President May be in Trouble

[Chip]

The only think I've been able to find was the former Ambassador making the accusations, but no charges have actually been brought to bear.

He's NEVER brought up on charges! He's too powerful and Venezuela controls too much oil. There's a public charge of him supporting terrorism every other year, at least. The biggest was back in 2008, when he made the State Department's list of state sponsors of terrorism. Look up Chavez and FARC. It's all on the Internets. He's an unpopular dude for a reason.

 

[Nova_C]

I don't respect opinions like "Madonna supports Obama, ergo Obama is bad". It shows a complete lack of critical thought directed at what is some of the most important information a person can have: What their government is doing.

The thing is, people complain about Obama having done nothing or made things worse, which is ludicrous. Unemployment has been dropping since '09(Link). Federal expenditure has been almost unchanged since '09(Link). Taxes have not gone up, but in fact have gone down (Link).

This is all reality. A reality you seem to refuse since it doesn't fit the conservative narrative.

PS. American politics absolutely affects Canada. It affects the whole world. When the credit crisis in the US took hold, it brought down pretty much everyone. So yeah, I have a dog in this fight, even if it's not nearly as big as the dog Americans have.

PPS. And if you want to rag on Obama for his failures, please do so. But stop fabricating things out of whole cloth. It is the outright falsehoods that get me going, not the legitimate criticisms against his presidency.

PPPS. And to insinuate that Obama's children are not his own pretty much says it all, doesn't it. That's the level of discourse you think is suitable to a political conversation? Very well.

 

[Chip]

When talking unemployment, you CAN'T included newly created government jobs. Private sector jobs are the only ones that are real. ALL gov't positions are living off of taxes, and the majority of "new" private sector jobs have been minimum wage. Here's a good article on it, albeit by a biased media source: http://www.cnn.com/2012/09/05/politics/fact-check-obama-jobs/index.html

 

[Lavender]

Ib1861 we had a bastard president from Illinois trying to ruin the country. And now history has repeated itself.

 

[Chip]

Not many haters of Lincoln.

 

[Camby]

I don't respect opinions like "Madonna supports Obama, ergo Obama is bad". It shows a complete lack of critical thought directed at what is some of the most important information a person can have: What their government is doing.

The thing is, people complain about Obama having done nothing or made things worse, which is ludicrous. Unemployment has been dropping since '09(Link). Federal expenditure has been almost unchanged since '09(Link). Taxes have not gone up, but in fact have gone down (Link).

Do you really read what you post? First of all, I never said a word about him raising taxes, BUT, since you mention it! You are correct, Federal Tax precentages have fallen just as your article state. Of course ALSO per your article, they have fallen due in large part to the unemployment rate of the last 4 years. So, your argument doesn't really carry that much weight now does it? Also, did you even look at what I posted regarding the deficit and stimulous package? Even though Obama has lowered the overall tax precentage (federal), how do you think we are going to pay for these expenditures? Is he going to eat the appropriate paper and magically shoot legal tender out his butt? Oh wait, he kind of already has done that just as Bush did by just printing more money while borrowin more from China. Once again, your argument really is useless unless you are going to look at both sides of the coin. It really is simple economics. If a bank loans you money, "hey, you have more money on hand", but guess what, the bank is eventually going to want that money back. SO, it's called the US needs to become fiscally responsible and start attacking this issue realistically NOW. Simply put, taxes may be low right now but due to ridiculous spending by the lcurrent and last administration, taxes WILL go up no matter who is elected.

This is all reality. A reality you seem to refuse since it doesn't fit the conservative narrative.

Again, I never addressed taxes I don't think, you brought that up. However, I do know it is a reality and it must be paid for. People like you seem to think there really is a free lunch. Of course that is just my interpretation of your numerous comments on how things aren't as bad as we make them out. Of course "we" is us backwoods conservatives that understand everything must be paid for at some point and time.

