Obama for president in 2012? Will you vote for him?

[Charlotteman 13]

First of all I was an enthusiastic Obama supporter in 2008. I thought he was the best man for the job, someone who could clean up the appalling mess Bush left behind. How proud I was to vote for him!

I voted for change. I voted for progress. I voted for a return to American freedoms. I voted for a return to sane economic policies....

I got none of those things. I got Bush Part 2. I got a president that rules to the right of Bush--- in a multitude of areas. I got a president that frightens me more than Bush, and that's quite a remarkable thing.

Obama's first day in office saw the "corporate community" flood the White House and Executive governmental apparatus. And after a year or so, the thinly veiled mask of corporatism became obvious. Now it's glaringly obvious.

Obama's former chief of staff Daley is a former JP Morgan CEO. Rahm Emmaneul was also a Goldman Sachs big boy. Reading down a column of Obama's cabinet is like reading a who's-who of the Corporate Elite. Most high Federal governmental positions are being held by corporate big wigs.

How can Obama "clean up" the economic mess when the very causes of the problems are running things! Truth is, Obama was a Corporatist all along. He had us all fooled. He had us fooled on so many levels, that he quite literally takes the cake. A liar that makes Billy Clinton look like a saint.

Some (there are many) reasons I will not vote for President Obama in 2012:

*** He is a Corporatist who has created a modern Fascist state. I guess the modern term for it is Corporotacracy, but it still sounds like Fascism to me. The government is becoming so entangled with corporations, it's hard to tell where one stops and the other starts. Even federal prisons are going corporate!!

*** Obama is a right wing warmonger. He escalated the Afghanistan war theatre, and has attacked more countries than Bush. He has threatened almost every Middle Eastern country. Instead of opening dialog with Iran, he is just continuing the American tradition of threatening them.

*** Obama breaks promises worse than any politician in recent memory. From medical marijuana, to Capital Gains eliminations for small businesses, to kicking lobbyists out of Washington, to fully supporting gay rights....the list is endless.

*** Obama fully supports smashing constitutional freedoms to smitherines. He has continued the Patriot Act AND signed NDAA which allows Americans to be held without charges, a lawyer etc. He fully supports spying on American citizens, and breaking into people's homes without a warrant.

*** Obama signs every tax cut for rich people that reaches his desk. Of course he pretends in advance to be opposed to those Bush tax cuts, but it's all b.s. If he really opposed those tax cuts, why doesn't he fight them! take the case to the American people!

*** Which leads me to my final point. Obama is much more inept at getting through "his agenda" than any president that I can remember, even Jimmy Carter. I have a feeling the Bush economic stuff really is Obama's agenda....

Well this is my two cents. What do you folks think?

by the way, I would never in a million years vote for a Republican. This might be like 1996, a year I sat out the Presidential contest. No way was Clinton or Dole gonna get my vote. Just like Obama won't get my vote, nor any of those Republican clowns.

Edited January 25, 2012 by Charlotteman

[cityboi 224]

I certainly understand the frustration. Has Obama been a perfect president? no. I don't think any president will ever be perfect. But its going to take more than 4 years to clean up the mess Bush put us into. I clearly will not be voting for Romeny or Gingrich. We don't need to return to the same policies that started the economic meltdown in 2008. Even If I were republican, I would not vote for Romney. He comes off like a used car salesman trying to convince me to buy a crappy car. He just seems like a very shady and dishonest person. Gingrich is scary ,but I do think Obama would beat him in the general election.

In your case you see Obama and Romney/Gingrich as the two evils. The only downside to sitting out on an election is that it could help contribute to the "worse of the two evils" getting elected. That would be the case if many democrats think that way.

Edited January 26, 2012 by cityboi

[richyb83 954]

Nice post! True no president will ever be perfect...

Our leader has already been appointed to us...like it or not we have 4 more years of Obama. Those state caucuses are rigged(see Santorum in Iowa) too long to explain in detail. The only other choices they give us are globalist puppets Romney or Gingrich??

Ron Paul has an interesting message; but he is not part of the "establishment"; therefore he is ignored and swept under the corporate-media rug; like he was in the debate earlier this week...has NO chance. Big Brother informs us Paul is not-electable. When the real fact is Gingrich & Romney are the "unelectable" ones....

The Republicrats are yanking our chains! They did a great job with the entertaining flavor of the month candidates...Perry, Bachmann & Cain...

Edited January 29, 2012 by richyb83

[cityboi 224]

The GOP should be worried. A new poll shows Obama leading over Romney in a head to head match up in Ohio. Whats worse is that as time progresses, Ohioians have a less and less favorable opinion of Mitt Romney. No republican has won the presidency without winning Ohio.

http://politicalwire.com/archives/2012/02/01/obama_improves_in_ohio.html

[Charlotteman 13]

At the National Prayer Breakfast on Feb.2, President Obama claimed his religious faith is a guiding principle of his administration.

