MemberThese are a few things people have been posting on Facebook recently that I really enjoyed. I thought I would share:
A video created to go along with an Obama speech from April 2012, made by the animator of the Simpsons and Family Guy:
A bunch of information on what Obama has done these past 4 years:
MemberSomeone posted this on FB, and I thought it really hit home (from playwrite Doug Wright)-
“I wish my moderate Republican friends would simply be honest. They all say they’re voting for Romney because of his economic policies (tenuous and ill-formed as they are), and that they disagree with him on gay rights. Fine. Then look me in the eye, speak with a level clear voice, and say, “My taxes and take-home pay mean more than your fundamental civil rights, the sanctity of your marriage, your right to visit an ailing spouse in the hospital, your dignity as a citizen of this country, your healthcare, your right to inherit, the mental welfare and emotional well-being of your youth, and your very personhood.
“It’s like voting for George Wallace during the Civil Rights movements, and apologizing for his racism. You’re still complicit. You’re still perpetuating anti-gay legislation and cultural homophobia. You don’t get to walk away clean, because you say you “disagree” with your candidate on these issues.”
The idea of Obama “evolving” on gay rights being an example of “Chicago style politics” is a bit offensive. It’s not like he’s all talk. He repealed Don’t Ask Don’t Tell (can you imagine the effects if it was put back in place? What would happen to everyone who is now out and serving?). He ordered DOMA to stop being enforced, and there is hope that the SCOTUS will find it unconstitutional (though given the SCOTUS makeup, I don’t know how realistic that is, which just goes to show HOW IMPORTANT the SCOTUS nominations are when picking a president– we’re talking LIFETIME APPOINTMENTS HERE PEOPLE!!). Again, my church came out in favor of gay marriage this past July, AFTER Obama did. And my church is not running for office or engaging in “Chicago style politics.” It was finding a balance between the beliefs of its followers.
The Daily Show was particulary good last night. After turning many of Romney/Ryan’s arguments on their heads (and citing the conservative Wall St. Journal to show how R/R is lying about the success rates of green energy companies), he moved on to the latest Republican claim about rape. http://www.thedailyshow.com/watch/thu-october-25-2012/republican-candidate-said-what-about-rape-now– He noted that allowing no exception for rape follows the beliefs of both the man who would be one heartbeat away from the presidency, and is indeed the platform of the GOP itself. Under those policies, a woman who wanted to be pregnant thru IVF would be prohibitied. A woman who was raped but didn’t want to be pregnant would be forced to carry to term.
Shiver . . . If you hold such beliefs, I don’t care what you say about the economy (and I frankly can’t trust anyone with such backwards beliefs). My body is soooo much more important than my wallet.
Member
Member@peachacid: I think drones violate the sovereignty of other nations, and other people. If a nation did that to us, we would see it as an act of war. It’s no wonder that there are countries who don’t like us. We feel like we are entitled to spy on them.
Member@peachacid: I am against the use of drones, but both candidates support drone warfare, so we’re out of luck there.
@EastMeetsBarn: I completely agree.
I don’t think we should be one issue voters, but since so many people are, I think it’s fair to put these two issues side-by-side: economic policy (on which Romney is not clear) and civil rights (for gays and women) (on which he is clear). If I had to choose which one of those is more important to me as an American and someone who supports the American dream and the freedom America stands for, I’d put civil rights before economic policy. I think civil rights takes the moral and ethical highground.
Member@EastMeetsBarn: Love this post!
Member@EastMeetsBarn: Another excellent part of last night’s Daily Show was the comparison between the financial health of the Green Energy companies that Obama’s administration funded, and the private sector companies that Bain invested in whilst Romney was at the helm.
The metric that “half” of the companies funded by the Green Energy programs have gone bankrupt is false. It’s really 5 companies out of 63. That’s 8% over the life of the program. The 50% failure rate was for the first two years of the program when there were far fewer companies involved— if one of 3 fails, it skews the numbers.
Compare with Bain’s 22% failure rate whilst Romney was at the helm, and anothr 8% of companies during the same time period staying in business BUT losing every penny that Bain had invested in them. (source: http://www.factcheck.org/2012/05/gillespie-twists-the-facts-on-bain-capital/_
So the takeaways from this comparison:
1. You cannot rely on the media or the campaigns to give you the full facts; those are going to be stretched as far as possible, to be as flattering as possible to the candidate that is releasing the numbers, and both parties will do this
2. Romney’s financial track record in this regard might not be as gorgeous as the spin doctors tell us
3. The numbers can be manipulated to show a favorable metric, no matter what the eventual outcome is. Don’t like the numbers Romney is showing for his term at Bain? Then release the numbers for the entire history of Bain, which are far more favorable, but don’t tell anyone what these numbers are based on
4. Please do research on your own before swallowing what either party tells you
Also, running a government is far different than running a for-profit, private-sector business. Consider that, to be successful as a business executive, your goal is to make as much profit for the shareholders as possible. Not to create jobs. Not to have happy employees or make life better for the customers. Those businesses are all in business to make money. If you think that the profit-driven skillset will translate well to the public sector, then by all means, Romney’s your man. I am not so sure that the skillset will transfer well, because a large part of being a successful politician is diplomacy, negotiation and compromise– things that do not lend themselves well to making the kinds of decisions needed to ensure maximum profits for a company.
MemberI think this wraps it up:::
A Liberal, a Moderate and a Conservative Walks into a Bar. The Bartender Says “Hi Mitt.”
IS that what we want for a president?
Oh and, Romney is only PRO-CHOICE IF THAT CHOICE IS SELF DEPORTATION.
Think about that ladies.
Member@fishbone: All excellent points. I was soc major, and one of the books we were assigned in Soc 101 was “How to Lie with Statistics.” In the private sector, you can lay people off, and not worry about what is in their future. You can’t “lay off” 47% of the so-called unproductive population. The profit goal just doesn’t work for government. And I think republicans sometimes get that. After all, how much money does the military BRING IN? I can’t think of any (feel free to correct me if I’m wrong), and we certainly spend a whole lot of $$$ on it, so the benefits must be perceived to outweight the costs. I think that applies to all sorts of things, like healthcare (though it’s noteworthy how our private, profit driven system is sooooo much more expensive than the “socialist” tax-payer funded systems elsewhere).
MemberI wish the poll had an option for Libertarian and Green Party 🙁
Im happily “throwing my vote away” on Gary Johnson!
Member@Beautiful Bluegrass: As am I! I hope he runs for the next election.
Member<3 Obama!! Yes, he will definitely win – without cheating – that is.
Member@bella0831: He never was against gay marriage. Most of your information about Obama is off, and out-of-date.
MemberI’ve never waivered, I’ll vote for President Obama again.
Member@EastMeetsBarn: “I think that applies to all sorts of things, like healthcare (though it’s noteworthy how our private, profit driven system is sooooo much more expensive than the “socialist” tax-payer funded systems elsewhere”
This!
Monthly, I’m paying almost the same amount of $ for health insurance and meds as I did rent at my last apartment! (which, with the pre-existing conditions clause, will not cover ANY of my mental health care for seven years, to offset costs). I must say that being an individual born with mental illness in America has become one sucktastic position to be in! I need to start a thread about how mental illness is perceived and treated in countries with nationalized healthcare. If there is a thread already discussing this, could someone PM me the link?
The topic ‘2 weeks before ELECTION DAY!… What is your final decision?’ is closed to new replies.