See, you and people who think like you. Ahh heck, I'll say it out loud, Liberals, remind me of those crazy drivers at a three lane highway funneling down to a two lane system. You see the signs for nearly a mile telling you the right lane ends, but you keep flying down that lane until you get to the point of merging in. Yeah, you eventually are allowed in by some idiot that is sympathetic to you. Now, you are back in line, moving down the road without a care in the world, but what you don't see or better yet, don't care about is the numerous people behind you that were slowed even more due to you and the ton of others like you blending in because you don't care about the others behind you. Of course the others behind you are our children that have inherited this debt as a result of "lower taxes" over the last few years.

So please, do not lecture me or make comments on what I get and don't get. Also, for your unemployement numbers, yeah, they have a net fall since October of 2010 of 1.9%. On paper that looks great, HOWEVER, the rate gradually dipped and rose and dipped to a net drop of 1.5% from October 2009 to December 2011. Since then it has dropped 4 tenths of a percent. So when you look at it as the whole month by month and see it, the fall isn't as great as it appears. Wow, in the last 6 months 100K people found jobs of those who have been actively looking. I am happy for them, but what about the others?

Please keep in mind this rate fall does not include underemployed individuals or those who have simply stopped looking. I am not going to look up the link, but if you factor in those who have stopped looking the true unemployement rate is around 12.5%.

PS. American politics absolutely affects Canada. It affects the whole world. When the credit crisis in the US took hold, it brought down pretty much everyone. So yeah, I have a dog in this fight, even if it's not nearly as big as the dog Americans have..

I stated in my post that our politics affect you, but I eluded to the fact that you seem to imply that things are good here and we "conservatives" should just wipe our runny noses and go on

PPS. And if you want to rag on Obama for his failures, please do so. But stop fabricating things out of whole cloth. It is the outright falsehoods that get me going, not the legitimate criticisms against his presidency..

I have not fabricated a single point, all are factual. You on the other hand only post and utilize information that suits your needs or views. a quick example is the "unemployement ...since 09" comment. Intentional or not, you failed to state October of 09. Stating "since 09" is likely interpreted by many as that year as a whole, rather than the last quarter of that year. SO, if you are going to argue, use all the facts, not just what you spin to fit your argument.

PPPS. And to insinuate that Obama's children are not his own pretty much says it all, doesn't it. That's the level of discourse you think is suitable to a political conversation? Very well.

Ahh, it was sarcasm, sorry it was wasted on you, maybe others got it. Here is a tidbit, maybe it is unsuccesful, but at times I use with, sarcasm or humor when I am posting. Sarcasm especially when I am irritated.

BTW, I don't view what you and I are having as a discussion, I view it as me presenting REAL data hoping a small fraction will sink in to you rather that utilizing only bits and pieces like you seem fond of doing.

That said, IF this is a discussion, then please address the FACTUAL issues I posted earlier tonight rather than accusing me of topics I never mentioned (I don't think at least). Again, be sure to use whole facts, not just the snipits that work to make you look right, you wouldn't let your child (not sure if you have children or not) utilize half truths would you. "You are grounded until your room is clean"
"It is clean now"
"Look at this, you just stuffed everything in your closet"
"You said clean my room, it is clean, now the closest is dirty"
"You know what I meant, now clean that room now or there will be reprocusions"
"But you don't use the same logic, you said taxes were cut even though they had to be addressed later, I can address the closet later".......

Get the point?

dc

 

[Camby]

Not many haters of Lincoln.

Agreed, he may not be the wonderful human most people think he was, but not many haters. No matter the tactics, the man saved the Union so it could be destroyed over a hundred years later, lol.

dc

 

[Nova_C]

Do you really read what you post? First of all, I never said a word about him raising taxes

He has done nothing benificial for this country, only cost us more and more taxes.

If this isn't supposed to mean that he has enacted more taxes, then you'll have to explain it because the only other possible meaning I can come up with is that he is spending those 'taxes', but that would require you to have written something where the meaning is tremendously obfuscated.

