Party platform statements.

[Guest 6.8 AR]

I'm past worrying about it, anyway.

[Caster]

Here's a speech by Obama. It makes more sense than anything he's said in his whole term:

[TMF]

The whole idea that either candidate can think for themselves is ridiculous. Romney could be anti-gun down to his core and it wouldn't matter; he ain't going after guns as president. He was governor of one of the most liberal states in the country, what did you expect him to say

Edited September 10, 2012 by TMF

[daddyo]

If that's the case, then you shouldn't have anything to worry about.

This.

[daddyo]

The whole idea that either candidate can think for themselves is ridiculous. Romney could be anti-gun down to his core and it wouldn't matter; he ain't going after guns as president. He was governor of one of the most liberal states in the country, what did you expect him to say

Then if that really is the case, he doesn't mean what he says. Nice to know and it's why I won't be voting for one liar to replace another.

[Jonnin]

That's not a very well made point, jonnin. I think you rely mostly on his term as governor of MA for most of your

reasoning, and I don't recall any such statements during his ruin for prez. I won't say it didn't happen, but I sure

don't remember him stating he would do such a thing. Besides, watching him sign a document that has odds

approaching infinity against making it to his desk, assuming he wins the election, going against the platform and

the votes of the people, you may as well called him the antichrist, because to make that leap assumes a lot of other

things would have had to have gone wrong.

I don't trust him on the issue, if he had a lefty Congress, but that ain't the case.

where has he not followed the platform, or, has he even had a chance to break the platform?

Or, you're just stirring the pot.

Well, Mitt was campaigning as early as 2008, which is when he said this:

"I also, like the president, would have signed the assault weapon ban that came to his desk."

Also his web site currently:

"As governor of Massachusetts, Mitt was proud to support legislation that expanded the rights of gun owners. He worked hard to advance the ability of law-abiding citizens to purchase and own firearms, while opposing liberal desires to create bureaucracy intended to burden gun owners and sportsmen."

which is just an outright lie: the stuff he supported as governer did no such thing.

Mostly, he has dodged the issue in the current campaign, because it points out his opportunistic flip flopping (also seen in his abortion stance). He has pretty much mouthed the "correct" words since 2009 or so.

In my book, though, his performance as gov means a heck of a lot more than his words on the campaign trail. And the lie on his website is downright frightening.

[Guest ThePunisher]

Like Obama has really not told any lies the last 4 years. I think he has broken the lie count meter, ..he's told so many, and every time he opens his mouth.

Edited September 10, 2012 by ThePunisher

[Jonnin]

I mostly ignore obama, and have not one nice thing to say about him.

I may have to vote for mitt but that does not mean I have to like him or trust him. Obama's lies do not justify Romney's lies.

Edited September 10, 2012 by Jonnin

[Guest ThePunisher]

I mostly ignore obama, and have not one nice thing to say about him.

I may have to vote for mitt but that does not mean I have to like him or trust him.

TRUST! Now, that's a novel idea in the arena of politics.

[Guest 6.8 AR]

Maybe, Jonnin, in your book, since they are both liars, keeping the one in office that has a track record of

destruction and a party platform of the same, is a better thing.

After reading a few more of these, well crap. They can't think for themselves. That's a good one. I guess an

ad firm got them in office. Wow, that's what Paul needed.

No wonder this country is going to Hell.

[Jonnin]

Maybe, Jonnin, in your book, since they are both liars, keeping the one in office that has a track record of

destruction and a party platform of the same, is a better thing.

After reading a few more of these, well crap. They can't think for themselves. That's a good one. I guess an

ad firm got them in office. Wow, that's what Paul needed.

No wonder this country is going to Hell.

No, I am not thinking obama with no re-election looming would be a good thing at all, as that gives him both free reign AND in his mind, a mandate to F things up.

[Guest 6.8 AR]

I mostly ignore obama, and have not one nice thing to say about him.

I may have to vote for mitt but that does not mean I have to like him or trust him. Obama's lies do not justify Romney's lies.

I would hate for anyone to betray his core beliefs. Not once did I attempt to justify anyone's lie. Have you always been

completely honest, factual and genuine? We can say a lot of things when we sit behind the internet wall. I hope there's

nothing sitting back festering. Be sad if it is.

If you want to stop politicians from lying, you better go to DC yourself and hold a gun at each one while they're talking.

Lot of work there.

[Chucktshoes]

In my book, though, his performance as gov means a heck of a lot more than his words on the campaign trail. And the lie on his website is downright frightening.

This is the point I have been trying to make.

During the last campaign much hay was made regarding O's lack of executive experience. Well, Mitt possesses that experience, and yet, a lot of y'all are willing to ignore what he actually did while in office because he has the right letter next to his name. There is no difference between y'all and the Democrats who gloss over O's record during the last 3.5 years regarding his handling of the wars, his failure to close Guantanamo, or the fact that he has claimed the ability to execute or assassinate US citizens without due process. Even GWB didn't go that far. For a supposed "Constitutional Lawyer" Obama sure doesn't give a damn about what it says. Mitt won't either, none of them ever do. They all just want to expand the power they wield.

