or Connect
TheCatSite.com › Forums › General Forums › IMO: In My Opinion › What - no political threads?
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

What - no political threads?

post #1 of 27
Thread Starter 
4 years ago at this time, nearly every single IMO thread was based on the upcoming presidential election. Did everyone get so burned out back then that no one wants to repeat it? laughing02.gif

That being said, what do folks think about the candidates?

Obama: he's actually gotten a lot accomplished, but I don't think he took some things far enough, such as health care reform and tightening environmental rules. I'd love to see single payer health care, as without it, DH or I will always be stuck in a job that offers family health care. I'd like to seriously start my own business, but can't afford health care in the current system. He's far more moderate in some of his views than I suspected, although I doubt that republicans will agree with me on that topic. And I'm OK with that. He's got my vote again.

Romney: I can't get past 2 things about the man. The fact that as the head of a corporation he was responsible for laying off thousands of workers for offshored jobs. I haven't been able to land a job in my field for over 2 years now because such a high percentage of that work is offshored. I will never trust someone who can blatantly lay off people in the name of corporate profit to the shareholders. The other thing I can't get over is his poor judgement when he put his poor dog Shamus in a carrier on top of his car, hosed off the car to get the sh*t cleaned off, and claimed that Shamus was having fun. That's animal abuse.

Anyone want to share thoughts about the candidates? I'm rather enjoying the media mudslinging.
post #2 of 27

I'm really, really having a problem getting excited about the election this time.  And it's not really the candidates, it's the idea that Congress is so fragmented and useless that no matter who is in the big leather chair, getting anything to him/her/it to sign is going to be nearly impossible;  or gutted, porked up and worthless by the time it gets there.  

post #3 of 27
Even the guys in my office haven't said one thing about politics (4 years ago they had to be warned to cool it several times). I think everybody is sick of the whole thing.
post #4 of 27

While the President was never my guy, I had high hopes for him.  I agree that he wimped out on some things; he should have gone for a single payer system.  You know, however, that he never proposed a health care plan?  He let Congress write it.  Had he passed a single-payer plan, and put it into effect this past January, I suspect he would be undefeatable in November.

 

He has also never sent a budget to Congress, and the Democratically-controlled Senate has not passed a budget since he became President.

 

He has done some really ill-advised things...like most Presidents.  He has had some good ideas...like most Presidents.  It begins to look like the economy is slipping back into recession.  If it does, if unemployment is still over 8%, and gas is close to $4, I have a hard time imagining him getting re-elected.  Many people failed to connect the dots when they had to pay more at tax time this year; our friends were bitten to the tune of $4,000, and it was entirely because of changes in the withholding rules under the stimulus bill.

 

Mr. Romney did, indeed, ship jobs overseas.  Sometimes he did it because there was no other way to save a company.  I have some problems with Romney, at least one of which I won't mention here, but I have no reason to believe he would be any worse a President than Mr. Obama.  The office often makes the man, and I don't see where he would be likely to be an exception.

post #5 of 27
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Skippymjp View Post

I'm really, really having a problem getting excited about the election this time.  And it's not really the candidates, it's the idea that Congress is so fragmented and useless that no matter who is in the big leather chair, getting anything to him/her/it to sign is going to be nearly impossible;  or gutted, porked up and worthless by the time it gets there.  

No kidding. I've been trying to stay up on things objectively. My districts representative of congress (R) was elected for the first time last election, and he does a lot to promote himself locally. I go to his town hall meetings, respond to his e-mail polls, and post on his facebook wall about my opinions. At the last town hall meeting, I asked him what his party was doing to get jobs back home to our country and he talked about manufacturing jobs. I pushed him a little harder and asked about white collar job offshoring, as manufacturing jobs don't pay the bills in our district. He just gave me a sheepish grin and admitted that it was a difficult issue to deal with and couldn't offer any solutions. What it told me is that he hadn't even considered the topic.

Politicians are so dysfunctional these days.
post #6 of 27

As to the offshoring of jobs and the subtle theft of American jobs by illegals (of all nationalities), we need a much stricter ID method for anyone who wants to work here.  There are companies that have knowingly brought in illegals.  (Rising Phoenix transportation is one.)  They have kept their employees in essentially slavery, threatening to report them to the INS (now the USCIS).  Some have openly encouraged illegals to come in from such places as Ireland on student or tourist visas and then overstay the visa.

 

Even if you subtracted out the jobs that supposedly "Americans won't do," there are some 5 million plus jobs that American could have if these illegals were eliminated from the work force.

 

And before you say anything....yes, I have picked vegetables, done framing and roofing work, and worked in a fast food restaurant.

post #7 of 27

Okay, since you asked . . .