BUT, since you mention it! You are correct, Federal Tax precentages have fallen just as your article state. Of course ALSO per your article, they have fallen due in large part to the unemployment rate of the last 4 years. So, your argument doesn't really carry that much weight now does it?

How does this even make sense? The rate the government sets for taxes is irrelevant to the number of people paying. Yeah, the government has seen a massive drop in revenue because of the recession. But the government charging an individual less in taxes is a separate concept from a smaller tax base. My argument only does not carry weight if you conflate those two concepts.

Also, did you even look at what I posted regarding the deficit and stimulous package? Even though Obama has lowered the overall tax precentage (federal), how do you think we are going to pay for these expenditures?

Oh, so you agree and the previous bit was just smoke and mirrors? All right then

Is he going to eat the appropriate paper and magically shoot legal tender out his butt? Oh wait, he kind of already has done that just as Bush did by just printing more money while borrowin more from China. Once again, your argument really is useless unless you are going to look at both sides of the coin. It really is simple economics. If a bank loans you money, "hey, you have more money on hand", but guess what, the bank is eventually going to want that money back. SO, it's called the US needs to become fiscally responsible and start attacking this issue realistically NOW. Simply put, taxes may be low right now but due to ridiculous spending by the lcurrent and last administration, taxes WILL go up no matter who is elected.

And yet many of Obama's detractors accuse him of raising taxes and they all want taxes lowered. He lowered them, but they still accuse him of raising taxes. Federal deficits don't work like personal loans, or the entire first world would already have collapsed. Deficits in a recession is pretty common, while surpluses in a boom are supposed to go along with that. Alas, that rarely happens.

Thing is, austerity isn't really working out for Greece. It's not an ideal solution.

Again, I never addressed taxes I don't think, you brought that up.

Nope.

However, I do know it is a reality and it must be paid for. People like you seem to think there really is a free lunch. Of course that is just my interpretation of your numerous comments on how things aren't as bad as we make them out. Of course "we" is us backwoods conservatives that understand everything must be paid for at some point and time.

No, you is just you. I am speaking to you and not assuming you speak for anyone besides yourself.

See, you and people who think like you. Ahh heck, I'll say it out loud, Liberals

Well, bless my heart. It's time for ad hominem! It's been so long since I was attacked for being a LIBERAL (dun dun dunnnnnn).

remind me of those crazy drivers at a three lane highway funneling down to a two lane system. You see the signs for nearly a mile telling you the right lane ends, but you keep flying down that lane until you get to the point of merging in. Yeah, you eventually are allowed in by some idiot that is sympathetic to you. Now, you are back in line, moving down the road without a care in the world, but what you don't see or better yet, don't care about is the numerous people behind you that were slowed even more due to you and the ton of others like you blending in because you don't care about the others behind you. Of course the others behind you are our children that have inherited this debt as a result of "lower taxes" over the last few years.

So please, do not lecture me or make comments on what I get and don't get. Also, for your unemployement numbers, yeah, they have a net fall since October of 2010 of 1.9%. On paper that looks great, HOWEVER, the rate gradually dipped and rose and dipped to a net drop of 1.5% from October 2009 to December 2011. Since then it has dropped 4 tenths of a percent. So when you look at it as the whole month by month and see it, the fall isn't as great as it appears. Wow, in the last 6 months 100K people found jobs of those who have been actively looking. I am happy for them, but what about the others?

I'm sure if only McCain had been elected, there'd be 0% unemployment.

Of course, the US is in a recession. The largest in nearly a century. Not sure why this doesn't seem to matter, or that you have just admitted to saying that things are improving, yeah. I guess they're just not improving fast enough so you suggest voting in someone who contends that half the country, including most of the elderly and infirmed, students with federal loans, and every single person who lost their job when the economy tanked is a loser and degenerate. A person who thinks paying 13 cents per dollar made is too much for him, but someone paying 25 cents per dollar made needs to pay more to live in the US.

Please keep in mind this rate fall does not include underemployed individuals or those who have simply stopped looking. I am not going to look up the link, but if you factor in those who have stopped looking the true unemployement rate is around 12.5%.

