps his strongest suit, especially compared to Romney’s bellicose posture toward Russia and China and his inflammatory rhetoric regarding Iran’s nuclear weapons program. Obama’s measured reliance on tough economic embargoes to bring Iran to heel, and his equally measured disengagement from the war in Afghanistan, are examples of a nuanced approach to international affairs. The glaring exception, still unfolding, was the administration’s failure to protect the lives of the U.S. ambassador to Libya and three other Americans, and to quickly come clean about it.

In considering which candidate to endorse, The Salt Lake Tribune editorial board had hoped that Romney would exhibit the same talents for organization, pragmatic problem solving and inspired leadership that he displayed here more than a decade ago. Instead, we have watched him morph into a friend of the far right, then tack toward the center with breathtaking aplomb. Through a pair of presidential debates, Romney’s domestic agenda remains bereft of detail and worthy of mistrust.

Therefore, our endorsement must go to the incumbent, a competent leader who, against tough odds, has guided the country through catastrophe and set a course that, while rocky, is pointing toward a brighter day. The president has earned a second term. Romney, in whatever guise, does not deserve a first.) The Salt Lake Tribune

The Salt Lake Tribune endorses President Obama for president.

Even more reason no one should vote for Mitt Romney, even Romney himself!




Mitt thinks 47% Of Americans Are Irresponsible! Cause They Won't Vote For Him!

Mitt Romney: Lies and Corruption

Comments

    0 of 8192 characters used
    Post Comment

    • profile image

      Spud 5 years ago

      I predict MSNBC will be the most watched channel on election night, and Chris Matthews leg tingle, will be replaced an extreme anxiety attack. If you sit close to the screen, make sure you wear a raincoat, I expect Matthews to spit like crazy and foam at the mouth.

    • vveasey profile image
      Author

      The Medicine Man 5 years ago from Detroit,MI

      Ellis

      thanks for commenting and so passionately

      You makes some good points

      Are black people the only ones who do Groupthink?

      How would you have gotten enslaved blacks out of slavery in a country whose slogan was all men are created equal?

      I would you have ended the long history of Jim Crow laws and black codes?

      How would you have gotten unions, trade guilds and other skilled trade unions, to stop shutting black workers out of their organizations?

      How would you've have stopped the practice of blacks having to recite their state constitution and if they couldn't , not being allowed to vote? etc, etc, etc,

      I think if it would be helpful is you would come up with complete or more complete answers to the question you raise

    • profile image

      Ellis 5 years ago

      Liberalism is a politics of poverty, envy and despair. Liberals often attack people like Mr. Clarence Thomas, former Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice, Dr. Walter Williams, Thomas Sowell and other black conservatives because they aren’t considered “authentic blacks.” As Harvard Law School Professor Lani Guinier famously wrote against Mr. Thomas in a 1991 article in the Michigan Law Review, "Black representatives are authentic" when they are "politically, psychologically, and culturally black."

      In the eyes of liberal academics, black conservatives "made it" without acknowledging the aid of white liberal paternalism and their omnipresent civil rights and affirmative action programs. Their independence is the reason these black conservatives are reviled.

      So why do black people always vote for the Democratic Party? Because for the past 75 years since the socialist FDR came to power, socially and culturally blacks have been indoctrinated to follow, follow, follow. From antiquity, they followed the African tribal chief and the shaman. During slavery, we followed ‘masser’ and the overseer and did what we were told. The next 100 years after 1865 and the Civil War during de jure and de facto segregation, we followed poverty-pimp preachers and civil rights activists (not Martin Luther King) who told us that by voting Democrat, God would bless black people through government handouts, a minimum wage and good government jobs.

      But welfare and government programs have destroyed the black family. Today, we proudly follow our first black president, Barack Obama, despite the fact that this president has done more harm to America in his first year than any other U.S. president in history.

      Admittedly, I don’t have a complete answer to my own questions, but this one thing I know: If my people will honestly face and overcome their four greatest enemies: promiscuity, ignorance, crime and pathology, then, out of necessity, they will stop the Groupthink mentality that keeps them on the Democratic plantation. Then they will take responsibility for the life choices they make without reliance on government. Collectively, blacks need to regain the moral and intellectual standards they had in the 1920s. Only then will blacks stop voting against their moral, economic and political interests and be truly set free.

    • vveasey profile image
      Author

      The Medicine Man 5 years ago from Detroit,MI

      News Alert!

      Mitt has changed his position so many time that now even the largest newspaper in, Utah, The Salt Lake Tribune, has endorsed President Obama for reelection as president

      click this link to read it or just read the article below

      http://www.sltrib.com/sltrib/opinion/55019844-82/r

      (Tribune endorsement: Too Many Mitts

      Obama has earned another term

      First Published Oct 19 2012 12:13 pm • Last Updated Oct 24 2012 03:41 pm

      Nowhere has Mitt Romney’s pursuit of the presidency been more warmly welcomed or closely followed than here in Utah. The Republican nominee’s political and religious pedigrees, his adeptly bipartisan governorship of a Democratic state, and his head for business and the bottom line all inspire admiration and hope in our largely Mormon, Republican, business-friendly state.

      But it was Romney’s singular role in rescuing Utah’s organization of the 2002 Olympics from a cesspool of scandal, and his oversight of the most successful Winter Games on record, that make him the Beehive State’s favorite adopted son. After all, Romney managed to save the state from ignominy, turning the extravaganza into a showcase for the matchless landscapes, volunteerism and efficiency that told the world what is best and most beautiful about Utah and its people.

      In short, this is the Mitt Romney we knew, or thought we knew, as one of us.

      Sadly, it is not the only Romney, as his campaign for the White House has made abundantly clear, first in his servile courtship of the tea party in order to win the nomination, and now as the party’s shape-shifting nominee. From his embrace of the party’s radical right wing, to subsequent portrayals of himself as a moderate champion of the middle class, Romney has raised the most frequently asked question of the campaign: "Who is this guy, really, and what in the world does he truly believe?"

      The evidence suggests no clear answer, or at least one that would survive Romney’s next speech or sound bite. Politicians routinely tailor their words to suit an audience. Romney, though, is shameless, lavishing vastly diverse audiences with words, any words, they would trade their votes to hear.

      More troubling, Romney has repeatedly refused to share specifics of his radical plan to simultaneously reduce the debt, get rid of Obamacare (or, as he now says, only part of it), make a voucher program of Medicare, slash taxes and spending, and thereby create millions of new jobs. To claim, as Romney does, that he would offset his tax and spending cuts (except for billions more for the military) by doing away with tax deductions and exemptions is utterly meaningless without identifying which and how many would get the ax. Absent those specifics, his promise of a balanced budget simply does not pencil out.

      If this portrait of a Romney willing to say anything to get elected seems harsh, we need only revisit his branding of 47 percent of Americans as freeloaders who pay no taxes, yet feel victimized and entitled to government assistance. His job, he told a group of wealthy donors, "is not to worry about those people. I’ll never convince them they should take personal responsibility and care for their lives."

      Where, we ask, is the pragmatic, inclusive Romney, the Massachusetts governor who left the state with a model health care plan in place, the Romney who led Utah to Olympic glory? That Romney skedaddled and is nowhere to be found.

      And what of the president Romney would replace? For four years, President Barack Obama has attempted, with varying degrees of success, to pull the nation out of its worst financial meltdown since the Great Depression, a deepening crisis he inherited the day he took office.

      In the first months of his presidency, Obama acted decisively to stimulate the economy. His leadership was essential to passage of the badly needed American Recovery and Reinvestment Act. Though Republicans criticize the stimulus for failing to create jobs, it clearly helped stop the hemorrhaging of public sector jobs. The Utah Legislature used hundreds of millions in stimulus funds to plug holes in the state’s budget.

      The president also acted wisely to bail out the auto industry, which has since come roaring back. Romney, in so many words, said the carmakers should sink if they can’t swim.

      Obama’s most noteworthy achievement, passage of his signature Affordable Care Act, also proved, in its timing, his greatest blunder. The set of comprehensive health insurance reforms aimed at extending health care coverage to all Americans was signed 14 months into his term after a ferocious fight in Congress that sapped the new president’s political capital and destroyed any chance for bipartisan cooperation on the shredded economy.

      Obama’s foreign policy record is perhaps his strongest suit, especially compared to Romney’s bellicose posture toward Russia and China and his inflammatory rhetoric regarding Iran’s nuclear weapons program. Obama’s measured reliance on tough economic embargoes to bring Iran to heel, and his equally measured disengagement from the war in Afghanistan, are examples of a nuanced approach to international affairs. The glaring exception, still unfolding, was the administration’s failure to protect the lives of the U.S. ambassador to Libya and three other Americans, and to quickly come clean about it.

      In considering which candidate to endorse, The Salt Lake Tribune editorial board had hoped that Romney would exhibit the same talents for organization, pragmatic problem solving and inspired leadership that he displayed here more than a decade ago. Instead, we have watched him morph into a friend of the far right, then tack toward the center with breathtaking aplomb. Through a pair of presidential debates, Romney’s domestic agenda remains bereft of detail and worthy of mistrust.

