Obama and Romney the same???

[Orias]

It's not... the end of Planned Parenthood will be the first wave of the assault on other issues like Roe vs Wade. Romney has been pretty transparent about the issue.

You do realize you just contradicted yourself right?

 

[Naragdaban]

Most American's politicians are within a hair's distance of one another. For all the posturing about disliking the other party, the two parties are really quite close, especially on long-term goals of foreign policy, banking, and the like.

 

[Revoltingest]

Most American's politicians are within a hair's distance of one another. For all the posturing about disliking the other party, the two parties are really quite close, especially on long-term goals of foreign policy, banking, and the like.

Are you trying to put me in a bad mood?
We're dooOOooOOooOOooOOooMMmmMMmmed!

 

[Orias]

Most American's politicians are within a hair's distance of one another. For all the posturing about disliking the other party, the two parties are really quite close, especially on long-term goals of foreign policy, banking, and the like.

This is true in a sense that both parties are needed, but that won't be the case for very long

 

[Daemon Sophic]

The OP is obviously using somewhat dated. Before etch-a-sketch Mitt flipped most of his dearly held positions.
Here is a more current table.
Barack Obama vs Mitt Romney - Difference and Comparison | Diffen

 

[TheKnight]

Women's rights may not be important to you. They are to me.

It's simpler than that. My business has been increasing in the double digits since Obama took office. That's pretty healthy to me.

The health of the business climate is based on how your business is doing?

Sorry. That don't impress me much. There are lots of people with over-inflated egos trying to demean others for me to take you seriously. I suffered under Shrub and I have prospered under Obama. If the Stupublicans and the Dumbocrats could work together to try and actually SOLVE problems rather than grandstand them, we would even be better off.

If we got rid of both the Dems and the Repubs, we would be much better off altogether.

 

[Revoltingest]

The OP is obviously using somewhat dated. Before etch-a-sketch Mitt flipped most of his dearly held positions.
Here is a more current table.
Barack Obama vs Mitt Romney - Difference and Comparison | Diffen

Did he "flip flop" or change his mind?
Did Obama "flip flop" on gay marriage or did he change his mind?

It seems that "flip flopping" is what the opposing side does, while one's own has "evolving" thinking.

I don't mind changes in agenda & beliefs if they're consistent with larger values, & the candidate
can be depended upon to uphold the promised agenda. Note,I don't plan to vote for either of'm.

 

[Daemon Sophic]

Did he "flip flop" or change his mind?
Did Obama "flip flop" on gay marriage or did he change his mind?

It seems that "flip flopping" is what the opposing side does, while one's own has "evolving" thinking.

I don't mind changes in agenda & beliefs if they're consistent with larger values, & the candidate
can be depended upon to uphold the promised agenda. Note,I don't plan to vote for either of'm.

Actually, many in the press considered Obama to be pro-gay marriage all along, but just utilized a politically opportune moment to emphasize it as his position. And as best I know, he never openy opposed gay marriage.

Romney on the other hand created the template for our improved national healthcare plan, but now has been ordered to oppose his brainchild, and so he does. He has voted and openly supported a woman's right to do what she wants with her own uterus....now he would strike down Roe v Wade. and on and on.....14 Bald-Faced Mitt Romney Flip-Flops That Were Dug Up By John McCain - Business Insider

As to not voting....this being a religious education forum, you must know that "All that is necessary for evil to triumph, is for good men (and women) to do nothing.". in fact, the GOP is counting on it. --> http://www.nytimes.com/2012/07/28/opinion/blow-wheres-the-outrage.html

 

[TheKnight]

Romney may be a theoretical flip-flop, but Obama has shown, over the past four years, that he has no problem saying one thing, promising it even, and doing another.

 

[s2a]

It's a bit difficult to draw any valid comparisons...since Romney can change his "stance" on anything in a matter of hours or even minutes...

"I was for it before I was against it" is the very epitome of Mitt Romney-speak.

 

[Daemon Sophic]

Romney may be a theoretical flip-flop, but Obama has shown, over the past four years, that he has no problem saying one thing, promising it even, and doing another.