My link surely does include this. You might want to check again. I'll wait.

No pressure.

I stated in my post that our politics affect you, but I eluded to the fact that you seem to imply that things are good here and we "conservatives" should just wipe our runny noses and go on

I surely didn't and I'll thank you to quote anything I said where I told 'conservatives' to buck up and 'wipe your runny noses'. As I said, the US is in the worst recession in nearly a century. Surely a lot of people are getting the shaft, there's a lot of poverty out there right now and a lot of people need the government to do something.

I'm hoping that since this will be Obama's second term, the Republican party will stop filibustering everything and actually work to improve the country. They swore to make Obama a one term president when he was elected. That was their priority. Their number one. The unemployed? The underemployed? Everybody else? They didn't care one whit so long as they made Obama a one term president.

You see that huge spike on the right? Yeah, that's the current number of filibusters that sitting congress has used versus history.

Maybe something good could have come from the Republicans not trying to hamstring everything the elected president of the United States was attempting to do, but alas, 'twas not to be.

I have not fabricated a single point, all are factual. You on the other hand only post and utilize information that suits your needs or views. a quick example is the "unemployement ...since 09" comment. Intentional or not, you failed to state October of 09. Stating "since 09" is likely interpreted by many as that year as a whole, rather than the last quarter of that year. SO, if you are going to argue, use all the facts, not just what you spin to fit your argument.

Not sure about this. "Since '09" I usually take to mean the end of '09. As in, since the date mentioned. The time after it. I can see including the rest of the year in that, though.

Considering the free fall the economy was in when Obama took office, it seems a little ridiculous to think that it would suddenly be arrested. The real question is, once the economy stopped tanking, has it been getting better?

According to the jobless rate and the Dow, yeah. Probably not as fast as most would like, but yeah, it's getting better.

Ahh, it was sarcasm, sorry it was wasted on you, maybe others got it. Here is a tidbit, maybe it is unsuccesful, but at times I use with, sarcasm or humor when I am posting. Sarcasm especially when I am irritated.

Well, it was incredibly poor taste. And I knew you weren't seriously putting that forward, but a joke that isn't funny, just offensive, is still offensive.

BTW, I don't view what you and I are having as a discussion, I view it as me presenting REAL data hoping a small fraction will sink in to you rather that utilizing only bits and pieces like you seem fond of doing.

That said, IF this is a discussion, then please address the FACTUAL issues I posted earlier tonight rather than accusing me of topics I never mentioned (I don't think at least). Again, be sure to use whole facts, not just the snipits that work to make you look right, you wouldn't let your child (not sure if you have children or not) utilize half truths would you. "You are grounded until your room is clean"
"It is clean now"
"Look at this, you just stuffed everything in your closet"
"You said clean my room, it is clean, now the closest is dirty"
"You know what I meant, now clean that room now or there will be reprocusions"
"But you don't use the same logic, you said taxes were cut even though they had to be addressed later, I can address the closet later".......

Get the point?

dc

You cited nothing, I had to look up everything you were talking about and you very much cherry pick data to suit your ends.

I think the kettle is calling.

 

[Lavender]

probably need a calculator tomorrow to count the lies at the debate.

 

[Camby]

If this isn't supposed to mean that he has enacted more taxes, then you'll have to explain it because the only other possible meaning I can come up with is that he is spending those 'taxes', but that would require you to have written something where the meaning is tremendously obfuscated.



How does this even make sense? The rate the government sets for taxes is irrelevant to the number of people paying. Yeah, the government has seen a massive drop in revenue because of the recession. But the government charging an individual less in taxes is a separate concept from a smaller tax base. My argument only does not carry weight if you conflate those two concepts.



Oh, so you agree and the previous bit was just smoke and mirrors? All right then



And yet many of Obama's detractors accuse him of raising taxes and they all want taxes lowered. He lowered them, but they still accuse him of raising taxes. Federal deficits don't work like personal loans, or the entire first world would already have collapsed. Deficits in a recession is pretty common, while surpluses in a boom are supposed to go along with that. Alas, that rarely happens.

