dvdjunkie wrote:What you are really saying Super Aurora is that you don't have an answer to any of those questions, am I correct?
If Obama is a "moderate conservative" I think you have him mixed up with wrong guy. There is nothing about him that is or was conservative,
Obama isn't a liberal. He's not a socialist (regardless of what the conservatives may say), his healthcare plan was basically romney's plan 2.0. His foreign policy is basically moderate, his economic policy takes some inspirations from "business leaders" and corporate ideals, even though they'd talk trash about him anyway because they want a 100% tool. And on other things as well.
So no, Obama would be labeled as a center right person on his record. He's not anywhere near a liberal, but he's not a full conservative by any means. That's why I said more so as moderate conservative as oppose to full hard-on liberal.
Again you have no clue how political spectrum works. You think that if it doesn't fit your views or answers you automatically label them the opposite of opposing side you're for. This is why bipartisan is a mess that it causes and needs to go. It breaks away any sort of moderate standings left in politics world. More and more politicians are leaning more and more right, even in the democratic party.
Even some big liberals I know, say Obama isn't liberal.
dvdjunkie wrote:and I think this will point that out:
A good friend of mine sent this to me:
"23 million unemployed/underemployed, 47 million on welfare, $5.5 Trillion in new debt, 5.5 Million homes in crisis/foreclosure, $716 Billion taken from Medicare, $1.9 Trillion in new taxes on 1-January, $4,500 drop in Household Income, 100% increase in gasoline prices, 14% drop in oil drilling leases on private land, 64% drop in drilling leases on public lands. How do those numbers add up for you?"
Please explain this as eloquently as you can.
That's completely stupid.
1. Obama came in with the unemployment rate at 7.8 percent. A majority of his term has been the swelling from the aftermath of the recession. The stimulus did a lot of good, but it wasn't enough, and so its just now coming back down to pre Obama level's (8 percent). Those people out of work were going to be out of work regardless because we were loosing 750,000 jobs a month every month regardless of who came in and over time that has slowly turned around. Plus, you can't say that 'x amount of people are out of work' when a portion of those were out of work much longer than the recession.
2. Again, 47 million on public assistance is directly the cause of the recession to begin with, not indicative of the actual amount of people on assistance as opposed to when Obama took office, and destruction of the middle class because of many policies already set in motion by the Bush administration and going back further such as the ridiculous tax cuts and huge austerity cuts to assistance programs and the collapse of the housing market. And that goes for those in debt and those who have lost their homes.
3. 716 billion taken from medicare? That was money that was shaved off the top from the private insurers. That money was just overhead that the private companies would take in from the government as extra surcharges that had nothing to do with the customers benefits and went right into their profit margins. It has nothing to do with beneficiary spending, indeed, it was waste and abuse. I have to say even as hating the bill that its one of the best things in it.
4. He didn't raise any new taxes. In fact i'd go as far as saying that was just a lie to begin with. There have been no taxes levied federally, the states have done their individual things, but a majority of these are small and pitifully insignificant.
5. 4,500 drop in housing income is a lie, it was actually 2,500, and because again of the recession. An still the numbers will in housing income drop will decrease as time goes.
6. 100% increase in gasoline prices is completely misunderstanding the issue. Obama doesn't control the gas prices. That is driven by speculators on wall street who jack up the price depending on their bets. Its not illegal, but its immoral, and its not something Obama can necessarily change unless he went after making it illegal, something he isn't going to do. Supply and Demand has not been an indicator for gas prices since before the Bush administration.
7. Those drilling bans were directly in regards to drilling on our shores, in public and private property such as wild life reserves or natural habitats, and also in regards to Obama's shifting to more offshore drilling to offset that.
Not to mention you failed to give me a source where you're friend "found" this from.
dvdjunkie wrote:I love to read you as you are straining to keep from crying because you might be wrong about our 'ruler' and maybe it will change your thoughts about YOUR future and the future of the children who will some day grown up into responsible human beings.
One, I don't cry over this. Why should I? This isn't a dead relative dying or something. You dramatize everything in effort to make your self look legitimate like in the last two quotes below.
Second, it won't change anything of my thoughts about anything. Especially from a guy like you who relies on Fox News as "legitimate unbiased new source"
dvdjunkie wrote:I think that there a number of you who go through life with blinders on and not one original thought except to be against what other people are for.
That's not true at all and you know it. I support Obama this term on two things: his foreign policy and his social policies. The latter being much more important than economic as this defines rights for humans as humans beings. And even still his economic policies, even if they're not perfect(nothing is perfect) from legitimate sources i've seen, look much better than Romney's ever is. Even Ben Stein, a professional economist and big friend of Fox News that you love so much, stated that Romney plan is not fiscally possible. Did you not watch that video I posted? The plan Romney wants would make the economic crisis even worse than first two years of Obama's years in office.
I don't see how Romney will be able to do much better when he already proposes adding 500 billion per year to the deficit on defense spending that nobody, including the defense administration itself, actually wants. On top of this, his plan calls for a massive reduction in tax revenue totaling roughly another 200-300 billion dollars per year (despite his ridiculous claims of lowering taxes while closing deductions, earning either a net zero tax decrease for EVERYBODY, or a shift of tremendous tax burdens directly onto the middle class from the wealthy).
So in total, he's going in with the plan to ADD 0.7 trillion to the deficit, right off the bat. Even if he cuts literally ALL entitlement spending (which of course is neither feasible nor possible when Medicare and Social Security are concerned), he'll still have a yearly deficit totaling roughly 1.4 trillion dollars--greater than Obama's current amounts.
Mind you, as governor, Mitt Romney INCREASED spending[
http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter ... -massachu/ ] . So his record is in fact worse than Obama's when it comes to decreasing spending and tackling the deficit.
Furthermore, when we look at things from a historic perspective, we can see that incumbent Democrats have by and large helped reduce the deficit more than Republicans, who have presided over increases to the deficit.
dvdjunkie wrote:I thank those eleven people who sent me PM's about this situation. And if you didn't think there was bullying going on here at UD, that is the reason why they have not contributed their thoughts to the thread. Those eleven people shall remain nameless because they trust me to never let anyone know whom they are.
Then why even bring it up if you want to have their names remain anonymous? One or two, I could buy ( I can guess CJ and carolinakid are one of the few probably), but 11? Sure. Also in fact why even bring this up. It hold nothing to election or this debate. You're just trying to play "victim" here.
dvdjunkie wrote:Okay, now back to the throwing stones at the old guy.
I love how you always bring this up as if to gain any sort of sympathy for you or as if you're trying in desperate attempt to make us look like "bad guys".
