Why I Am Now an Anybody but Obama Voter

Renew America ^ | 25 Sep 2012 | Tim Dunkin

[muawiyah]

naw, mitt supports abortion on demand with that 'health of the mother' exception. what he does is prove he is a convincing liar if you believe otherwise.

so, a convincing liar as president or an unconvincing liar as present.

so many choices so little time. best get after the RINOS now ~ prepare the impeachment resolutions. NOTE: romney's massachusetts brain trust and some of his wealthier backers are already working over the lists of potential/probable appointees. we must begin our attacks on those people now.

[Fletcher J]

Sorry that you’re so defensive, sweetie, on behalf of the author. Is it someone you know? I’ll stand by my comment, however, which is entirely logical and informed.

This article is kind of like reading a restaurant review that starts with the author saying that until this week, he couldn’t discern any difference between eating horse shit and a decent meal. Although I may ultimately agree with the author’s conclusion about the restaurant, I would decline to consider him an expert on food.

Likewise, anyone who couldn’t until recently see any difference between Obama and Romney has been ignorant of the facts, and I’ll look to others for deep politcal insights, thank you.

[Verginius Rufus]

In 2008 I wrote down the names in order of my preference, when there were 9 candidates, and Romney was next-to-last (ahead only of Ron Paul)...McCain was third-to-last.

This time I was hoping for a conservative that could win, but I was never convinced that any of the conservatives who ran in the primaries could beat Obama in the general election.

Romney is pro-American and pro-free enterprise. His views on the so-called social issues are too liberal for my liking, but he claims to be pro-life now. In any event, if he is elected he will want to be re-elected, so conservatives will have some leverage with him. If Obama is re-elected, we have none--and he's likely to be more extreme, more lawless, and more arrogant than he has been in his first term. Heaven forbid that he gets a chance to replace one of the conservative Supreme Court justices with a clone of the two justices he has picked so far.

[muawiyah]

yeah, we're voting religion this time ~ at least that Ann woman is ~ she's still carping about religious bigotry ~ and she doesn't mean her own.

Mitt and his mittbots gotta' get off that stuff and right now. the slightest hint of it will lose him a good 20 million votes ~

Sounded so MOOSHELL and her ashamed for the country angle.

one term of that stuff is enough.

[txrangerette]

And thank YOU for dropping by...

:)

[txrangerette]

Count on livius to be so very...RATIONAL.

Thanks for your input.

(You “Mittbot”, you /sarc.)

[Yashcheritsiy]

Not defensive. I’m merely amused by the fact that seem like you don’t have any reading skills.

But then again, that’s more common on here than a lot of FReepers like to think, so I won’t hold it against you.

Nevertheless, there are a lot of good reasons to see Romney and Obama as very similar. You could start with their mutual support for government-run health care, and move on to other things like their past support for abortion, the gay agenda, gun control, higher taxes, forcing religious organisations to conform to government mandates against their own doctrines and consciences, illegal immigration, etc. etc.

As much as you might pretend they are, these aren’t trivial. It’s stupid to say otherwise. that’s why I say your comment is ignorant. If you really and truly believe that there is a wide gap between Obama and Romney *across the board*, then you probably don’t have any business voting, much less commenting on this article or this site. the differences are a matter of small degrees on most things - it’s the one area of foreign policy where Romney finally started putting a difference.

[Cincinatus' Wife]

As with Rush, once you’ve said it, there’s nothing more to say! :)

[txrangerette]

When they have only one word left, “Mittbott”, you know it’s over...

[Lancey Howard]

I’ll vote for the ticket that promises to restore honor and dignity to the military, first by returning to DADT and barring declared homos from serving. Where does the Bunny/Fudd ticket stand on this?

[brightright]

Voting for the lesser of two evils has been working so well. Continuing to support the liberal Rino candidate is what gave us Obama. Every Election we have been given a more liberal candidate. Till now we have a candidate who can’t even pretend he is not liberal. He has not repudiated even one of his liberal policies or statements. But he did say he was severely conservative so he must be. No matter who wins this election it is bad for the Country. As long as we continue to accept and support liberals they win, and the Country loses.

[muawiyah]

The one sure way you know you’ve got a mittbot on the line is they start kvetching about ‘mittbot’ ~ get over it. bushbots did ~ certainly you can too. RINOs are all alike in that regard. buck up.

[muawiyah]

we really do have to go after this guy's appointees right off the bat. any of them from massachusetts or other new england states must be opposed to the bitter end even if it shuts down the Senate.

no one from bain, with bain, at bain, or involved in any firm with any dealings with bain may be allowed to pass, and no one who ever worked for the mccain core team either.

[Grampa Dave]

Obama lied again and this time Americans died in Libya!

Carter is Obama. Obama is Carter.

Both are Traitor Losers, who hate America!

Jimmy Carter's presidency was doomed by the Iranian hostage crisis after the US embassy in Tehran was stormed by Islamist extremists following the Iranian revolution.

A year after the 52 Americans were taken hostage, Carter lost the 1980 election. The hostages were released just as President Ronald Reagan, who defeated Carter, was sworn in.

1979

2012

As Clint noted, the Empty Chair improved by codetoad:

It is past time to fire Barack and his empty chair and have both of them hit the road back to Chicago!

Thanks to RushIsMyTeddyBear and Focault's Pendulum and for finding these morphing graphic art realities

[Terry Mross]

What scares me are the “moderates” who think Romney is too conservative.