 

I think that until we get rid of the do-nothing yahoos who are in Congress right now, things will not change. The President is one person who maybe has limited powers, but without a responsible Congress, can't be held responsible for the ills of the American people. But research shows that most incumbents will be re-elected - guess it's a problem but not for MY representative or senator.

 

I consider myself an independent but I will not vote for Romney! He has no clue what the middle class citizen lives with. And isn't it the CEOs who continue to take their own cut of the pie while shipping jobs overseas so they can increase their profits? And aren't they the ones who also get their bonuses (BIG bonuses) even when their companies don't show a profit. Can't blame that on the Democratic president.

 

Finally, until we can clean up the election process and special interests/lobbying filth, things won't change much, I fear. Look at the millions and millions of dollars being spent to try and get certain people elected (and how truly "independent" will those politicians be if/when elected?).

 

BTW, hate what Romney did to his dog . . .

 

post #8 of 27
Quote:
Originally Posted by catmom5 View Post

BTW, hate what Romney did to his dog . . .

 

That was...what, 20 years ago?  How about what the President did to dogs?  How is it any different from putting the dog in the bed of a pickup?  Besides which, I hear he reaped a just punishment for it.

 

What does the President know about everyday life in the middle or lower class?  Only what he's been told; he essentially led a life of leisure all his life.  He never had a real job.  He never started a business.  He never ran a business.  In fact, he's spent much  of his political career criticizing those who DO run businesses.  I have more real-life business experience than he does. 

 

As to "do-nothing yahoos" in Congress--you DID read what I said about the President not submitting a budget, and even in the two years when he had majorities in both houses, he didn't take care of that little constitutionally required item?  In addition, the budget is immune to filibuster, and yet the Democrats don't have the guts to pass one even if it's just to say they passed one.  They don't want to be held responsible for anything.

post #9 of 27

This thread was started for people to give their OPINIONS. And that's exactly what I did. Sorry if you are interested in arguing - I'm not.

post #10 of 27
Quote:
Originally Posted by mrblanche View Post


He has also never sent a budget to Congress
Quote:
you DID read what I said about the President not submitting a budget
catconfused.gifcatconfused.gifcatconfused.gif

Obama Budget Pushes Sweeping Change (Feb. 27, 2009)
Obama’s 2011 Budget Proposal: How It’s Spent (Feb. 1, 2010)
In third year, Obama proposes a more modest course (Feb. 14, 2011)
Obama Seeks New Taxes on Rich (Feb. 14, 2012)
post #11 of 27
Quote:
Originally Posted by catmom5 View Post

This thread was started for people to give their OPINIONS. And that's exactly what I did. Sorry if you are interested in arguing - I'm not.

 

Ummm, hon? That is what IMO is. It's a place where people can debate and blow off steam and state their side of the debate. Then it goes back and forth until each side realizes they can't change the other mind and they shake hands and agree to disagree. 

 

I agree this election year is nothing like 4 years ago, but most of the "outspoken" members seem to be gone. I personally don't post on political issues because honestly I don't understand most of them and with work and everything else I really don't have time to research things this early in the game. I will say this much, Obama didn't get my vote last time and he DEFINITELY won't get my vote now. I don't see a damn thing he did for this country except put us more in debt. MY life and income hasn't improved. I was willing to give him a chance but I really don't see any "changes". 

post #12 of 27
Quote:
Originally Posted by mrblanche View Post

As to "do-nothing yahoos" in Congress--you DID read what I said about the President not submitting a budget, and even in the two years when he had majorities in both houses, he didn't take care of that little constitutionally required item?

Nowhere in the Constitution does it require the president to submit a budget to Congress.

That would be the Budget and Impoundment Act of 1921. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Budget_and_Accounting_Act
post #13 of 27
Quote:
Originally Posted by catmom5 View Post

This thread was started for people to give their OPINIONS. And that's exactly what I did. Sorry if you are interested in arguing - I'm not.


And I gave my opinion.  Is that not allowed?

 

I personally think the President is just digging himself into a deeper hole, but events in the coming 3-4 months will probably determine the election.

 

Those who read "The Audacity of Hope" were hoping for a little audacity from this President, and he has consistently voted Present, figuratively speaking.  His history should have been a warning to those of us (me included) who expected him to take some bold stands, such as the single-payer insurance I've mentioned repeatedly.

post #14 of 27
Quote:
Originally Posted by Momofmany View Post
 The other thing I can't get over is his poor judgement when he put his poor dog Shamus in a carrier on top of his car, hosed off the car to get the sh*t cleaned off, and claimed that Shamus was having fun. That's animal abuse.
Anyone want to share thoughts about the candidates? I'm rather enjoying the media mudslinging.