      Therefore, our endorsement must go to the incumbent, a competent leader who, against tough odds, has guided the country through catastrophe and set a course that, while rocky, is pointing toward a brighter day. The president has earned a second term. Romney, in whatever guise, does not deserve a first.) The Salt Lake Tribune

      Oooo Weee. Can you believe it?

      The Salt Lake Tribune endorses President Obama for president.

      They said it better than I could

      Even more reason no one should vote for Mitt Romney, even Romney himself!

    • profile image

      Rerun 5 years ago

      When a president has done as poor a job as Barack Obama, you vote him out. Hopefully that is what will happen next week. Obama has overseen some of our worst years and has not improved one thing. But I am feeling sorry for the weak minded Bush blamers and their child-like insistence that O simply didn't have time to fix it all. Four years is plenty, time to move our arrogant failure out of our WH and a real leader in. Not to mention, the removing of O will surely save an unfathomable amount of jet fuel in AF1.

    • vveasey profile image
      Author

      The Medicine Man 5 years ago from Detroit,MI

      Rachel

      thanks for commenting.

      That's why they were calling him Mitt The Twit in England

      A lot of his followers want so badly to get the black guy out of the office of the president, that they're blinded by it, that's why they can't see what you see.

      Read this by a Republican who backs up what I just said

      The Republican Party is full of Racists

      "Col. Lawrence Wilkerson, a self-identified Republican who was Gen. Colin Powell's chief of staff during his time as secretary of state, did not take too kindly to a recent accusation -- from Mitt Romney's controversial campaign co-chair John Sununu -- that Powell only endorsed Barack Obama for president because they're both black. Sununu would later backtrack, but the damage was done.

      Wilkerson, who is white, didn't mince words on MSNBC'sThe Ed Show Friday night. "To say that Colin Powell would endorse President Obama because of his skin color is like saying Mother Teresa worked for profit," he said. And although he gave Sununu a bit of a pass, blaming his statement on an "unfortunate" choice of words, Wilkerson had much harsher words for the GOP as a whole.

      "Let me just be candid," he said. "My party is full of racists. And the real reason a considerable portion of my party wants President Obama out of the White House has nothing to do with the content of his character, nothing to do with his competence as commander in chief and president, and everything to do with the color of his skin. And that's despicable."

      from the Root webpage http://www.theroot.com/buzz/former-powell-chief-st

    • profile image

      Rachel 5 years ago

      I'm actually British, and here we're really worried that Romney will get in power - he's two faced, delusioned, power hungry and self-obsessed; none of which are qualities you want in a leader of the people.

      Now I am most definitely not saying Obama's perfect, but the deficit? We're in the middle of a recession, it's not going to resolve itself overnight. Cutting military? So are many other contries around the world and anyway, conflicts are often resolved through intelligence and deal-making; war is evolving.

      But same-sex marriage; how can you be against that?! The only argument available is that of religion, and religion should be seperate from state that's just how it goes. Why should you deny people the chance to be happy? As long as they love each other and they care for one another, why should they not do as their hetrosexual counterparts?

      And another thing - Romney has made mention of wanting to restore America to it's former power. In this day and age surely what we should be aiming for is strong allegiances between countries trying to sort out this planet-wide mess we've got ourselves into.

      If it's universally accepted in another freaking country that you shouldn't touch him with a bargepole, then why oh why can those closest to him not see it?

    • vveasey profile image
      Author

      The Medicine Man 5 years ago from Detroit,MI

      Nole

      I guess calling people names and just making fun of people makes people like you feel good about yourself and that's all it does. and it doesn't change anybodies minds, if only affects you.

      I have a great idea for you.

      Instead of spiting piss and vinegar on my hub, sign up for a hubpages account and write your own hubs, and let others comment on your hubs...and you can spit all the piss and vinegar you want.

      You can lay out all your arguments for the world to see and agree or disagree with

      but I fear it's much easier for you to spit piss and vinegar on my hub than to put the time and effort into writing your own hubs, if you even can write your own hubs

    • vveasey profile image
      Author

      The Medicine Man 5 years ago from Detroit,MI

      Same thing for you. makes you feel good just spewing anger and venom talking about saving you the trouble of doing something that will never happen in reality

    • profile image

      Nole 5 years ago

      Reality Today...It is hard for the Obama morons to breathe when their heads are up his azz.

      --------------------------------------------------------------------------------

      You suck, Barry. Please resign and save us the trouble of clown slapping you back to Chi-town

    • vveasey profile image
      Author

      The Medicine Man 5 years ago from Detroit,MI

      Nole

      Hahahaha that's so funny I forgot to laugh

      you're suffering from delusions of grandeur

      and self-inflicted anger

    • vveasey profile image
      Author

      The Medicine Man 5 years ago from Detroit,MI

      Dale

      there are democrate who are racists and there are democrates

      who aren't racist.

      some goes for republicans

    • profile image

      Dale 5 years ago

      @mp2525

      If you are going to give history lessons, you really ought to know the history instead of making things up. Johnson was the biggest racist President this country has ever had. He and JFK were actually opposed to the civil rights movement but when it became politically expedient then Johnson signed the bill. You can fool ignorant people but you cannot fool those who truly know the history and the truth. Too bad this is how the democrats operate today, lie, lie and then lie some more until it becomes a sort of truth that is still false. I think the Republicans have lost there way as well, but I still see more truth and integrity from them than I have the Democrats in my lifetime. I love how you twisted the truth of history to be on the democratic side, when that really has not been the case. There have been racists in the Republican party, but as a whole they are not. I dont think the majority of democrats are either, your typical American democrat anyway. But the party leaders the dems have today, they certainly do have some racism going on. It is just veiled under the guise of compassion, a false compassion. Who opposed the Voting Rights Act? Democrats.

      Also, Governor Wallace was a Democrat.

    • vveasey profile image
      Author

      The Medicine Man 5 years ago from Detroit,MI

      mp2525

      Amen Brother!

    • mp2525 profile image

      mp2525 5 years ago from Los Angeles

      Col. Wilkerson's concise and honest statement regarding GOP racism, trumps every other argument put forth by Romney Supporters/Obama Detractors.

      The fuller colorization of America is going to happen regardless of all of the sound and fury emanating from the twisted thinking of those who have been thoroughly brainwashed by the most expensive, massive barrage of right wing disinformation ever.

      The fear of this eventuality is, of course, ridiculous. But until those who harbor such deep racist feelings are able to free themselves of their prejudices, they will never be able to make clear headed decisions as to what is in their best interests and in the best interests of our country.

      It is all so reminiscent of Govenor Wallace standing in the doorway trying to prevent integration...trying to prevent a better future from happening. It is time to get out of the doorway and start lending a hand in building that better future.

    • vveasey profile image
      Author

      The Medicine Man 5 years ago from Detroit,MI

      The Republican Party is full of Racists

      "Col. Lawrence Wilkerson, a self-identified Republican who was Gen. Colin Powell's chief of staff during his time as secretary of state, did not take too kindly to a recent accusation -- from Mitt Romney's controversial campaign co-chair John Sununu -- that Powell only endorsed Barack Obama for president because they're both black. Sununu would later backtrack, but the damage was done.

      Wilkerson, who is white, didn't mince words on MSNBC'sThe Ed Show Friday night. "To say that Colin Powell would endorse President Obama because of his skin color is like saying Mother Teresa worked for profit," he said. And although he gave Sununu a bit of a pass, blaming his statement on an "unfortunate" choice of words, Wilkerson had much harsher words for the GOP as a whole.

      "Let me just be candid," he said. "My party is full of racists. And the real reason a considerable portion of my party wants President Obama out of the White House has nothing to do with the content of his character, nothing to do with his competence as commander in chief and president, and everything to do with the color of his skin. And that's despicable."

      from the Root webpage http://www.theroot.com/buzz/former-powell-chief-st...

    • vveasey profile image
      Author

      The Medicine Man 5 years ago from Detroit,MI

      Nole

      Self -Arrogant building yourself up to make yourself feel special and thinking that you're some kind of savior who can save everyone but yourself.

      I agree that you too " have the right to vote but that doesn't mean we have to follow you down your path of failure".

      But we don't need you we will save ourselves."

    • profile image

      Nole 5 years ago

      Face reality, libtards and progressivetards. A right wing tsunami is brewing and it is starting to roll. And there isn't a damn thing you can do about it. People more intelligent than you and better than you are about to clown slap your azz to the curb. You have the right to free speech but that does not mean we have to listen to you. You have the right to vote but that doesn't mean we have to follow you down your path of failure. We will save you from yourself.

    • danielrobertkelly profile image

      Daniel Robert Kelly 5 years ago from Milwaukee, WI

      In 100 years, as historians consider what we as a nation failed to do, when we had the technology, to avert the end of oil, they will look at three moments:

      The moment we elected a movie star with a brain disease over a man who tried to make solar a national priority.