Thing is, austerity isn't really working out for Greece. It's not an ideal solution.



Nope.



No, you is just you. I am speaking to you and not assuming you speak for anyone besides yourself.



Well, bless my heart. It's time for ad hominem! It's been so long since I was attacked for being a LIBERAL (dun dun dunnnnnn).



I'm sure if only McCain had been elected, there'd be 0% unemployment.

Of course, the US is in a recession. The largest in nearly a century. Not sure why this doesn't seem to matter, or that you have just admitted to saying that things are improving, yeah. I guess they're just not improving fast enough so you suggest voting in someone who contends that half the country, including most of the elderly and infirmed, students with federal loans, and every single person who lost their job when the economy tanked is a loser and degenerate. A person who thinks paying 13 cents per dollar made is too much for him, but someone paying 25 cents per dollar made needs to pay more to live in the US.



My link surely does include this. You might want to check again. I'll wait.

No pressure.



I surely didn't and I'll thank you to quote anything I said where I told 'conservatives' to buck up and 'wipe your runny noses'. As I said, the US is in the worst recession in nearly a century. Surely a lot of people are getting the shaft, there's a lot of poverty out there right now and a lot of people need the government to do something.

I'm hoping that since this will be Obama's second term, the Republican party will stop filibustering everything and actually work to improve the country. They swore to make Obama a one term president when he was elected. That was their priority. Their number one. The unemployed? The underemployed? Everybody else? They didn't care one whit so long as they made Obama a one term president.

You see that huge spike on the right? Yeah, that's the current number of filibusters that sitting congress has used versus history.

Maybe something good could have come from the Republicans not trying to hamstring everything the elected president of the United States was attempting to do, but alas, 'twas not to be.



Not sure about this. "Since '09" I usually take to mean the end of '09. As in, since the date mentioned. The time after it. I can see including the rest of the year in that, though.

Considering the free fall the economy was in when Obama took office, it seems a little ridiculous to think that it would suddenly be arrested. The real question is, once the economy stopped tanking, has it been getting better?

According to the jobless rate and the Dow, yeah. Probably not as fast as most would like, but yeah, it's getting better.



Well, it was incredibly poor taste. And I knew you weren't seriously putting that forward, but a joke that isn't funny, just offensive, is still offensive.




You cited nothing, I had to look up everything you were talking about and you very much cherry pick data to suit your ends.

I think the kettle is calling.

Tell you what, I am already tired of arguing with you. Not because I can't defend my position, it just doesn't matter to people like you Write all you want, accuse all you want, color Obamas regime in a good light all you want, I could care less anymore, you aren't looking at the real data, only what you want too. Plus, you don't get a say so in our election so why does it matter even if I "brought you around"?

Regarding me bringing up the taxes, I never said he has raised taxes RIGHT NOW. However, I am sure you are right, taxes will continue to drop under Obama if he is re-elected. We don't have anything to worry about over the next 4 years, everything is slowly getting better, we will all be fine. Glad to hear it.

Lastly, you still didn't address how we will repay all of our recent debt, of which, 4 trillion is Bush's fault and 6 trillion is Obama's. Do you want to continue to avoid that since you know what the answer is and how it will effecctively prove my point and negate yours?

"I'll wait, no pressure".....

unsubscribed now, please continue to post your drivel and hero worship. I only wish we could send Obama to Canada so he could fix everything there for you guys.

dc

 

[Camby]

I forgot to post this before I unsubscribed from this thread. It will save you from the pressure of looking it up. Just a site describing how the real unemployment rate of 8.5% unemployement at the end of December 2011 is actually a true number of 17.5%. But hey, it's just a number right, I am sure somewhere your previously cited info includes all the missing data to get us to that real number....right...right?