Whoa...do you have a link to an article about this? That's horrible!!

post #15 of 27
Quote:
Originally Posted by ut0pia View Post

Whoa...do you have a link to an article about this? That's horrible!!
Look, the story has its own Wikipedia page! tongue.gif

http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Seamus_incident
post #16 of 27
Quote:
Originally Posted by mrblanche View Post

That was...what, 20 years ago?  How about what the President did to dogs?  How is it any different from putting the dog in the bed of a pickup?  Besides which, I hear he reaped a just punishment for it.

 

What does the President know about everyday life in the middle or lower class?  Only what he's been told; he essentially led a life of leisure all his life.  He never had a real job.  He never started a business.  He never ran a business.  In fact, he's spent much  of his political career criticizing those who DO run businesses.  I have more real-life business experience than he does. 

 

As to "do-nothing yahoos" in Congress--you DID read what I said about the President not submitting a budget, and even in the two years when he had majorities in both houses, he didn't take care of that little constitutionally required item?  In addition, the budget is immune to filibuster, and yet the Democrats don't have the guts to pass one even if it's just to say they passed one.  They don't want to be held responsible for anything.

Yep.

 

Just to mention - as I understand the Budget situation - there is actually a Budget in place - but it requires updating each year to reflect financial changes.  

 

The process is that each house passes its version of what the changes would be (a draft), then BOTH houses debate each version and then agree to a compromise.  

 

The House has passed their version of the updated drafts for debate, but the Senate refuses to even provide a draft of their own to be debated.

 

I think the current budget is ?? a 6-year budget (I really don't know when it expires, sorry) - and some of the parts expire so they have to keep passing temporary resolutions - like the Bush Tax Cut ---  well, that's sort of my understanding of this mess.

 

I did find a link, but haven't read the whole thing - here it is:  http://fpc.state.gov/documents/organization/34649.pdf  ...

now gotta go do cat chores - hey, talk about a budget out of control - our cat expenses are just that - OUT-OF-CONTROL, and no end in sight.  laughing02.gif

 

 

Since the Dems want to give freebies to everyone - how about FREE HOLISTIC CAT FOOD, and FREE NEUTER AND SPA PROGAM - now, there's something I'd vote for 'cause no one is helping me take care of other people's carelessness in NOT getting their cats altered - ugh! 

 

Oh, and while I'm at it - the dog in the crate thingie - REALLY!! He was probably lovin' it out in the wind rather than cooped inside that car with all those humans - also, I think he had the RUNS, so instead of them just leaving him at home or in a stranger's care - they found a way to have him with them as he worked out his "situation".  Can't tell you how many times I've seen dogs running loose in the back of trucks.  AND, remember - that happened a way back in the last century when there was less enlightened thinking than there is now.  laughing02.gif

post #17 of 27
For those of you disappointed by the fact that Pres. Obama hasn't passed single-payer health insurance, I hate to break it to you, but he never campaigned on implementing it.

Here is his official 2008 campaign platform in writing; comments on health care are on page 6.

Universal coverage does not equal single-payer.

Don't get me wrong -- I, too, would love to see a single-payer system, modeled preferably on the UK's National Health Service, although the Swedish model holds appeal for those more localism-oriented. Here is a comparison of the Belgian, French, German, and Swedish systems, and here is a Time article on the UK system.
post #18 of 27

About the dog crate thing -

Yes, it was a long time ago. I would blow it off if Romney appeared to be sorry about it.

What's the difference from being in the bed of the truck or on top? You can see the dog in your rear-view if he's in the bed of the truck.

 

By the way, Obama ate dog meat when he was a child.

Romney drove his dog in a crate on the roof for 12 hours as a grown man.

post #19 of 27

I sure hope folks elect a President based on more important issues that what they did with their dog 20 years ago or if they ate dog food in a country that does these things.

 

I know myself that I've changed my behaviour toward animals a great deal in the past 20 years since I've learned more.  If these are the issues that determines the voting, the US is in bigger trouble than it is in already.

post #20 of 27

I can already see the general shape of this campaign.  For one thing, just about every silly accusation from the Democrats about Romney will be met with a similar silly accusation from the Republicans about the President.  I'd say if that's the way they want to do it, fine, but there are much more important things in play here.
 

post #21 of 27
Quote:
Originally Posted by mrblanche View Post

I can already see the general shape of this campaign.  For one thing, just about every silly accusation from the Democrats about Romney will be met with a similar silly accusation from the Republicans about the President.  I'd say if that's the way they want to do it, fine, but there are much more important things in play here.
 

You know, I really do agree that the dog thing doesn't have a place in this campaign. That being said, it does reinforce the idea that Romney isn't all that compassionate.

 

I don't love Obama being president. I think he is giving it his best shot and I believe he's sincere though.