      The moment we elected (sort of) a C-student playboy who would lie America into war over a man who was instrumental in reversing deficit spending, and had a real vision for future technologies and the investment in them.

      and now, you think that we should elect a man who calls the new technology economy "imaginary" and "likes coal" and who's experience boils down to pirate economics and moral flexibility when it comes to funding. Look back at history. Beyond the nonsense you are being fed by email forwards, SEO tuned blog posts about "truth," and talking head media. The internet was made originally to have access to data, and the data is very clear. The GOP has been sucking the life out of the economy every chance it gets for the last 25 years and blaming everyone else for the effects, every time. A Romney/Ryan ticket is a poster perfect example of two politicians who will do it bigger than ever before.

      Time is up.

    • vveasey profile image
      Author

      The Medicine Man 5 years ago from Detroit,MI

      Guess

      You say "Look okay, You have suddenly made this assumption that I worship the ground that Romney walks on. "

      That statement is hypocritical because you made that assumption about me first, when you said "Look, I get that in your mind vv that you view Obama as the "messiah president"

      Now you have the nerve or maybe it's just the intellectual blindness about the hypocracy of that statement, that 's allows you to be taken aback, or affended and now say that that's what I'm saying about you.

      lastly You say "I can not stay away, because I am trying to do a part to get people to stop being so ridiculous and to try to get them to focus on what hasn't been accomplished in the past four years."

      Then you should be able to appreciate the fact that I and others feel just as strongly about Romney and are trying enlighten you and others about what we see as his weak points.

      So if you're on some type of crusade or see yourself as some type of a savior, and think you know how to assess Romney or President Obama better than I or others do, not only is that blindly arrogant, your sadly mistaken and you're wasting your time.

    • profile image

      Guess 5 years ago

      Look okay, You have suddenly made this assumption that I worship the ground that Romney walks on. Obama would not have that statement because he had no running mates and for the past four years has been thinking selfishly. You remember how he claims he got Bin Laden. He did as the commander in chief, but he delayed the action for three months and during that time wanted to just bomb the area. Second, when Obama declared who got Bin Laden, that was one of the most self-centered acts because it put those Seals in danger because people now knew who did it. It was supposed to be a secret. Don't believe me, read the book No Easy Day. Have you even read about what Obama did before he was elected president. Yes he served on the senate, but he voted "present" 130 times. This means that he was here. Basically that means he held no leadership whatsoever because he didn't take a side.

      Also the only reason unemployment isn't 10% is because of the fact that the labor force has dropped by quite a bit leading to the unemployment rate staying at 8%. And also, the rose garden speech that Obama made after the attack on the ambassador was not about the ambassador. It was refering to 9/11. During the debate the moderator spoke out at Romney about that HOWEVER after the debate she apologized to the public saying that she was wrong about the rose garden speech. And you're right, I can not stay away, because I am trying to do a part to get people to stop being so ridiculous and to try to get them to focus on what hasn't been accomplished in the past four years.

    • vveasey profile image
      Author

      The Medicine Man 5 years ago from Detroit,MI

      Guess

      I knew you couldn't stay away. And it has diddly squat to do with deciding to "pull an Obama".

      You say "all that you have tried to do is say that because Romney changed his views during the campaign to encompass the views of his running mates, he should not be president."

      I think that's a good reason but it damn sure ain't the only reason.

      Now let's switch that around to "all that you have tried to do is say that because Obama changed his views during the campaign to encompass the views of his running mates, he should not be president".

      Suppose president Obama had changed his views to the complete opposite of what he firmly claimed to believe as much as Romney has.

      Honestly, What would you be saying about Obama if he did that?

      I bet you wouldn't be making excuses for him like you're doing for Romney would ya?

    • profile image

      Guess 5 years ago

      Ive decided to pull an Obama and break my promise here. As a matter of fact, I do disagree with some of the things Romney has said, the main one is the 47% comment. However, all that you have tried to do is say that because Romney changed his views during the campaign to encompass the views of his running mates, he should not be president. What this showed instead is that he is willing to listen and bridge a gap between each of the republican candidates.

    • vveasey profile image
      Author

      The Medicine Man 5 years ago from Detroit,MI

      Guess

      No I think you are confusing me with yourself, if you think I see President Obama as a "messiah president". That's your term not mine.

      I could say that you see Mitt as a "messiah" you hope to be president. I bet you never post anything remotely resembling criticism of your Messiah Mitt Romney.

      As far as you not commenting back on this hub, thank you I appreciate that.

    • profile image

      Guess 5 years ago

      Look, I get that in your mind vv that you view Obama as the "messiah president", but have you looked at the legitimate facts to this all. Obama has no clue what to do so he has resorted to acting like a child. Remember back in elementary school where people would make names up from people's last name. This is exactly what Obama is doing. Instead of trying to fix the economy, he is acting like a ten year old and playing not only the blame game, but also the name game.

      Also, there is no point expecting me to comment back on anything else you post regarding this hub.

    • danielrobertkelly profile image

      Daniel Robert Kelly 5 years ago from Milwaukee, WI

      Voting on the price of gas is not what people with IQ's over 100 do, sorry. Since by "troll" I assume you mean someone who is posting information you don't like, here's someone on your "side" to show you what I mean.

      http://www.istockanalyst.com/finance/story/6013675...

      Sure, better to elect someone who is complaining about everyone who is not like him. I feel sorry for the president having to even entertain a debate with an individual like Mitt Romney. It's like debating how to make more cookies in the cookie jar with the person who stole them all in the first place and blamed you for there not being any left.

      It's vitally important that we all realize immediately that a vote for today's Right is a vote to sell the country to the few who can pay for it.

    • profile image

      Zach 5 years ago

      Obama wanted to be President. Well, he is President. And for the last four years he has been complaining about being President. Being President is soooo harrrd for little Barry. He must get really tired from destroying this nation. I feel sooo sorry for him.

    • profile image

      Stacy 5 years ago

      This message is for people with IQ's over 100 that realize that you're paying $2 a gallon MORE than you were 4 years ago, that you've paid $2000 more in insurance premiums over the last 3 years and/or don't have a decent job yet. Don't pay attention to the trolls...just go and vote early while the rest of em whine and wait for the government dole. All you conservatives out there, don't waste your time. See if your local public library is open for polling today and get out there!

    • danielrobertkelly profile image

      Daniel Robert Kelly 5 years ago from Milwaukee, WI

      By all means then, return us to the unilateral, lead with military force borrowed from the future while flipping the bird to the international community, and guaranteeing a future of resource wars.

      http://www.classwarfareexists.com/wp-content/uploa...

      Romney will not lead the world anywhere but back to resource wars.

      As for Jimmy Carter, again, I say look to the numbers, and the long term effects of the Reagan years. First, who was responsible for the economy:

      http://www.huppi.com/kangaroo/L-carterreagan.htm

      And the numbers, in hindsight, support that with Carter the economy was on the mend. Government spending was declining. Unemployment was nearing its end.

      The Reagan-Bush years turned that around in a hurry and gave us the Savings and Loan crisis (based on deregulation and speculative derivative investments), Black Monday, Star Wars, and cheap cocaine on the streets in order to arm and train terrorist proxy wars around the world.

      In Latin America, those proxy warriors killed thousands, and disappeared entire villages. Then that money, family money, founded Bain Capital.

      http://wonkette.com/480456/mitt-romney-more-reagan...

      (This isn't being even remotely argued against by Romney and Bain, except to say,"it's confidential, but trust us, we checked.")

      This status quo argument is BS. As is the "leading from behind" and deferment, or any of the other easy to pronounce and distribute talking points currently circulating. What's going on here is some sort of "I'm rubber you're glue" campaigning, that only works if you're willing to give the presidency to those who have paid the most for it. 90% of Romney supporters are being convinced to vote against their own best interests, and the interest of the future.

      As just one example, had only the Carter initiatives on domestic green energy development held, we wouldn't even be discussing who the leader in advanced clean energy production was. Instead, we elected an actor, who wanted space weapons instead of limitless clean energy (All solar research facilities except one immediately shuttered).

      Think beyond your lifetime. You like coal? Coal, oil, gas, and, by extension, water will run out in a fossil fueled vision. Maybe not before you're dead, but before my children are. Thanks Kyle, thanks a lot for your prescience.

    • profile image

      Kyle 5 years ago

      After nearly four years in the White House our ceremonial President is presiding over the weakest recovery of modern times. He presides over low growth, high unemployment, and trillion dollar deficits every year of his presidency. All he is offering the electorate in the next four years is more of the same. Jimmy Carter could not get reelected with such a shaky strategy, and neither will Obama. Furthermore, last month his foreign policy went poof right in front of him. His nonsense about leading from behind, deferring to international organizations, and paying obeisance to Arab militants has been seen for what it is, a warrant for invading our diplomatic installations in foreign lands. In Libya the animals slaughtered our ambassador, and the evidence is clear, to wit, the ambassador was seeking more security at the time of his death and being rebuffed. Remember Benghazi!

    • vveasey profile image
      Author

      The Medicine Man 5 years ago from Detroit,MI

      danielrobertkelly

      Amen Brother!