I'll grant you Gitmo, and personally I would have liked to see a brutal example have been made of Bush Jr. and Cheney (though Obama didn't actually promise that) But you must admit that Obama has been up against an arm-linked, high(goose)-stepping GOP congressional filibuster wall for 3 years.
Don't forget "Our primary objective is to make Obama a one term president". http://mobile.rawstory.com/therawstory/?ref=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.google.com%2Furl%3Furl%3Dhttp%3A%2F%2Fwww.rawstory.com%2Frs%2F2011%2F07%2F10%2Fmcconnell-stopping-obamas-re-election-still-single-most-important-goal%2F%26rct%3Dj%26sa%3DX%26ei%3DQvwdUPy8Fanw6AH-uYCADA%26ved%3D0CFUQuAIwAQ%26q%3Dmake%2Bobama%2Ba%2Bone%2Bterm%2Bpresident%26usg%3DAFQjCNGy9fV4qP2ct-u1waO_LXWtvcPZFQ#!/entry/4febb1ac7af68a84dccfdd7a
Most of his failed promises are because he has been the old-fashioned gentleman, trying again and again to get the GOPers to work for the American people.....rather than being the throat-slashing, workhorse that we needed him to be, in order to cut the conservative shackles from America's wrists.

 

[TheKnight]

I'll grant you Gitmo, and personally I would have liked to see a brutal example have been made of Bush Jr. and Cheney (though Obama didn't actually promise that) But you must admit that Obama has been up against an arm-linked, high(goose)-stepping GOP congressional filibuster wall for 3 years.
Don't forget "Our primary objective is to make Obama a one term president". http://mobile.rawstory.com/therawstory/?ref=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.google.com%2Furl%3Furl%3Dhttp%3A%2F%2Fwww.rawstory.com%2Frs%2F2011%2F07%2F10%2Fmcconnell-stopping-obamas-re-election-still-single-most-important-goal%2F%26rct%3Dj%26sa%3DX%26ei%3DQvwdUPy8Fanw6AH-uYCADA%26ved%3D0CFUQuAIwAQ%26q%3Dmake%2Bobama%2Ba%2Bone%2Bterm%2Bpresident%26usg%3DAFQjCNGy9fV4qP2ct-u1waO_LXWtvcPZFQ#!/entry/4febb1ac7af68a84dccfdd7a
Most of his failed promises are because he has been the old-fashioned gentleman, trying again and again to get the GOPers to work for the American people.....rather than being the throat-slashing, workhorse that we needed him to be, in order to cut the conservative shackles from America's wrists.

And the response to his failures is always the same..."It's not his fault, the GOP won't let him accomplish his goals..."

What does coming home from Iraq and Afghanistan or closing Gitmo have to do with the GOP? We didn't get into war with Congress, we can leave without it too. Closing of a military installation is entirely within his power. He orders it shut down, and the funds that were allocated get shifted elsewhere by the service maintaining them assuming Congress doesn't take it elsewhere.

What does it mean when he says he won't sign the NDAA and does? That he won't sign an attempt to extend the Patriot Act and does? When he swears to uphold the Constitution and then does things like the NDRP?

Don't worry, I don't support Romney. But I abhor the ignorance of those who are all over Obama, placing the blame for his failures on his circumstances as opposed to his actions.

Perhaps, it's not apparent because the Obama administration does a great job with PR, but as someone who currently works for the DoD and is paid with taxpayer dollars, I can tell you from what I have seen that he says one thing to the public and does another. "We'll leave Afghanistan, you can take that to the bank" in his 2008 campaign...just five days ago a friend of a friend of mine was killed by an IED in Afghanistan. People I know deploy there and face the stark reality that we, as a country, have no idea why we're there and we send our men and women to die in suicide missions, telling them that the guys up top have their interests at heart.

To your average citizen, sure Obama looks promising. I don't doubt it. He's great with PR. But when you see memos and things from the top about our plan for long term sustainment, how we have to keep morale high, and how people should be focused on the mission, you get pretty ****** off when you come home from work and the Obama administration is grandstanding about how we'll withdraw...Just after you were told about the plan for long term sustainment. Just like we withdrew from Iraq, right? Oh wait....

To make matters worse, I have seen in the past two years the slow progression towards increased federal military presence here in the States. Grand Central Terminal in NY used to feature your occasional NYPD officer. I was there last Tuesday and couldn't help but notice the soldiers, armed with rifles, walking along. Being the kind old DoD fellow I am, I ask why they're there? "To provide an extra layer of security" they said. "What happens if you have to arrest someone?" "We turn them over to the civilian police I guess." "You guess?"