Omigosh didn't we hear this malarkey from the most corrupt president ever, George W. Bush? And we saw what good religion did for Bush~

Remember when it came to public light that during Ronald Reagan's last couple years in office, Nancy Reagan was running the White House through the guidance of three famous astrologers?

Do we really want our national leaders claiming supernatural influences, and looking to the paranormal to solve the nation's problems? Isn't this cause for alarm?

And why is our government funding such nonsense? Imagine what it cost the Secret Service to set up Obama's visit to this prayer breakfast...our government isn't supposed to be involved in religion, is it?

Just another blatant lie of Obama....he's about as christian as I am, which is zilch. But he is proving he is willing to pander for the votes of religious fanatics, just with the best of 'em.

Edited February 3, 2012 by Charlotteman

[nashvylle 682]

Sounds like you're upset because Obama isnt saying what you want him to. In America, you can believe what you want. I dont want people telling others what to believe.

Edited February 3, 2012 by nashvylle

[Charlotteman 13]

Sounds like you're upset because Obama isnt saying what you want him to. In America, you can believe what you want. I dont want people telling others what to believe.

Of course I totally agree. People have the right to believe anything they want. I'm talking about what politicians say in public in an official capacity.

My problem with prayer breakfasts, and praying in public, is that Obama is cheapening religious faith. He is blatantly trying to get religious fanatics' votes.

And he is doing so at taxpayer expense. We shouldn't sit by, and accept listening to religious extremism from the President of the US....... all that jesus talk, it was pure christianity. Religion is supposed to be separate from politics, yes?

And yes you're right, I wish Obama would just keep his supernatural ideas to himself. It makes many of us nervous. And I can imagine how those prayer breakfasts must go over in the European media. We're probably the laughing stock.

By the way isn't there something in the bible about praying in private?

Edited February 3, 2012 by Charlotteman

[cityboi 224]

Unfortunately all politicians pander to some group. Romney is trying to pander to Latinos making his Latino heritage known and by showing members of his family on the Latino side. Gingrich was also pandering to Latinos hinting he would consider Florida's Marco Rubio for the VP spot. John McCain pandered to women by putting Sarah Palin on the ticket. A lot of women thought that was insulting. I wish pandering would stop on both side. Its so disrespectful to these groups. Bottom line, Obama hasn't been perfect and he hasn't fulfilled all his promises. But I'd rather have Obama any day over Romney or Gingrich. I'll be voting for Obama because we can't afford to turn around and go back. I don't want to see another economic collapse due to republican economic policies. Its amazing that people don't get it. Every time a republican gets in office, the economy slides.

Edited February 3, 2012 by cityboi

[nashvylle 682]

I am a Christian, and Charlotteman, I only pray in private. The Bible does say to pray in private. The Bible also teaches free will, which America is fortunate to have. I find it ironic that I tend to agree with atheists sometimes more than self-righteous people. We are all equal, no matter what a person feels.

I do also think that Obama is not a true Christian, but that is just my opinion and I have no proof.

As far as the economy goes bad whenever a republican gets in office, that's just ludicrous. I am fiscally conservative and socially liberal, and honestly, I think we need to raise taxes by 2%, lower corporate taxes, and cut entitlements by a TON. Everybody gives up something. Neither president is doing that, and it concerns me. However I think Romney would be most probable to raise taxes a little and cut entitlements a little. We'll see.

Edited February 3, 2012 by nashvylle

[cityboi 224]

My issues is with the Bush tax cuts. The wealthiest Americans don't need such large tax cuts. Those tax cuts are part of the problems why this country is in so much debt. Republicans will say if you raise taxes on the wealthy it will be a job killer. Obama is not seeking to raise taxes on businesses. He wants to raise them on personal incomes of the wealthy. That doesn't affect jobs. The rich will still have plenty of money to help spur the economy. I am totally against a flat tax because that would lower taxes for the wealthy even more while raising taxes on the poorest of Americans.

"Trickle down economics" don't work because if it did, the economy would have been booming at the end of Bush's second term.

As for Obama's religion, I really don't care if he is Christian or not. He wasn't voted into to office to be a pope like figure. We are going down a dangerous path if we start combining religion with politics. Domestic and foreign policy shouldn't be guided by religion. That's why there is a big mess in the middle east today. Those countries have been fighting each other for thousands of years over religion.

Edited February 3, 2012 by cityboi

[Charlotteman 13]

Gosh, I didn't mean for this thread to become a discussion on religious belief, etc-lol

I think almost all of agree that people should have the right to believe anything they please. And even though I'm an atheist, I would be the first one on the streets fighting, if the govt ever tried to make religion illegal.