You don't need to answer, I know who I am voting for and nothing you will post will change that. I need real data and answers, not "colorized" info.

http://useconomy.about.com/od/suppl1/f/real_unemployment_rate.htm

Unsubscribing again to go skulk in the shadows

dc

 

[tsst]

Boy I got way behind on this thread ...

Actually I posted the Madonna thing not because she likes Obama. I could really not care any less about Madonna's opinion on absolutely anything. She called him a black muslim. I just found it funny that she was either blindly supporting someone she doesn't even know (ie he has always claimed not to be muslim) or maybe she does know him very well.:shrugs:

I posted the Chavez article not because of guilt by association. Guilt by association is reserved more for people like Ayers and Wright. I posted the Chavez article assuming he endorsed Obama because he likes his policies. When a socialist dictator publicly endorses the policies of a US President it makes me at least raise an eyebrow as to why.

Btw the way it's not just Chavez. The Castro family has also. And the Communist party of the USA. And the muslim brotherhood. And Gen Kadafi. Hmmm...

 

[Outcast]

"The fact that we are here today to debate raising America’s debt limit is a sign of leadership failure. It is a Sign that the US Government cannot pay its own bills. It is a sign that we now depend on ongoing financial assistance from foreign countries to finance our Government’s reckless fiscal policies. ...Increasing America’s debt weakens us domestically and internationally. Leadership means that 'the buck stops here'. Instead, Washington is shifting the burden of bad choices today onto the backs of our children and Grandchildren. America has a debt problem and a failure of leadership. Americans deserve better."

SENATOR BARACK HUSSEIN OBAMA, MARCH 2006

I believe this quote basically depicts why I don't like the man.

 

[beautifullywild77]

I think that is exactly what it does. Like it or not in Canada or here in the US, I could care less. Obama is terrible for this country. I do not know of one single change he has affected that has benifited this Country. He complained that Bush had us 4 trillion in debt when he left, Obama has us over 6 trillion in debt but he doesn't bring that up and when he IS cornered on it, it is Bush's fault. On a related note, I have often wondered if a paternity test were performed, would those even be Obama's kids? Afterall, he so far hasn't been responsible for anything else in his life, so surely he can't have been responsible for the act that produce the children right?

He promised the American public that his "obamacare" would come with a price tag of approximately $950 billion and now it comes with a price tag of $approximately $1.5 trillion. That does not include additional spending not included to carry out the mandates over the years. He has had 3 years to make changes he promised and hasn't and now that there is an election coming, suddenly it is apparent that the problems he inherited are much worse than he ever thought. SO, is he too incompetent to have made that distinction sooner or is he to incompetent to have started making real changes?

He touts he has created 4.5 million private sector jobs. Well, in tuth he has, but at the expense of our hard earned tax dollars via his "stimulous". The danged stimulous isn't free, someone has to pay for it right? His "shovel ready jobs is nothing short of a falsehood laid upon the Americans dumb enough to believe him and believe there is such a thing as a free lunch. If I hurt Obama voters and supporter, oh well, I don't plan to apologize. So, his "shovel ready" jobs seem to be shovels ready to scoop his loads of crap. Here is the original cost and how it has moved....brace yourself, it hasn't went down any. So those jobs were created at the expense of other hard working Americans to help stimulate the economy. Even after the stimulous, unemployement has not dipped below 8%. I am not sure I can afford more of his great ecomonic ideas.

February 2009 - $787 billion
January 2010 - $862 billion
August 2010 - $814 billion
February 2011 - $821 billion
May 2011 - $830 billion
August 2011 - $825 billion
February 2012 - $831 billion
August 2012 - $833 billion
​

I work as a project manager in construction. Insert that title in any manager position and guess what would happen if we couldn't project costs better than that? I am betting I would be fired before 4 years were up.




He IS like Chavez, given the chance I am certain Obama would centralize as much as he could. I am sorry but I can't believe people still support him. He has done nothing benificial for this country, only cost us more and more taxes. You may sit in Canada and see no problems with it, but when my children are born saddled with more debt than we can hope to repay (will happen very soon), I have a problem with that. I blame him AND Bush for it. Both were idiots in my opinion. I am betting Romney will not be any better, HOWEVER, he is a succesful business man so maybe there is a chance. He at least understands the simple economic principals that obama can not grasp.