And it's not just GCT, it's airports like JFK, LGA, etc...and this in New York of all places. Oh and you know, drones in law enforcement don't make me comfortable either. "Hey let's get these drones ready for civilian agencies to take em and use them for civilian law enforcement purposes."

Does the thought of a bird 22,000 feet in the air snapping a picture of your license plate and sending you a speeding ticket because it determines your speeding with imaging technology make you comfortable? How about if you know its sister bird is over some foreign country armed to the teeth?

I'm the last person to be paranoid, and I'm the last person to say Obama is going to make himself a dictator. I don't buy into that. What I buy into is what I can clearly see happening in front of me. I don't believe soldiers should be patrolling here in the US at all. And if they are they should be trained beyond a "I guess" as to what they should do if a confrontation with civilians does ensue. Because having been on the active side, violent and dangerous confrontations warrant a lethal reaction. And well, the thought of soldiers vs civilians in Grand Central is a horrifying one to me. Not to mention that I'd be willing to be the poor soldier who was following orders would later be crucified as someone who was out of control, out of line, and will be punished. God forbid we question what those who are trained to kill armed enemies abroad are doing walking around with weapons here in the States as if they were supposed to use them if they had to.

You can keep your Obama because the "change" I've seen are changes towards something more akin to a military dictatorship than towards a liberal society.

 

[Revoltingest]

Actually, many in the press considered Obama to be pro-gay marriage all along, but just utilized a politically opportune moment to emphasize it as his position. And as best I know, he never openy opposed gay marriage.

Romney on the other hand created the template for our improved national healthcare plan, but now has been ordered to oppose his brainchild, and so he does. He has voted and openly supported a woman's right to do what she wants with her own uterus....now he would strike down Roe v Wade. and on and on.....14 Bald-Faced Mitt Romney Flip-Flops That Were Dug Up By John McCain - Business Insider

There are lists of Obama's evolutions (aka, flip flops) too. I recall that the very first thing he did in office was to keep Bush's policies, eg, the wars, Gitmo.
I simply object to disparate treatment of changes by partisans. Each side tries to convince itself by consensus that their guy is the good guy when he does
what the other guy does.

As to not voting....

Not voting? What gave you that idea?
I plan to vote for someone who isn't the lesser of 2 evils.

 

[Daemon Sophic]

I am no Obama fanatic. His weakness and failed promises are no news item to me.
Nor am I so naive to believe the corporate press tripe that all of Obama's failings are purely his own fault.

That said, and harkening back to my earlier statement of 'All that evil needs to triumph.....". Alas, it really does come down to your choice of two poisons, not three.
Staying home because you "lack enthusiasm", or taking the ruefully pious route of writing in a third party candidate, are both the same as voting Romney in. That is why the right wing press and their followers often drag out such nonsense as "meh. they're just the same anyway. Vote, don't vote. No matter.". It is noteworthy that the rare left-wing broadcast NEVER raises even a shadow of this lie.



Personally, I'd rather take the poison that at least promises (and to some degree tries delivering) to keep the mega-rich from controlling the press and the vote, get us out of wars, allow women and minorities and gays the same rights as white men, support the middle class through mathematically feasible economics, kill terrorist leaders that slaughtered our people, allow freedom for all religions, and yet still promote general educaton and heed the warning of doctors and scientists.
vs
The poison that promises to promote war, condemns scientific concensus as a political soccer ball, promises to oppose equal rights and women's rights, prefers less people vote, and those that do vote should be less educated on the topics of debate, believes in the morally and mathematically indefensible 'trickle down theory' of economics, and is overall much less respected by the entire international community.

If you think Ron Paul is the answer, then by all means, drum up a third party next year, or vote him in during the next primary. Right now however, it is two. Hook your wagon to the dissapointing old horse going in the correct direction, or hook your wagon to the nag going the wrong way.

- P.S. - Some interesting readings and thoughts...read if you want to...
snopes.com: National Defense Resources Preparedness

Confused About NDAA and Detention Provisions? Here's an Explainer | Crooks and Liars

P.P.S.- 1. I've seen those soldiers in big and small town airports since 2001. and no, I can't say that I like their presence.
2. Drones and facial recognition cameras in public places....as long as they're not packing a payload. Meh.
3. My sincere condolences for the loss of your friend.