[Yosemitest]

Obama’s smaller crowds a hint of smaller voter turnout
September 6, 2012

The main event, Obama’s acceptance speech, is scheduled for the 74,000-seat Bank of American Stadium.
Four years ago, when Obama gave a similar open-air speech at an NFL stadium in Denver he drew an energized, enthusiastic crowd of 80,000.
Steve Kerrigan, head of the DNC convention, said at a Monday morning press conference, “[The speech] at the stadium will go forth rain or shine.”

Wait, another Democrat about-face, today it was announced that President Barack Obama’s big speech on Thursday night will move from the vast Bank of America stadium to the much-smaller Time Warner indoor arena.
That is a crowd downsized by 50K, with the forecast for Charlotte on Thursday staying the same, a 40 per cent chance of rain with only the possibility of thunderstorms:
‘Overcast with a chance of a thunderstorm and a chance of rain..Chance of rain 40% with rainfall amounts near 4.8 mm possible.’
The chances of rain in the evening drop to 30 per cent.

With Obama’s speech moved indoors, there will likely be thousands of disappointed fans.
However, with enthusiasm surrounding the Obama campaign seemingly diminishing, there have been concerns that the stadium could even be filled.
This in nothing new for the “Forward” 2012 campaign, when Barack Obama launched his re-election at Ohio State University on Karl Marx’s birthday it was to a stadium full of mostly empty seats.


The official Barack Obama Tumblr boasts a figure from ThinkProgress that 14,000 attended the event, that is only 70% of the stadium’s seating capacity.
Keep in mind that this was less than half the crowd that greeted the President in Ohio only two years ago.
It’s a good thing Obama aides maintain that the president appearing before smaller crowds is all part of the new more intimate plan.
Apparently, Obama’s team wants the American people to believe that they are intentionally working to minimize the turnout of supporters at 2012 campaign events.
Campaign spokeswoman Jen Psaki said,
“Our focus right now is on exciting our supporters and winning over undecided voters
and the smaller and medium-size events are the best venue to accomplish that because the president can closely engage with the crowd.”

COME ON MAN!
Recent polls show that Republican voters are far more enthusiastic about the upcoming election than Democrats.
Figures show almost 2/3 of Republicans describe themselves as either extremely enthusiastic, or very enthusiastic, about voting out Obama in 2012.
What is important about this is at the same time Democratic enthusiasm is dropping.
Only 21 percent of Democrats say they are extremely enthusiastic about voting, and 22 percent described themselves as very enthusiastic about voting.
The real reason Obama’s speech was moved indoors was
because they couldn’t have thousands of empty seats broadcast into households across America.
Traditionally, Democrats have been very good at motivating their people to turn out and vote,
but if Democratic enthusiasm wanes a good number just may stay home or vote for the economy, not ideology.
When that happens, President Obama’s tenure will come to an end in January, 2013.

Yeah, most Democrats are TOO DEPRESSED to vote again for a Fabian Fascist, even if he IS a Kenyan TURD!

[windsorknot]

I'm not a Romney fan, but I detest King "Jug Ears" Hussein and his disastrous policies. I will vote to remove the trash from the White House.

[Tuanedge]

I’m voting Romney, because it means the country and the Constitution will die more slowly, and more people will have a chance to prepare. That’s the win. All our conservative choices have died at republican hands.

If the election makes him Reagan, then I say glory to God...but this is the age of diminished expectations.

[Fletcher J]

Glad you’re not defensive... LOL I’ll ignore your insults to get straight to the point.

Romney isn’t exactly a Reagan conservative, but in terms of the individuals themselves, Romney and Obama, there is a big difference between the two.

Romney is a decent American family man who loves his country. On the other hand, Obama was raised by various America-hating scum, and welcomes seeing this country being humbled economically, politically, and militarily.

Romney didn’t spend his formative years in Indonesia, wearing a sarong and eating dog meat. Romney’s father was American, not Kenyan. Romney’s mother was not a commie. It won’t require Romney to be elected President for Ann Romney to be proud of America. Romney didn’t spend 20 years listening to a pastor who said “Not God Bless America, god d**n America!”. Romney has never bowed to foreign leaders and gone on a world-wide apology tour. Romney has never associated with known terrorists to begin and maintain his political career. Romney has had a real job and made his own fortune, instead of spending his whole life in make-work jobs provided by political sponsors. Romney has executive experience. Romney has established a record of achievement, instead of breezing thru life with an assist from Affirmative Action. Romney is a hard worker, and not a lazy slug like Obama. Romney has been vetted, unlike Obama. Romney isn’t a narcassist who “wrote” TWO autobiographies before turning 40. Romney has never snorted cocaine or smoked pot. Romney would respect religious beliefs and free speech, unlike Obama. Romney chose conservative Paul Ryan for his running mate, Obama chose Joe Biden - to add some gravitas to the ticket! LOL Romney is promising us conservative governance, Obama is promising us liberal governance.

Bottom line is that while I might disagree with Romney on a host of issues, I trust his motives. Obama, on the other hand, wants to manage America’s decline so that we are no longer a world leader. That’s a huge and fundamental differentiator between the two.

This country would be hard-pressed to recover from another 4 years of Obama, so our best hope is to elect Romney and then hold him accountable to conservative principles. We have a chance to do that with Romney, and zero chance with a lame-duck Obama administration.

[Yashcheritsiy]

Bottom line is that while I might disagree with Romney on a host of issues, I trust his motives. Obama, on the other hand, wants to manage America’s decline so that we are no longer a world leader. That’s a huge and fundamental differentiator between the two.

That's find - but it is a differentiator that exists as a result of your own subjective opinion, not objective fact. It is your "feeling" about the candidates vis-a-vis each other. That's your right, obviously, but you can't pretend that it has to be normative for every other person that you deal with. Yet, just that attitude is the crux of your criticisms, making your criticisms unmeaningful.