I brought up this prayer breakfast business because it's yet another highly questionable political thing that Obama is involved in. When Obama says he's a christian, we must take him at his word. But how many of us think the president actually does pray in private~

I don't care if the President is a muslim, a christian, a Jew, a Buddhist, a Hindu, or even a believer in Ra the Sun God. But whatever he is, even if he's just a boring atheist like me, he shouldn't be using it to pander for votes. (Crass is the word that comes to mind.) When I voted for Obama in 2008, I would have never imagined him being involved with such diversionary politics.

By the way, during the infamous breakfast, Obama spoke of his visit with Billy Graham....and how they had become friends. And prayed for each other. Isn't that just lovely? The President of the United States of America having a warm meeting with a known anti-semite and racist!

Obama said he was so inspired after Billy prayed for him......maybe the President should meet up with David Duke as well. He could get even more inspiration!

Edited February 5, 2012 by Charlotteman

[cityboi 224]

Obama pulls ahead of Romney in Virginia poll as the economy improves.

http://www.washingtontimes.com/blog/inside-politics/2012/feb/8/obama-pulls-ahead-romney-virginia-poll/

In addition Obama leads Romney in Ohio and Obama pulled ahead of Romney in Florida.

[Charlotteman 13]

^^ This doesn't surprise me at all. The more the American people see Obama's Republican opponents, the more people will flock to the President in droves. It will be a massive defeat for the Republicans in 2012, on the presidential level. And yes I have a crystal ball.

But Obama does not deserve re-election. I think he deserves impeachment. He swore, in 2008, to uphold the Constitution of the United States. He has failed to do so, as evidenced by his re signing Bush's Patriot Act. He also signed the NDAA which smashes the US Constitution to bits. Obama is supposed to be protecting the Constitution, yes? He has failed to do so, and he should be removed from office, let alone re-elected.

An interesting commentary by prominent progressive Rachel Maddow re:Obama's frightening moves to become a modern dictator.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XBdPEK5pNtE&feature=results_video&playnext=1&list=PLF2EE8F9B7523E752

Edited February 9, 2012 by Charlotteman

[Dan@6439 0]

I think I probably will. Romney is the only one I would possibly vote for if he was running against Obama, but that chance isn't very high. The other Rebublican candidates I think cater to much to the Tea Party or Libertarians and there is so much I disagree with them about. I think Romney will ultimately win the Republican nomination but the Republicans won't get their act together and unite to nominate him early. Those who are saying now that Santorum is the most electable against Obama are fooling themselves. Most Democrats like me, and even the majority working closely with the President's campaign still believe it will be Romney in the end. Romney is the only one who can beat Obama. A lot of Republicans are in denial about this. By the time many finally admit he's got the best chance to beat Obama, it may be to late and Romney will be a lot weakened by a divided, long campaign, which would make it a lot more favorable for the President to win. The Republicans need to wake up now and decide would they rather have Romney who they distrust, or the President who they even distrust more?

[Charlotteman 13]

I'm begining to think Obama was re elected ages ago.....the coming election in November is starting to look like a high school vote for Class President. i.e. silly as hell. In this case, a silly hoax.

In my most humble opinion, I think important federal elections are rigged. A 1950s training manual from the CIA was leaked several years ago. There's a whole chapter on how to rig "foreign" elections, how to influence "foreign" medias re: their national elections, etc.

hummmm....if the American government was involved in such unscrupulous and illegal acts back in the 1950s, we can only assume they are doing even worse things today (?)

With the absurd Electoral College in place, only two states would have to be rigged to insure a candidate's election: Florida and Ohio. And didn't we already see it happen with our own eyes, in the year 2000, when Florida's voting system was exposed as the Third World sham that it is?

Folks, even Pres. Jimmy Carter, who has been a UN International Elections Monitor (for decades) has raised serious doubts about America's ability to have a fair election.

The Corporate Elite have their man in place. They aren't letting him go anywhere. He pretends to be a Progressive and at least ~80% of the people believe it. But his record is firmly to the right of Bush. Obama is the perfect Corporate candidate, because most of the American people are too under educated or unsophisticated to see through the corporate media's illusion that he's a liberal/progressive.

The Corporate/Banking Elite probably re elected Obama ages ago, and this November will essentially be a mass staged event, so the sheeple will think they actually have a choice.