    • danielrobertkelly profile image

      Daniel Robert Kelly 5 years ago from Milwaukee, WI

      Rufus, here's the thing, the economy has started to improve, look at the numbers yourself. It takes years to recover what was lost. Look at history. Then, realize that Mitt Romney's promises are simply reiterations of what is _already forecast to happen_.

      http://www.forbes.com/sites/rickungar/2012/10/18/r...

      Spending has been reigned in. Just go look at the numbers yourself, google the data on spending vs. GDP. Its clear. The binge never happened.

      http://www.marketwatch.com/story/obama-spending-bi...

      Perpetuating this D'Souza style mass psychology nonsense is just ridiculous. Or are you saying that it's OK to start pointing out that there's just a very large section of the population who are only voting for Mitt because he is a white man (or against Barack because he's not white)?

      As far as plans go, have you read that thing on the Romney site? It's 8 pages long. The first 3 pages are dedicated to an opinion piece about the President. The last two are the appendix which is a collection of references, some of which contradict the positions in the preceding pages.

      The only myth is the idea that this is a failed presidency, and that Mitt Romney has a plan beyond profiteering.

    • profile image

      Rufus 5 years ago

      Listen, what happened to our country under this President was so predictable, but people were swept up in the fervor of electing the first black President and quite frankly remove the white guilt...What did they get? They got an incompetent, unqualified myth...The man was a myth! No one really knew him...he came from out of nowhere...It is unbelievable to me that the MSM is still spinning their wheels for this guy...they are so invested in his ideology that they sold their souls in 2008...they have protected him for four years, but he has been unmasked..The man is not the intelligent genius the MSM lets you believe he is...it is an insult to mankind that they have created a myth, and they stick by this guy till the end...If Romney wins, they will give him a hard time...believe me..but I think under Romney the economy will start to improve, he will get rid of the regulations, the Czars, and put the unions back in their place...it will be a fight..but our country is worth fighting for. I believe they are running scared..

    • vveasey profile image
      Author

      The Medicine Man 5 years ago from Detroit,MI

      Mark

      Many times groups or individuals have taken credit for acts they didn't commit because they wanted the notoriety attached to committing that act.

      So if some group or individual claims to take credit for some act of violence. That claim still has to be investigated to see if it's true and can't be accept totally on face value, because they claim they did it.

      And that takes time.

    • vveasey profile image
      Author

      The Medicine Man 5 years ago from Detroit,MI

      "In today's Wall Street Journal, Karl Rove asserts that Mitt Romney fundamentally altered the arc of the presidential race in the first debate because he came across as a "man with a plan." And it is surely the case that, despite the president's apparent win on points in Tuesday's debate, the race is a near dead heat. Mitt Romney must have earned a second hard look from a lot of voters who had been skeptical.

      The problem is that what Rove calls a "plan" doesn't yet measure up. Romney, Paul Ryan, and their campaign need to give us answers to some of the hard questions about this plan. As the president asserted in the debate on Tuesday, what we have been told so far surely wouldn't have been enough for Romney to justify a Bain investment in him, and it surely shouldn't be enough to earn a vote.

      Let's get specific: Rove acknowledges that the cornerstone to Romney's appeal is the public's belief that he will be better able to handle the economy. The centerpiece of that claim is his revenue-neutral, middle-class-protecting tax policy, a 20 percent marginal rate cut for all. This is the policy with the $5 trillion price tag over 10 years. That $5 trillion figure is a simple arithmetical extension of the current tax code and revenue figures, and is really not in dispute.

      So to avoid adding to the deficit, how does Romney fill that gap? So far, he's only suggested limiting tax deductions and credits. In the debate, he suggested a $25,000 cap. But the Tax Policy Center, an independent research group, calculated that would only save about $1.3 trillion—leaving Romney a gargantuan $3.7 trillion short. In fact, even if he somehow eliminated every itemized deduction while cutting rates by 20 percent and eliminating the AMT, he would still only bring in $2 trillion dollars—less than half of what he needs.

      Since Romney vigorously maintains that he will not add to the deficit with his tax plan, and since the only loophole closings that would actually raise sufficient revenue—the ones relating to mortgage payments, charitable contributions, state and local taxes, and health care premiums paid by employers—are off the table for middle-class taxpayers, according to Romney, there is clearly a gaping hole in the plan. This plan, in fact, is Swiss cheese.

      Electing a candidate with a plan is one thing. Electing a candidate who is selling a mirage is something else altogether. If Romney wants the serious second look he is getting to continue, he owes the public a serious explanation for why this plan would work. Ryan's answer that he didn't have enough time to explain the plan surely didn't inspire confidence.

      The burden of proof when running for the presidency of the United States of America should be higher than, "Trust me. I'll tell you later."

      http://www.slate.com/blogs/spitzer/2012/10/18/romn...

    • profile image

      Mark 5 years ago

      Reuters is reporting tonight that, "Officials at the White House and State Department were advised two hours after attackers assaulted the U.S. diplomatic mission in Benghazi, Libya, on September 11 that an Islamic militant group had claimed credit for the attack, official emails show."

      These emails were sent from the State Department’s Operations Center to the White House, Director of National Intelligence, Pentagon, and FBI, and the first email was sent within 1/2 hour of the start of the attack. Two hours after the attack began, a third email was sent, bearing the subject line, "Update 2: Ansar al-Sharia Claims Responsibility for Benghazi Attack".

      The president then nipped off to bed, as he had to fly to an important campaign fundraiser in Las Vegas the next day.

    • vveasey profile image
      Author

      The Medicine Man 5 years ago from Detroit,MI

      2besure

      You're welcome!

    • 2besure profile image

      Pamela Lipscomb 5 years ago from Charlotte, North Carolina

      Well, you have pretty much said what most people who really see Mitt for who he, say. He policies change from week to week. He can not be trusted. Thanks for sharing

    • profile image

      Carl 5 years ago

      Given the campaign landscape, Axlerod is now instructing Obama to use 'plan B': Bain, Big Bird and Binders. That will keep the lefties babbling away and distracted from all the actual issues of the campaign, and then when they lose bigger than shi+ the puffington host and chris matthews can begin complaining that the election was stolen because the Big Bird issue was not effectively communicated to the voters. Obama is so done right now it is depressing.

    • profile image

      Juan 5 years ago

      Wow, now the president is doing illegal fund raising and I can only find an article in one newspaper. All of the other papers are talking about Mitt's "Binders". If anyone knows business, they would know that a CEO gets details of business decisions in binders so they can have a meeting and make decisions. Politicians might not understand actual decision making based on logic and information presented.

    • vveasey profile image
      Author

      The Medicine Man 5 years ago from Detroit,MI

      And now there is proof the George W and team knew much more about the impending 9/11 attacks before they happened and did nothing to about it,

      That definitely can't compare to "Fast And Furious" which was started under the George W's administration. It was in operation in 2007 under various names.

      This is from a CBS report

      "Operations Castaway and Too Hot to Handle are among a dozen or so other cases ATF operated that allegedly employed gunwalking in recent years including Florida, New Mexico, Texas and Arizona. In the Hernandez case, started under the Bush Administration in 2007, documents show ATF agents watched several suspects and weapons cross the border in coordination with Mexican officials who then failed to stop the suspects, so they were lost".

    • vveasey profile image
      Author

      The Medicine Man 5 years ago from Detroit,MI

      You say "Do you understand how huge that is? Can you imagine if GWB had sent arms to Al Queda in order to encourage their murderous thuggery in order to declare war against Iran?"

      Nope, you're right. Even if what you say is true and I don't know if it is.

      GWB, Knowingly attacking Iraq and killing thousands of their people and costing the lives of thousands of our soldiers for the 9/11 attacks, a crime the Iraqis didn't commit and for having weapons of mass destruction, that they didn't have, can't compare to that

    • profile image

      Bobby 5 years ago

      Barack Obama Has Surpassed Buchanan as the Worst President Ever

      Is it because he’s presiding over and contributing to the destruction of the mighty economic engine that is American capitalism? No. That’s bad, but not bad enough.

      Is it because he and his cohorts are as crooked as a dog’s hind leg? No. That’s bad, but not bad enough.

      It is because he has either allowed or deliberately ordered the sales of weapons to narco-terrorists in Mexico, using private enterprise as a conduit for the illegal, immoral sales, causing the deaths of at least 300 citizens and officials in Mexico as well as the death of at least one American Border Patrol Agent. Do you understand how huge that is? Can you imagine if GWB had sent arms to Al Queda in order to encourage their murderous thuggery in order to declare war against Iran? Do you think the media would have covered it?

      With Fast and Furious, the information has been becoming available for months (as slowly as the administration can manage), yet the Demedia acts as if it is hermetically sealed. They are not pursuing the story; they are not reporting the story; they are not questioning the authorities. The Demedia is offensive. They are a 5th column within our country. Every American who still believes that justice should overcome political expediency should work to bring them to their knees.

    • vveasey profile image
      Author

      The Medicine Man 5 years ago from Detroit,MI

      It's not only President Obama who has a "strong distaste" for what you call, pre-Obama America, so do the millions of Americans who voted for him and are voting for him again.