[Guest 6.8 AR]

I think we have the basic ideas down pat, Jonnin. Look, I saw both sides of that gun stuff in MA. Lot of

distortion going on there. i don't remember who signed or said much of it, but it was displayed and portrayed

to get Romney into pieces, politically, and to a large extent it worked. I don't know who is right, but I am suspect

of a lot some call facts and at this point, I really don't care. It is wasteful and useless to trash everyone running,

except that it might make some feel better if it actually turns out that way. That, to me, is sickening.

Spoil before you get a chance to show yourself. Talk about self fulfilling prophecies.

[Guest 6.8 AR]

This is the point I have been trying to make.

During the last campaign much hay was made regarding O's lack of executive experience. Well, Mitt possesses that experience, and yet, a lot of y'all are willing to ignore what he actually did while in office because he has the right letter next to his name. There is no difference between y'all and the Democrats who gloss over O's record during the last 3.5 years regarding his handling of the wars, his failure to close Guantanamo, or the fact that he has claimed the ability to execute or assassinate US citizens without due process. Even GWB didn't go that far. For a supposed "Constitutional Lawyer" Obama sure doesn't give a damn about what it says. Mitt won't either, none of them ever do. They all just want to expand the power they wield.

Be careful who you say y'all to. I think Gitmo shoud remain open, he shouldn't have power to execute anyone overseas,

either party, okay? I doubt I have glossed over anyone's record. Your point wasn't made, yet. Why don't you finish it?

You list a bunch of stuff Obama does and say we glaze over it and then conclude by saying but not backing your point up.

[TMF]

Then if that really is the case, he doesn't mean what he says. Nice to know and it's why I won't be voting for one liar to replace another.

If the benchmark for worthiness of a politician is their level of honesty I have a hard time believing you could vote for anyone. Every career politician has achieved their position through dishonesty, deception and probably criminal activity.

[Guest 6.8 AR]

I would have said almost every, but TMF, you made a point!

[Jonnin]

If the benchmark for worthiness of a politician is their level of honesty I have a hard time believing you could vote for anyone. Every career politician has achieved their position through dishonesty, deception and probably criminal activity.

The alternative is to not vote, which is translated as apathy rather than as anger at the choice.

[TMF]

The alternative is to not vote, which is translated as apathy rather than as anger at the choice.

I never said anything about not voting. I just think its silly that any grown man would believe everything a politician says. It is just absurd. It's even more absurd to think a particular candidate kneels at the cross because he says so. Any candidate you vote for is going to make you compromise your beliefs to some extent, even if it is Ron Paul. Anyone who claims to align 100% with a particular candidate is either naive, delusional or just plain lying to themselves.

[Jonnin]

well, yes, all that stuff!

But not agreeing with someone is not even remotely related to deception, those cannot really be put together. I can disagree with say H. Cain's tax plan (just a random example), but he was not trying to hide his agenda there. I can agree with Romney's web site gun control statement/mission or party platform, but it feels misleading. Totally different.

[TMF]

I believe all politicians are deceptive. How else would they get to where they are? They sure didn't get there by telling the truth all the time.

[Jonnin]

Sure, they all spin and mislead and outright lie. And the press (or public) should call them on it every time, and make it more damaging to behave this way than not.

[TMF]

Sure, they all spin and mislead and outright lie. And the press (or public) should call them on it every time, and make it more damaging to behave this way than not.

And that is why I don't get worked up about crappy leaders in our government. It is the American people that have created this market for these slick tongued snakes to thrive in. They can't help it, they're born liars. We complain about the sh*t sandwich we have to eat from our leaders in government, but it's our friends and neighbors that are making the friggin sandwich. The politicians are just the ones serving it to us.

[daddyo]

I never said anything about not voting. I just think its silly that any grown man would believe everything a politician says. It is just absurd. It's even more absurd to think a particular candidate kneels at the cross because he says so. Any candidate you vote for is going to make you compromise your beliefs to some extent, even if it is Ron Paul. Anyone who claims to align 100% with a particular candidate is either naive, delusional or just plain lying to themselves.

No, what's absurd is that we can't trust our elected representatives. Maybe I'm part of a dying breed, but I still demand accountability and honesty from mine or I don't vote for them again. You can "settle for" if you want; not me.

Edited September 10, 2012 by DaddyO

[TMF]

No, what's absurd is that we can't trust our elected representatives. Maybe I'm part of a dying breed, but I still demand accountability and honesty from mine or I don't vote for them again. You can "settle for" if you want; not me.

It's not about "settling", it's about reality. The reality is that the politicians aren't the problem, its the dummy voters and party liners who have relinquished our country over to a crooked system. Idealistically I would love to change that, but realistically I can't and neither can you. Boycotting the two party system might make you feel better, but it changes nothing due to the sheer numbers of party liners. The answer? Reelect no one. Of course, that would mean you'd have to vote for a liberal democrat at some point. If just a small section of the voting population (10%) were to do this they would swing most every election. If our elected leaders were denied the possibility of making politics a career things might change. They might even start working for us again. I dunno, there is just no feasible way to combat this problem... too many dummies. The only way to beat the system is to work within it.