Edited May 5, 2012 by Charlotteman

[nashbill 78]

Can someone please explain to me why a sitting first term president gets a bye in the primary process for his second term. I never really thought about it before. i do not remember any president being challenged by anyone in his own political party for there second term. Also, why by the time the state I live in holds its primaries, the process really becomes irrelevant. The candidates are already running for president by that time. I feel my vote will not count anyhow. Living in a very red state, TN, my vote becomes a throwaway because the Electoral College gives all delegates to the majority winner, 51%, you get them all. We don't advocate this type of system to any country trying to create a democracy. Just some random musings after a few cocktails.

[nashbill 78]

Oh, as to the actual topic, I will vote for Obama. Until the Republicans stop using gay issues as scare tactics to win elections, I can not vote for a Republican for President.

[Charlotteman 13]

Can someone please explain to me why a sitting first term president gets a bye in the primary process for his second term. I never really thought about it before. I do not remember any president being challenged by anyone in his own political party for their second term.

It's happened several times in the past decades. Ronald Reagan challenged sitting president Gerald Ford for the nomination in 1976 and lost. Teddy Kennedy challenged sitting Pres. Jimmy Carter for the nomination in 1980 and lost. Pat Buchanan challenged sitting president George H.W. Bush in 1992, and lost.

Sitting presidents manage to win their party's nomination, but when an intra-party challenge is thrown at a sitting president, history shows that president will lose in the general elecion.

1976: Ford lost the general election

1980: Carter lost the general election

1992: George H.W. Bush lost the general elction

Edited May 5, 2012 by Charlotteman

[nashbill 78]

^Thanks for the info. I need to pay more attention.

[Charlotteman 13]

.....I feel my vote will not count anyhow. Living in a very red state, TN, my vote becomes a throwaway because the Electoral College gives all delegates to the majority winner, 51%, you get them all. We don't advocate this type of system to any country trying to create a democracy....

I agree with this assessment. Under the current American voting system, only voters of Florida and Ohio matter. The Electoral College is utter maddness. I can't believe it still exists.

Actually, having the Electoral College in place makes it easier for the Elite to rig an election. If our systm was "one man-one vote", the crooks would have to rig votes all over the country. The Electoral College enables them the luxury of only having to rig two states.

Edited May 5, 2012 by Charlotteman

[nashbill 78]

George Bush would never have been president. He did not win a simple majority of the voters. Without the help of Florida's voting fiasco and a brother that happened to be governor at the time, he would have been another side note in history.

[cityboi 224]

George Bush would never have been president. He did not win a simple majority of the voters. Without the help of Florida's voting fiasco and a brother that happened to be governor at the time, he would have been another side note in history.

I still believe Al Gore really won that election. After thousands of votes in heavily a democratic county mysteriously got thrown out, I'm convinced of that.

[Charlotteman 13]

President Obama just gave a tepid nod of "support" for gay marriage, during a television interview. Vice President Biden delivered a message of firm support for gay marriage prior to Obama's carefully worded statement.

Gay marriage is being used as a wedge issue by both sides. Of course right wing Republicans love gay bashing, and will use this whole thing to appeal to their lowest echelon base....but the Democrats used it in a most awful manner.

Pres. Obama and Vice President Biden started all the gay dialog during final preparations and the announcement that Chinese banks will now be allowed to open/operate in the U.S. All the gay talk diverted the public's attention from this surprising development.

http://businessnewsd...ank-to-us/3809/

In communist China aren't things "owned by the people/government"? If so, does the Chinese government effectively own Chinese banks?

If China does indeed have control/ultimate ownership of the Chinese banks, that means one thing: Communist Chinese banks will be operating on U.S. soil.

Is this something Americans will accept? The American people seemed to have accepted most manufacturing jobs being transferred to China, so perhaps they will accept this banking thing too.

I personally think it's an outrage that Obama and Biden started all the gay talk to divert the public's attention from this most startling development. Shame on Obama, Biden and their campaign team for this nefarious, ugly, well thought out staged performance.

***and by the way, Obama still hasn't aggressively pushed for DOMA's repeal, has he? And I would be surprised if he lifts one single finger to advance gay marriage. He wants gay dollars and gay votes. He might fool some gay people. He certainly doesn't fool me. Obama and Biden are, in my opinion, just savy, and sometimes sinister political operatives.

Edited May 11, 2012 by Charlotteman

[cityboi 224]

Honestly I think the majority vote should rule, not the electoral college. If the majority vote ruled, democrats would win almost every election due to highly populated urban areas across the country.

[Charlotteman 13]

Yahoo News has oodles of "news" articles today that are naked propaganda. All suggesting black voters will still vote for Obama, even if they are religiously opposed to gay marriage.

The articles "interviewed" two or three black people, and the corporate controlled media created three made-up "news" stories out of it. A sickening display of corporate media attempting to meddle in U.S. elections.

We can now consider Yahoo News to be in the gutter of corporate American "journalism", along with CNN, Fox, et al.