      Because pre-Obama America was the very wonderful America of George W Bush, the lovely Dick Cheney and neocon war hawks.

      Their America was so great that they knowingly attacked Iraq even though they knew they had nothing to do with the 9/11 attacks and had no weapons of mass destruction. That has to be one of the shining moments of pre-Obama America.

      When it came to light, that Iraq had no weapons of mass destruction and no involvement in 9/11. Bush/Cheney and the neocons changed their tune from Saddam has weapons of mass distruction to "free the Iraqi people". So they both being capitalistic oil men, could gain control of the second largest oil field in the world. Just Lovely

      And one of the most beautiful things about preObama America was, let us not forget, was although the neocons harp all day about the debt when it come to president Obama. They hardly made a peep when the Iraq and Afghanistan wars were launched without being paid for. That's not hypocritical that's wonderful.

      Then there was that most shining moment in preObama America when Bush/Cheney and the republican neocons caused one of the worst financial meltdowns in preObama American history.

      Banks were failing, General Motors and Chrysler were about to go out of business etc, etc, etc, etc,.

      Any American would have to be crazy not to want to go back to that America.

    • profile image

      Marty 5 years ago

      My personal belief is that Obama, like so many leftist radicals, has a strong distaste for pre-Obama America and that he believes that the United States has been an imperialistic international bully, that we've consumed too much of the world's resources, that we've been an environmental felon and that our capitalistic system unfairly and inequitably distributes income and wealth -- and I think he means to effect wholesale change to rectify those sins.

      Do I believe that he wants to "destroy" America, as such? No. In his mind, as warped and foreign as I think it is, he doubtlessly believes he is helping to create a better America -- a utopia of sorts. That is, he is intentionally trying to fundamentally transform America into something that he believes would be better but that most Americans -- and infinitely more if they understood the full scope of what he is up to -- would consider horrific, an America that we would barely recognize as the one bequeathed to us by our ancestors.

    • profile image

      krafty11 5 years ago

      vveasey, I could not have said it better myself!

    • vveasey profile image
      Author

      The Medicine Man 5 years ago from Detroit,MI

      The film clip didn't address the ugly history of the "founding fathers" being rich slave owners, but demanding freedom for themselves, while using them to try make a point.

      And I'm sure the film won't address this either

      So it looks to me, judging by the film clip, that the film is nothing but propaganda, designed to strike fear in those who are susceptible, because they already hate, dislike, or have conspiracy theories about president Obama, already.

    • vveasey profile image
      Author

      The Medicine Man 5 years ago from Detroit,MI

      That film clip looks like total propaganda

      It implies that because Obama said that his father's dreams were his dreams, that he trying carried out that dream.

      I think that's really reaching, but if his father's dream was freedom from colonialism which the clip seems to imply. I think that 's a good dream. America is all about freedom right?

      In the same breath the clip, speaking about his father's dream implied that it included " the downsizing of America".

      His father's dream was the downsizing of America?

      It's talks about the founding fathers and liberty

      when all or most of them were rich white slave owners

      including Thomas Jefferson, who wrote all men a created equal

      but never freed any of his slaves while he lived.

      So obviously, the "all men are created equal" he was talking about was himself and the other rich, slave owning founding fathers, who didn't want to keep sharing their wealth with their King (they were British colonist) King George.

      All lands discovered or colonized by British subjects belonged to the king and therefore this lead to the revolutionary war because they didn't want to keep paying a share of their goods (a tax) without any say so about it, or any other polices King George wanted to enact.

    • Ken Burgess profile image

      Ken Burgess 5 years ago from Florida

      Krafty... I'm all for people making up their own minds.

      http://2016themovie.com/media/

      Easy enough to watch a clip less than two minutes long, and then they can go from there, if they want to learn more about Obama or not.

      There is a reason why our Nation is still struggling as if it is still 2008, and it has everything to do with who is running our Country and what his priorities are.

    • profile image

      krafty11 5 years ago

      OBAMA'S AMERICA?!! REALLY?! WRONG!!! And once again, he made NO SUCH PROMISES to fix the economy in FOUR YEARS!!! WHAT IS WRONG WITH YOU PEOPLE?! HAS OUR HATRED GOTTEN THIS DEEP?!! The economy was crippled BEFORE HE TOOK OFFICE!!! He specifically mentioned stopping the constant slide of jobs and getting the bleeding stopped and bandaged BEFORE we can ascend and once more, he made VERY clear that it would in all likelihood take TWO TERMS to fix! The bleeding has been stopped to the point that thousands, not MILLIONS of jobs are being shed. And before someone goes on a rant about that, yes. I realize that there are still jobs being lost but this is a MAJOR improvement over what it was in the uncertain economy we live in. You really think that Romney's so-called tax cuts are going to create jobs? BULL!!! The rich will just take THAT money and pocket IT as well and force workers to do more with less. THAT is what is crippling the economy!! Obama is correct, no one (middle class) will be able to spend on anything much less afford it if the rich get their way. They don't WANT a middle-class! They want the filthy-rich and the barely surviving poor. It makes my eyes hurt to read all of this propaganda nonsense because no one will take time to analyze ALL facts before jumping on a fear monger wagon!

    • Ken Burgess profile image

      Ken Burgess 5 years ago from Florida

      Two faced Chameleon?

      Try Obama... check out the movie 2016 Obama's America, which is out now on DVD, in Redbox, available for download on the web... learn all about being two faced, that's what Obama is.

      Look at all his promises from 2008... he didn't focus on fixing Washington, or the economy, or taxes, or anything other than ramming down America's throat Obamacare, and a bunch of other garbage and regulations that is crippling our economy.

    • profile image

      Jeremy 5 years ago

      Another way to view our decline and slide toward Socialistic tendencies: The current occupiers of the WH have been very successful by their own standards -

      * Creating and encouraging a massive dependency on Food Stamps

      * Encouraging a massive jump in long-term disability signups

      * Engineering the start of the government takeover of healthcare

      * Getting to where 50% of people don't pay income tax, and where the growth of the welfare state cannot be stopped because of it's popular appeal.

      * Creating a steady growth in all welfare programs

      By and large, the success of the US has been because of the free enterprise system and the rewards for individualism and effort. There can be no denying that this is being eroded. Obama wants to see American exceptionalism destroyed, and that is consistent with his upbringing and mentors. By “socialist,” I do not mean a Lenin, Castro, or Mao, but whether Obama falls within the mainstream of contemporary socialism as represented, for example, by Germany’s Social Democrats, French Socialists, or Spain’s socialist-workers party. Obama is a Socialist by that criteria.

    • profile image

      Bart 5 years ago

      Under classical socialism, the government owns the business in order to direct it to redistribute wealth. The Obama administration's nationalization of GM and Chrysler by buying their assets and appointing their boards is classical socialism and nearly identical to the British Labour government's nationalization of British Leyland in 1975.

      In contrast, under German Zwangswirtshaft socialism, the government allows nominal private ownership of an industry, but uses its police, taxing and spending powers to direct industry operations to redistribute wealth. The Obama "clean energy economy" and Obamacare programs employ this type of socialism.

    • profile image

      krafty11 5 years ago

      So Sue, you're saying it's okay to continue building wealth on the backs of hard working people who helped get them there in the first place--Is this correct? You're saying that it is okay to put the policies back in place (deregulation, etc.) that created this mess from the get go? No one watching is what led to this collapse and the wealthy NEED to be policed to prevent predatory practices from becoming commonplace again and sending the economy into another fragile state. I feel sorry for anyone who thinks that this is morally sound!

      And anyone else who mentions the word SOCIALISM just because they've heard it from everyone else without going to the dictionary and educating themselves, I have a little history lesson for them: U.S.S.R!!! We are nothing like the former country and need to STOP referencing ourselves to it!!!

    • profile image

      krafty11 5 years ago

      None of this will change the fact that Romney is NOT QUALIFIED to be President. The post by Robert only quantifies what I've already said--this is based on nothing but anger and fear mongering and not applied to fact. I guess what was quoted in 'The American President' is true--"People are only interested in two things-- making you afraid of it and telling you who's to blame for it. That, ladies and gentlemen, is how you win elections." Sadly, none of this includes actual facts. Romney is two faced and has flip-flopped more times than I care to cover here. He is the wrong choice for President and no matter what people thinks about President Obama's oft-quoted statement that Romney stands to defend the very policies that made this mess in the first place, he is absolutely right. THAT ladies and gentlemen IS FACT!!!

    • profile image

      Sue 5 years ago

      This is Carter/Reagan all over again. The same horrible economy. The same economically ignorant fool in the White House bringing misery to Americans. The same economic collapse under the weight of socialist, pro union, soak the rich, demonize the business owners, policies.

    • profile image

      Robert 5 years ago

      The news media is ignoring signs of mass revulsion towards President Obama. In the West Virginia Democrat primary, a felon got 40% of the vote versus Obama. In deep blue Massachusetts and Connecticut, GOP Senate candidates are even, or leading in recent polls. In pro-union Wisconsin, Walker won by a country mile. But worst of all for Mr. Obama, several recent polls show Romney competitive in Illinois -- Obama’s home state. Romney is actually winning by a landslide in the suburbs of Obama’s Chicago. Even in Cook County, the country’s biggest Democratic stronghold, Romney leads by double digits among independents (43-31) and white voters (53-40). These are very bad signs for Obama.