 

I'm afraid of republicans. The "less government" attitude has gone a lot farther than I would have guessed. I have friends on the right who are saying that the EPA needs to be abolished. Romney said he was going to "get rid of" planned parenthood. Their attitude toward "entitlement programs" like SS and Medicare make me really nervous. We obviously can't ignore the fact that they need to be fixed, but it seems like the right wants to privatize everything. Once that happens, I believe we will have less control than we have now. I trust insurance companies less than I trust our government. We can't vote them out of office.

post #22 of 27

Since Planned Parenthood isn't a government program, it would be pretty hard for either party to "do away with it." 

 

And, as I've always said, it's good for those in power to learn that they can be voted out of power.  Neither party has a private line to Truth And Wisdom.  Both have good ideas.  Both have bad ideas.  Neither party is made up entirely of "bad people," whatever you might hear at a union hall or a Tea Party gathering or on TV or radio.  Both are made up of approximately the same mix of rich and poor, well-educated and ignorant, biased and open-minded people, all of them wanting the best for the country.

 

To doubt Romney's compassion is exactly what his opponents want you to do.  The campaign is almost never about the issues; it's almost always an attempt to get you to like one guy more than the other. 

 

A lot of people are now asking the questions about the President that they should have asked before they voted for him the first time.  Romney's past is a fairly open book; the President and his campaign and friends have gone to great lengths to keep much of his past secret.  To me, that very fact says a lot about the two men.

post #23 of 27
Thread Starter 
It's funny to watch both sides build up their ammo to blast at their opponents. My guess is that the battle lines will be drawn this way:

Romney: Will be blasted for offshoring as CEO. His religion won't be openly questioned, but there will be some that will advertise Mormonism as a cult faith. Shamus the dog will always be on the edges. His health care plan in Mass will be compared with what Obama implemented and Romney now claims is wrong. His inability to relate to 99% of the nation due to his wealth (his comment about his $370,000 annual earnings for speaking tours as "pocket change").

Obama: Will be blasted for increasing the debt (although a lot of it came when he actually put the wars into the budget). The unemployment rate not low enough. Health care will come from 2 angles - the right will say it needs to be revoked and the left will say that it didn't go far enough. There will be renewed rumblings that he isn't Christian and wasn't born in the US, and who knows, maybe they'll resurrect Bill Ayres and his church in Chicago.

Any other bets where the PAC funded attacks will lie? I'm of the opinion that we should make a list of all the obvious attack ads, number them, and when we hear them, say "that's #5!". Then give credit to the PAC that comes up with new and improved dirt to fling at the candidates.

But I'm still an optimist, and hope that both sides will bring the positive side of what they have accomplished to the table.
post #24 of 27

Originally Posted by mrblanche View Post

 

 

Quote:
Since Planned Parenthood isn't a government program, it would be pretty hard for either party to "do away with it." 

 

 

But Romney said it.

 

 

Quote:
And, as I've always said, it's good for those in power to learn that they can be voted out of power.  Neither party has a private line to Truth And Wisdom.  Both have good ideas.  Both have bad ideas.  Neither party is made up entirely of "bad people," whatever you might hear at a union hall or a Tea Party gathering or on TV or radio.  Both are made up of approximately the same mix of rich and poor, well-educated and ignorant, biased and open-minded people, all of them wanting the best for the country.

 

 

I agree with you there.

 

Quote:
To doubt Romney's compassion is exactly what his opponents want you to do. 

The fact that his opponents want us to dislike Romney doesn't diminish the actions that caused him to be seen as incompassionate in the first place.

 

post #25 of 27
Quote:
Originally Posted by mrblanche View Post

Since Planned Parenthood isn't a government program, it would be pretty hard for either party to "do away with it." 

That's disingenuous; Planned Parenthood may not be a federal program, but it receives about a third of its money from the federal government, and either party can certainly de-fund that portion if they find it objectionable, which would of course severely hamper PP's ability to provide services to low-income people, although it may not entirely "do away with it."
post #26 of 27

Since money is fungible, the easy solution is to promise no federal or state money would go to abortions, and put all that money into the other women's health services that they claim to be the bulk of their work, and use only private donations for abortions.  See how easy that is?
 

post #27 of 27
Quote:
Originally Posted by Momofmany View Post

Obama: Will be blasted for increasing the debt (although a lot of it came when he actually put the wars into the budget).

Just as a minor point, although the war funding wasn't strictly in the budget (although a lot of the spending was military spending that would have taken place, anyway), it was always included in the deficit reports.  In other words, the deficits under Bush included that spending.  Those amounts didn't just disappear, and they were included in the annual reports.

New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: IMO: In My Opinion
TheCatSite.com › Forums › General Forums › IMO: In My Opinion › What - no political threads?