Like Chip and the others said, these fringe leaders and dictators like him because a multitude of reasons, two of the most important are he thinks like them governmentally and he is a weak leader. He has devalued our country both economically and "physically". The man lies constantly, he couldn't meet with one of our valued allies at a certain time of crisis but has the time to make tv show appearance and fundraise. C'mon, that shows the world what he thinks of Isreal, he doesn't care.

Sorry to get riled up I just don't like a condesending tone directed at this issue when you have no true vseted interest. Unless you want to argue that our politics affect you, but obviously you have no issues with Obabmas policies since you seem to try and stir the pot to his defense so much. So ultimately, you seem to be happy with him.

Sorry for any errors, but I am genuienly irritated by your flippant attitude towards our countries demise. If others agree with you, then guess what, I am irritated with them also. Not that it matters to them, but it is the way I feel. Unfortunately, we are likely saddled with this imbacile for another 4 years because people think we need to give him "a little more time" to see his changes. It didn't take Reagan and Clinton 2 terms to correct the economy did it? So why should it take him that long?

dc

Very well said Camby!

 

[beautifullywild77]

Man I must spread rep around before giving it to Tsst, Outcast, and Camby! dagnabbit!

 

[starsevol]

Man I must spread rep around before giving it to Tsst, Outcast, and Camby! dagnabbit!

Smart men, all three. Shame one of them can't be president.

 

[Nova_C]

Tell you what, I am already tired of arguing with you. Not because I can't defend my position, it just doesn't matter to people like you Write all you want, accuse all you want, color Obamas regime in a good light all you want, I could care less anymore, you aren't looking at the real data, only what you want too. Plus, you don't get a say so in our election so why does it matter even if I "brought you around"?

You haven't addressed what I have linked. If you won't link to this 'real data' that you supposedly have, but will not tell me about, not sure what else I can do. I have not expected you to take my word for it, but I have linked back to factcheck.org, which is a pretty well respected site for valid, unbiased information. If factcheck.org is wrong, tell me why, don't just throw your hands up in the air because I won't take your word for it.

I know who I am voting for and nothing you will post will change that.

I think this says it all. It doesn't matter what happens, eh? Doesn't matter what evidence I post. You believe what you believe and maybe it's right and maybe it's wrong but that doesn't matter because you've made your decision. And nothing will ever change that.

 

[tsst]

One sunny day in January, 2013, an old retired Marine approached the White House from across Pennsylvania Avenue where he'd been sitting on a park bench.

He spoke to the U.S. Marine standing guard and said, "I would like to go in and meet with President Obama."

The Marine looked at the man and said, "Sir, Mr. Obama is no longer President and no longer resides here." The old man said, "Okay," and walked away.

The following day the same man approached the White House and said to the same Marine, "I would like to go in and meet with President Obama."

The Marine again told the man, "Sir, as I said yesterday, Mr. Obama is no longer President and no longer resides here."

The man thanked him and again just walked away. The third day the same man approached the White House and spoke to the very same U.S. Marine, saying, "I would like to go in and meet with President Obama.

"The Marine, understandably agitated at this point, looked at the man and said, "Sir, this is the third day in a row you have been here
asking to speak to Mr. Obama.

I've told you already that Mr. Obama is no longer the President and no longer resides here. Don't you understand?"

The old man looked at the Marine and said, "Oh, I understand. I just love hearing it."

The Marine snapped to attention, saluted, and said, "See you tomorrow, Sir."

10 chars!!!

 

[beautifullywild77]

hehehehehehe

 

[kathylove]

"Smart men, all three. Shame one of them can't be president."

There are several people here, among my friends, and among other people I have read about, that I would prefer to vote for over the choices we have been given. But none of them have enough money and influence to finance a campaign, unfortunately!