    • vveasey profile image
      Author

      The Medicine Man 5 years ago from Detroit,MI

      krafty11

      And well said

    • profile image

      krafty11 5 years ago

      This blinded hatred of President Obama has really got to stop. The country, through it's own arrogrance, put itself into a virtual bankruptcy and last I checked, NO ONE can pull themselves out of bankruptcy in FOUR YEARS!!! The president never promised (despite all the uninformed fear mongering rhetoric) to fix the economy in four years. He in fact said in his acceptance speech (For those who will actually bother to go back and LISTEN) it would in all likelihood take TWO TERMS to fix! I don't care if Lincoln's long-lost cousin sat in the White House! He wouldn't have gotten it done in four years either and neither will Romney! The ONLY thing the president PROMISED was that he would be the last man to tackle health-care. I remember the speech like it was yesterday and people really need to take a look at the facts.

      In spite of all the 'The president's not getting anything done' nonsense, fact and history to this point will show that congress has gotten more done than they have in a long time. Neither side has been happy with what has resulted which means no one got all they went looking for. THAT is the sign of a REAL leader. Everyone knows the Romney has done an about face on practically everything he initially stood for just to get votes--all flash and no substance.

      And this business with America's wealth--is it any wonder that we have the BIGGEST DISPROPORTION of wealth in the world and people think that this is okay?! SERIOUSLY?! People are tired of the rich getting over on them while they struggle with the problems that their arrogance created in the first place! They SHOULD be angry and demanding 'where is my piece!' Some work two and three jobs just to make ends meet and for the Romney and the Republicans to sit there and call them the lazy 47% is just sickening to me!

      People really need to reevaluate what their so-called 'freedom' really is. I am more than certain that the freedom that the forefathers fought for is not this garbage being spewed out by every hateful, uniformed and uneducated (and PLEASE do go taking it out of context, you know full well what I mean) person intent on using their voting powers to cast a ballot for someone who has not shown for one minute he relates to the common person. I have NEVER known a Republican to support the common man and I'll be DAMNED if I'm blinded by their rhetoric and phony postering to believe it now. That's all. I'm done.

    • profile image

      Pat 5 years ago

      @vv

      Americans.

    • vveasey profile image
      Author

      The Medicine Man 5 years ago from Detroit,MI

      Pat

      who's Mitt in this for?

    • profile image

      Pat 5 years ago

      How many times does he have to lie to you before you see that he is only in this for himself? My God, he lies every time he opens his mouth. Check out just who Obama is for yourself. Watch the documentary "2016." He hates America. He wants America to become an equal to other third world countries. America must come down so lesser countries can come up. He wants our nuclear war heads to drop to 300 while Russia maintains a number of 1500. He wants America to become equal to a third world country. That is when the Middle East will run us over. If you do not believe this just watch the documentary "2016". Scare the pants off anyone that fights for liberty around the world.

    • mp2525 profile image

      mp2525 5 years ago from Los Angeles

      Luther and VV:

      I too share your concerns, but I also agree with everything VV says.

      I would only add that Romney's experience as a successful vulture capitalist does not qualify him to lead us out of our economic mess...in fact, his success therein bespeaks a mentality that disqualifies him. And his 20% across the board, 5 trillion dollar tax reduction fantasy suggests that he knows nothing of macro economics and the ultimate financial chaos such a misadventure would create.

      Finally and most important, like W before him, he is another frat boy "tough guy" who supported and marched for the Viet Nam war, but found a safe way to avoid harm (picnics and bicycle rides in France on his 2 year Mormon Mission) while other guys served and sacrificed and died. This is hypocrisy at its most despicable.

      I do not know if it is guilt or just plain ignorance, but Mitt has surrounded himself with the same set of George's neocons (also mostly non vets) who are ready to huff and puff and leads us into another military quagmire at the first possibility. I prefer Obama's and the Joint Chiefs more measured approach that has worked just fine for the last 4 years. The thought of Cheney and his gang of fools with their itchy little fingers on the trigger can only bring disaster.

    • vveasey profile image
      Author

      The Medicine Man 5 years ago from Detroit,MI

      Luther

      thanks for commenting

      I feel your pain.

      I think the President could have been more forceful as well.

      but I think because he's was a successful community organizer and was able to get diverse people to work together and because he was able to do something similar as a state senator.

      He over estimated his ability to do the same with the congress.

      I don't think he realized the ruthlessness of the congressional republicans or the blue dog democrates.

      Even after they stabbed him in back after to agreeing to some deal...he still was overly confident he could somehow get them do what he wanted.

      I think he compromised on some things because he at least wanted to get something done.

      As for jobs...he had an infrastructure jobs bill he tried to get passed but the republicans voted it down because their number one goal was to make Obama a one term president

      But I agree he needed to be and needs to be more of a fighter rather than being so focused on trying to get a consensus.

      What would a vote for Romney do for you?

    • profile image

      Luther 5 years ago

      @mp2525

      President Obama has some real problems if I’m flirting with Mitt Romney. I’m a left leaning, black, urban professional with a law degree. Thinking back to 2008 and the type of voter Obama did well with, I hit all of the demographics: I’m black, college-degreed and live in an urban center (Chicago at that). If I’m thinking of abandoning him, then he has some real problems.

      The reason I’m reading Mitt Romney’s economic plan is because it doesn’t appear Obama has one. He’s been in office almost four years and he has to give another speech on his jobs plan? Unemployment was over 9% for two years. Why don’t I know about his jobs plan already?

      And the drama about the speech highlights his real problem: the President of the United States has no spine. The President of the United States wanted to give his jobs speech on Wednesday but backed down after Republicans condemned him for his timing. I am bone tired of the President wanting to do something, Republicans blasting him for it and him backing down. It doesn’t matter what he does, Republicans will blast him; he needs to act like he’s the President rather than getting permission from John Boehner to take a piss.

      Would George W. Bush change the timing of a speech to placate Democrats?

      Another example: President Obama wanted to close the prison at Guantanamo Bay. Republicans argued that security would be compromised and the prison is still open. Question: If President George W. Bush wanted to close Guantanamo Bay, would it still be open?

      As much as President Bush’s policies can be questioned at least he knew he was the President and acted like it. Instead acting like the President and leading Americans, Obama tries to build consensus by giving speeches and delegates everything to Congress. Think about the debt ceiling debate, he implored Congress to get him a proposal instead of creating and fighting for his own plan. The same is true with his landmark piece of legislation, health care. Republicans mistakenly call it Obamacare, like he was the one who created it. It should be called Pelosicare. Like everything else, Obama gave speeches imploring Congress to pass universal healthcare and then went off somewhere hoping Congress would give him something sign.

    • mp2525 profile image

      mp2525 5 years ago from Los Angeles

      Nice!

    • vveasey profile image
      Author

      The Medicine Man 5 years ago from Detroit,MI

      Now this is funny! But unfortunately true

      President Obama speaking at a ralley in Virginia today.

      It's called you might have Romnesia!

      "Now that we're 18 days out from the election, Mr. 'Severely Conservative' wants you to think he was severely kidding about everything he said over the last year," the president said. "He told folks he was the ideal candidate for the Tea Party, now he's telling folks, 'What? Who me?' He's forgetting what his own positions are. And he's betting that you will too."

      Continued the president, "he's changing up so much and backtracking and side stepping we've got to name this condition he's going through.

      "I think it's called…'Romnesia,'" the president said to cheers and laughter.

      "I'm not a medical doctor, but I do want to go over some of the symptoms with you because I want to make sure nobody else catches it," the president said in the battleground state of Virginia, where recent polls show Mitt Romney with momentum.

      "If you say you're for equal pay for equal work but you keep refusing to say whether or not you'd sign a bill that protects equal pay for equal work, you might have Romnesia," the president said, sounding not a little like comedian Jeff Foxworthy.

      "If you say women should have access to contraceptive care but you support legislation that would let your employer deny you contraceptive care, you might have a case of Romnesia," the president said. "If you say you'll protect a woman's right to choose but you stand up at a primary debate and say that you'd be delighted to sign a law outlawing that right to choose in all cases, then you've definitely got Romnesia."

      Moving on from issues he was raising to try to win over more women voters - Romney is polling better with women than previous Republican presidential candidates - the president said Romnesia extends to "other issues. If you say earlier in the year, 'I'm going to give a tax cut to the top one percent' and then in a debate you say 'I don't know anything about giving tax cuts to rich folks,' you need to get a thermometer a take your temperature, because you probably have Romnesia.

      "If you say that you're a champion of the coal industry when, while you were governor, you stood in front of a coal plant and said 'this plant will kill you' -"

      The crowd, for this one, chimed in "you probably have Romnesia," prompting the president to laugh and say, "that's some Romnesia."

      Said the president, "if you come down with a case of Romnesia and you can't seem to remember the policies that are still on your website or the promises you've made over the six years you've been running for president, here's the good news: Obamacare covers pre-existing conditions!"