 

[Revoltingest]

That said, and harkening back to my earlier statement of 'All that evil needs to triumph.....". Alas, it really does come down to your choice of two poisons, not three.

In the short run, yes.
But I vote for the long run....& to avoid the need to thoroughly shower after voting.

.....taking the ruefully pious route of writing in a third party candidate, are both the same as voting Romney in.

Pious? Rawrwrr! I just vote my preferences. I've said many times that it's OK to wrestle with the dilemma of voting for the lesser
of 2 evils, or voting for whom we really want. Either way makes sense. I could live with Romney winning....although I'm concerned
about his foreign policy. But it would be even harder if it resulted in Obama's re-election.

That is why the right wing press and their followers often drag out such nonsense as "meh. they're just the same anyway.

I've not seen that attitude from them. But everyone is entitled to an opinion.
And I've no special connection to right wing sources....I read'm all, including lefties.

Vote, don't vote. No matter.". It is noteworthy that the rare left-wing broadcast NEVER raises even a shadow of this lie.

Lie? That's rather harshly histrionic.

Personally, I'd rather take the poison that at least promises (and to some degree tries delivering) to keep the mega-rich from controlling the press and the vote, get us out of wars, allow women and minorities and gays the same rights as white men, support the middle class through mathematically feasible economics, kill terrorist leaders that slaughtered our people, allow freedom for all religions, and yet still promote general educaton and heed the warning of doctors and scientists.
vs
The poison that promises to promote war, condemns scientific concensus as a political soccer ball, promises to oppose equal rights and women's rights, prefers less people vote, and those that do vote should be less educated on the topics of debate, believes in the morally and mathematically indefensible 'trickle down theory' of economics, and is overall much less respected by the entire international community.

I don't see those alternatives at all.

If you think Ron Paul is the answer, then by all means, drum up a third party next year, or vote him in during the next primary. Right now however, it is two. Hook your wagon to the dissapointing old horse going in the correct direction, or hook your wagon to the nag going the wrong way.

- P.S. - Some interesting readings and thoughts...read if you want to...
snopes.com: National Defense Resources Preparedness

Confused About NDAA and Detention Provisions? Here's an Explainer | Crooks and Liars

P.P.S.- 1. I've seen those soldiers in big and small town airports since 2001. and no, I can't say that I like their presence.
2. Drones and facial recognition cameras in public places....as long as they're not packing a payload. Meh.
3. My sincere condolences for the loss of your friend.

I still plan to vote for Gary Johnson.
#1 & #2 - Interesting times lie ahead.
#3 - Who is that?

 

[Daemon Sophic]

.....
Lie? That's rather harshly histrionic.

You see a difference in the candidates. I see it. No reporter outside of Faux fails to see it. Therefore, equating them is not an accident.

I don't see those alternatives at all.

I'm just going with their quotes and platforms.

I still plan to vote for Gary Johnson.
#1 & #2 - Interesting times lie ahead.
#3 - Who is that?

Gary Johnson -- Had to look him up. -->Gary Johnson on the Issues
Not getting my vote. :sorry1:

#3 is regarding TheKnight's post.

 

[Revoltingest]

You see a difference in the candidates.

Not big enuf for me.

I see it. No reporter outside of Faux fails to see it. Therefore, equating them is not an accident.

Are you claiming that Fox News sees Romney & Obama as the same?
I don't know what Fox is saying, but I'd be surprised if this were true,
since they lean Republican. Any links?

I'm just going with their quotes and platforms.

Tis better to look at what they do, than at what they say.
The latter area is where they become similar.

Gary Johnson -- Had to look him up. -->Gary Johnson on the Issues
Not getting my vote. :sorry1:..
Of course not....he's the Libertarian candidate.

 

[Revoltingest]

VP candidates look to be a big difference between the candidates.
I ran across this interesting 'commercial' for Joe.
[youtube]yfjn4BpmirU[/youtube]
American Crossroads: "Run, Joe. Run" - YouTube

 

[tytlyf]

Joe is Joe. Nothing new here. So where's Mittens taxes?

 

[Reverend Rick]

Where is Obama's transcripts?