      The crowd cheered ebulliently.

    • mp2525 profile image

      mp2525 5 years ago from Los Angeles

      Despite the fact Obama has not cleaned up George Bush’s mess quickly enough, despite the fact that Benghazi was not handled properly, etc, etc, the fact is that Obama has the courage of his convictions. Romney has the courage of the Lion in the Wizard of Oz. Obama has integrity. Mitt does not know the meaning of the word. If you do not know the meaning of integrity, I suggest that you read my blog “Where is the Outrage? Where is the Integrity?”...or any of my other Hubs pertaining to Mitt.

    • profile image

      Cindy 5 years ago

      mp2525,

      You're an idiot. Look at the facts. Read the whole speech from the Rose Garden and look at the releases from Susan Rice.

    • mp2525 profile image

      mp2525 5 years ago from Los Angeles

      VV:

      Why do you even bother with these Romney pinheads? They are hopeless. You just have to wait until the herd gets thinned. Whoops that may be too Darwinian for them to digest.

      Keep writing your Hubs!

    • vveasey profile image
      Author

      The Medicine Man 5 years ago from Detroit,MI

      Yep you're being disrespectful

    • profile image

      Cindy 5 years ago

      Oh, you didn't like my response so you deleted it.

    • vveasey profile image
      Author

      The Medicine Man 5 years ago from Detroit,MI

      Cindy

      It's childish for you to call my comments childish

      Respond like an adult without name calling

      I could have called your comments all kinds of bad names

      but that's not necessary to have a rational, adult conversion

      even if we disagree with one another wouldn't you agree?

    • profile image

      Cindy 5 years ago

      Read the whole speech and you'll see what I mean. This is going to be a close race. Either candidate could win. Your childish, biased remarks like "Case closed! Romney caught in indisputable lie! Facts matter!" are just not accurate.

    • vveasey profile image
      Author

      The Medicine Man 5 years ago from Detroit,MI

      Cindy

      CNN is not MSNBC

      and I'll take MSNBC over Fox News any day.

      She said Romney was right, in the main, which means he wasn't completely right, meaning he was wrong about what the President said in the rose garden but may have been right about the other things he said.

      That's the only thing that makes sense or she would just said Romney was right period, no qualification needed.

      Susan Rice was only going by what the intelligence agencies she depends on for information knew at that time, as they carried out a more thorough investigation of what really happened. As more updated information was supplied to her agency they updated their information and statements to the press.

      That's just the way it works.

      You depend on those agencies who are responsible for investigating the situation and updating you with new information as they learn more of the facts. So you can update your information to those who depend on you for their information about the situation

    • profile image

      Cindy 5 years ago

      I watched Susan Rice (Obama's ambassador to the UN) on FIVE mainstream Sunday news programs after the attack say that the attack was "in fact" (her words) a spontaneous protest against an obscure video. It was clear from the beginning there was no spontaneous protest at all, and it was a premeditated attack, as Hillary Clinton is now saying.

      I have a feeling you only watch MSNBC or you would realize how badly the President misled the American people last night.

    • profile image

      Cindy 5 years ago

      Have you read the whole speech?

    • vveasey profile image
      Author

      The Medicine Man 5 years ago from Detroit,MI

      Romney got caught in one of his lies when he said President Obama didn't call the Libya attack a terrorist attack. Hahahaha!

      It's pretty bad when the moderator has to tell you twice that what you're asserting is not correct because you keep trying to assert it! Hahahaha

      This is from CNN fact checking what President Obama called the attack,

      "On September 13, at a campaign event in Las Vegas, Obama vowed to bring the killers to justice. He then added, "No act of terror will dim the light of the values that we proudly shine on the rest of the world, and no act of violence will shake the resolve of the United States of America."

      (If the president didn't think this was a terrorist attack why did he say "No act of terror?")

      "Two days later, White House Press Secretary Jay Carney responded bluntly to a question about why Obama had not labeled the incident a terrorist attack.

      "I think you're misunderstanding something here," Carney said. "I'm the president's spokesman. When the head of the National Counterterrorism Center, Matt Olsen, in open testimony in Congress, answered a question by saying yes, by the definitions we go by -- this is me paraphrasing -- this was a terrorist attack -- I echoed that, because this president, this administration, everybody looks to the intelligence community for the assessments on this. And it has been since I said so, the president's position that this was a terrorist attack."

      Case closed!

      Romney caught in indisputable lie!

      Facts matter!

      Even more reason why no one should vote for Mitt Romney or the republicans not even Mitt Romney himself!

    • profile image

      Cindy 5 years ago

      Even Candy Crowley apologized earlier to Romney and the American people saying that yes for 2 weeks the Obama administration claimed the Benghazi attack was the result of a film and it was a spontaneous demonstration and not a planned act of terrorism. Obama and Clinton also apologized profusely to the muslim community for the video.

    • profile image

      Bob 5 years ago

      Maybe someone can figure a way to have a five hour special of American Idol on TV on election day to keep the Obama supporters at home. I guess you could also make it a marathon with Survivor, Biggest Loser, The Great Race, The Bachelor and American Idol.

    • profile image

      Kyle 5 years ago

      In fact, that reference to “acts of terror” didn’t appear in any sentence or paragraph with “Libya” or “Benghazi.” In that Rose Garden speech Obama seemed to obliquely refer to the purported provocation (the anti-Muslim video) when he said: “Since our founding, the United States has been a nation that respects all faiths. We reject all efforts to denigrate the religious beliefs of others. But there is absolutely no justification to this type of senseless violence. None. The world must stand together to unequivocally reject these brutal acts.” The reference to “acts of terror” (plural, not the singular attack on Benghazi) was in reference to 9/11/01 and other jihadist attacks:

      Of course, yesterday was already a painful day for our nation as we marked the solemn memory of the 9/11 attacks. We mourned with the families who were lost on that day. I visited the graves of troops who made the ultimate sacrifice in Iraq and Afghanistan at the hallowed grounds of Arlington Cemetery, and had the opportunity to say thank you and visit some of our wounded warriors at Walter Reed. And then last night, we learned the news of this attack in Benghazi.

      As Americans, let us never, ever forget that our freedom is only sustained because there are people who are willing to fight for it, to stand up for it, and in some cases, lay down their lives for it. Our country is only as strong as the character of our people and the service of those both civilian and military who represent us around the globe.

      No acts of terror will ever shake the resolve of this great nation, alter that character, or eclipse the light of the values that we stand for. Today we mourn four more Americans who represent the very best of the United States of America. We will not waver in our commitment to see that justice is done for this terrible act. And make no mistake, justice will be done.

    • vveasey profile image
      Author

      The Medicine Man 5 years ago from Detroit,MI

      Romney got caught in one of his lies when he said President Obama didn't call the Libya attack a terrorist attack. Hahahaha!

      It's pretty bad when the moderator has to tell you twice that what you're asserting is not correct because you keep trying to assert it! Hahahaha

      This is from CNN fact checking what President Obama called the attack,

      "On September 13, at a campaign event in Las Vegas, Obama vowed to bring the killers to justice. He then added, "No act of terror will dim the light of the values that we proudly shine on the rest of the world, and no act of violence will shake the resolve of the United States of America."

      (If the president didn't think this was a terrorist attack why did he say "No act of terror?")

      "Two days later, White House Press Secretary Jay Carney responded bluntly to a question about why Obama had not labeled the incident a terrorist attack.

      "I think you're misunderstanding something here," Carney said. "I'm the president's spokesman. When the head of the National Counterterrorism Center, Matt Olsen, in open testimony in Congress, answered a question by saying yes, by the definitions we go by -- this is me paraphrasing -- this was a terrorist attack -- I echoed that, because this president, this administration, everybody looks to the intelligence community for the assessments on this. And it has been since I said so, the president's position that this was a terrorist attack."

      Case closed!

      Romney caught in indisputable lie!

      Facts matter!

      Even more reason why no one should vote for Mitt Romney or the republicans not even Mitt Romney himself!

    • vveasey profile image
      Author

      The Medicine Man 5 years ago from Detroit,MI

      Wrong!

    • profile image

      Mike 5 years ago

      Ok, I was hoping you might refer to a Rev Al article next.

    • vveasey profile image
      Author

      The Medicine Man 5 years ago from Detroit,MI

      Mike

      instead of making dumb disparaging remarks

      check the facts

      during the debates Ryan admitted he took stimulus money.

      Check other sources. But you may be one of those people

      who will only believe want you want to believe, damn the facts

    • profile image

      Mike 5 years ago

      Great, now you've cited another genius, Joe Biden.

    • vveasey profile image
      Author

      The Medicine Man 5 years ago from Detroit,MI

      Mike

      It's part of the freedom of information act.

      read other sources you'll see the same thing.

      go to Joe Biden's website the letters are posted there.

      Paul Ryan confirmed he sent the letters during the debate.

      It so easy to just diss something because you don't want to believe it

      rather than checking it out for yourself.

    • profile image

      Mike 5 years ago

      Oh great, a Huffington Post article. There's an unbiased news source.

    • vveasey profile image
      Author

      The Medicine Man 5 years ago from Detroit,MI

      Well wouldn't you know it...Paul Ryan talks against President Obama's stimulus act but requested stimulus money himself, can somebody say hypocrite.

      Just click the link below to see the facts for yourself.

      http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/10/12/paul-ryan...

      Even more reason why no one should vote for Mitt Romney including Mitt Romney himself

    • profile image

      Roger 5 years ago

      Hard to imagine how many of you still think Obama is such a wonderful POTUS. You haven't seen enough of his cronies getting taxpayer money? You enjoy watching scandals like Fast and Furious, Bengazi, and Solyndra? Oh, maybe you like being lied to every single day? How are those unemployment numbers and gas prices looking for you people? Median middle class income down, house prices down, inflation up, defecit sky rocketing, Senate Dem's haven't passed a budget in over 3 years now... Dear God, you people need to wake up.

    • jman00001 profile image

      jman00001 5 years ago from Texas

      I think some "progressives" are also interested in high volume on their hubs from conservatives.. which we tend to give generously..

      Hmm maybe some of our liberal hubbers are more capitalist than we realize? The points we all shared are simple valid. Especially personal events like Cheryl shared. I think they know it but want to generate conflict & drama a lil like reality TV.. It seems to be working..

      Anyway, my concern is the growing numbers of people who do actually believe in Obama. That is what scares me . I now know of 2 colleague educated professionals with over 10 years working experience in Texas that OPENLY want wealth redistribution.. They advocate for a bigger, stronger government that will have greater control or businesses and people ... When asked why, they say it is safer that way for the poor and middle class and rich people will finally get their wealth shared which is what they deserve? They says they have many friends who believe the same thing although don’t share it openly.

      People - we have now have many with no desire for liberty, fairness or freedom.. One of these individuals even disavowed her Christian beliefs based on Obama's pro gay marriage comments. I am no longer convinced that these people are simply part of a small fringe group.

      Without the tea party or republicans having a similar core voting group Advantage like Obama has- namely a sizable group that will vote in November and will not split their vote under any conditions - I really don't see how Christianity or Conservatism will prosper in America’s future.

      The Obama / liberal/ socialist core group is growing – both by immigration and by greater numbers of children being born to low income parents as well as middle to high income immigrant parents and following the same entitlement and or socialist lifestyle. We gave all citizens the right to an equal vote, but never expected this betrayal of our founding principals.

    • profile image

      Cheryl 5 years ago

      WHAT economic progress are we making? I am a registered nurse and have been for 19 years and I WAS LAID OFF!! Nurses, yes nurses are losing their jobs left and right. Medicare, medicaid cuts, doctors tripling the amount of patients they are seeing due to these cuts; hospitals cutting back. You call this progress? Why don't you check out dailylayoffs.net and see the amount of people losing their jobs. I have applied for every job I can think of...waitress, housekeeper, dog walker, bus cleaner, retail and was offered a job doing home care as a NURSING ASSISTANT making $8.00/hr. I wish the public was aware of the falsification of this nursing shortage. Everyone thinks anything in healthcare is recession proof.....WRONG! Since Obama got into office, NOTHING IS RECESSION PROOF. If OBAMA has his way...we will be in a depression in the blink of an eye. I have relatives in Europe living under socialized medicine (OBAMA'S plan) and let me tell you it's horrible. You better "hope and pray" Obamacare does not go through, because God forbid it does, you better "hope and pray" you don't get sick. Been there, done that and I know what it's like. Do you want to wait four months to see a doctor for a simple infection? And you approve of his "TRACK RECORD"? You contradict yourself because then you say "in spite of the best efforts of Congress to make sure Obama wouldn't be allowed to get us back on track"......SO, WE'RE STILL OFF TRACK. "Making economic progress".....show me the proof.

    • profile image

      Charles 5 years ago

      There are so many of Obama's malfeasance in office that there is not enough room to cover them here. But lets talk about a few. There was his refusal to wear the American Flag lapel pin. His reason? He wanted to be fair. Fair? About the American Flag? We have fought, and many have died for that flag. Then he went to Saudi Arabia and told the people the US was no longer a Christian Nation. WRONG!! Then he bowed and kissed the ring of the Saudi King. Unacceptable. Then came the trillions in stimulus for shovel ready jobs. Shovel ready jobs? That turned out to be a lie. Then came the oil spill in the Gulf and he did nothing until four months later. The folks down there lost jobs, lost money, begging for the Federal Government to do something. Then he goes down and staggers along a beach with cameras rolling like he is really involved. Then he signs legislation forbidding drilling for oil in the Gulf. He was guaranteeing; that those folks would never recover. Then came the unforgivable. The idiot, moron, low life, muslim who shot 13 brave young American Hero’s on Ft. Hood. What did Obama do? He called it a work place incident. Then at the memorial ceremony at the trooping of the Flag, he does the unforgivable, he does not salute the Flag like everybody else, he is covering his crotch!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! As a retired military person, this is unforgiveable. I am going to stop writing but there is so much this imposter has done to our Country that it will take a long time to recover.

    • profile image

      Obama is a serial liar 5 years ago

      http://online.wsj.com/article/SB100008723963904435...

      And the only reason anyone has him up in polls is because they skew the polls (dishonestly) for Obama - here is how they do it.

      http://video.foxnews.com/v/1863079594001/rove-be-c...

    • vveasey profile image
      Author

      The Medicine Man 5 years ago from Detroit,MI

      Mark

      Thanks

      I'm done with your smart ass remarks too.

      Sorry I missed your response about Obama being down like Romney

      But you're still making assumptions and being condescending, whether you mean to or not about my age or that I'm basing the outcome of the election on emotion...

      based on all I can say is your deluded way of looking at what I'm saying, based on what you appear to think, is your superior way of looking at issues.

      It tickles me that people like you who criticize me and my hubs seem to find it hard to stay away...it's like y'all are obsessed with following my hubs.

      Try writing your own hubs about what you're passionate about rather haunting my hubs like a restless ghost

      So no love lost...and good-bye

    • profile image

      Mark 5 years ago

      @vveasey

      I absolutely adressed your question about "what you would be saying if Obama was behind like Romney is."

      I stated that "History has shown this election is too close to call at this point. If Romney was up by 2 percent, I wouldn't feel comfortable about him winning and wouldn't rub it in anyone's face."

      I can play the quotation mark game too.

      I didn't say that you were voting based on emotion. I said you were basing the outcome of this election on emotion. You absolutely are.

      When I said that I am happy about young voters being excited about the election, I meant it. I didn't mean it to be codescending, but it's quite easy to tell you're about 20.

      I think I'm done with your hubs. I'll read your smart-ass response, but likely won't way in again. You really don't know what to say when someone doesn't follow the script.

    • vveasey profile image
      Author

      The Medicine Man 5 years ago from Detroit,MI

      Mark

      I'm not missing the point and I'm not calling the election for President Obama...yet!

      You didn't address the point about what you would be saying if Obama was behind like Romney is.

      You say" I truly appreciate it when young voters are excited about an election, but don't overlook history in favor of emotion. If this was 1980 and your first opportunity to vote, you would be talking trash about Reagan".

      You're making quite a big assumption if you think that I'm young or would vote based on emotion...in fact the emotion part is kind of insulting, and condescending.

      The only thing you might be right about is I may have been talking trash to you, but I was talking the truth about Reagan in 1980!

    • profile image

      Mark 5 years ago

      @vveasey

      No, you're still missing the point. History has shown this election is too close to call at this point. If Romney was up by 2 percent, I wouldn't feel comfortable about him winning and wouldn't rub it in anyone's face.

      As for your Mitt remarks. Obama is the President of the United States and not my personal friend, therefore I do not refer to him by his first name.

      I truly appreciate it when young voters are excited about an election, but don't overlook history in favor of emotion. If this was 1980 and your first opportunity to vote, you would be talking trash about Reagan.

    • vveasey profile image
      Author

      The Medicine Man 5 years ago from Detroit,MI

      Mark

      You said "You didn't address any of my points."

      I think mentioning Mitt and Reagan in the polls was one of your points wasn't it? That's why I asked you about the comparison. Point addressed.

      You seem to have so much faith in Mitt that you're happy to ignore the polls!

      But truthfully if Obama was behind like Mitt what would you be saying?

      As for what I call him..I call him what he calls himself Mitt or Romney so how is that an attempt to belittle him?

    • profile image

      Mark 5 years ago

      vveasey

      You didn't address any of my points.

      I will admit that Obama is closer to Jimmy Carter than Romney is to Reagan, but you're totally mssing the point. Romney is doing much better in the polls than Reagan was at this point prior to the election and he had a landslide victory. There are a lot of things that could happen prior to this election.

      I'm not at all discouraged by the polls at the moment. I expect more Republicans to actually show up to vote and less Democrats this time around. Also, as I stated earlier, the numbers could certainly change quickly.

      Also, are you guys going to continue to refer to him as Willard and Mitt in an attempt to belittle him if he is elected?