"Why I refuse to vote for President Obama!"

[szh]

http://www.theatlantic.com/politics/arc ... ma/262861/

I stand up and applaud the points made in this article linked above. He has stated his reasons against both candidates in a way that I simply couldn't do as effectively.

I don't want to quote from it, since I think it is worth a thorough and complete read, but a few paragraphs stand out:

What about the assertion that Romney will be even worse than Obama has been on these issues? It is quite possible, though not nearly as inevitable as Democrats seem to think. It isn't as though they accurately predicted the abysmal behavior of Obama during his first term, after all. And how do you get worse than having set a precedent for the extrajudicial assassination of American citizens? By actually carrying out such a killing? Obama did that too. Would Romney? I honestly don't know. I can imagine he'd kill more Americans without trial and in secret, or that he wouldn't kill any. I can imagine that he'd kill more innocent Pakistani kids or fewer. His rhetoric suggests he would be worse. I agree with that. Then again, Romney revels in bellicosity; Obama soothes with rhetoric and kills people in secret.

To hell with them both.

Sometimes a policy is so reckless or immoral that supporting its backer as "the lesser of two evils" is unacceptable. If enough people start refusing to support any candidate who needlessly terrorizes innocents, perpetrates radical assaults on civil liberties, goes to war without Congress, or persecutes whistleblowers, among other misdeeds, post-9/11 excesses will be reined in.

Please read this article completely!

Z

[themadscientist]

I already did, a week ago. The points are well laid out.

[szh]

I already did, a week ago. The points are well laid out.

They are indeed!

Z

[themadscientist]

I said back in 2008 that there were three types of Obama voters.

1. I'm voting for the black guy!

2. He's so dreamy and hopey changey!

3. I listened to what he said he would do, I liked it and i want to give him a chance to do it.

I only respected the last group and those are the ones who are disappointed and rightfully so. He has lost a large share of them. Some will still vote for him this cycle, but because they are now members of group 4. Romney is a terrible choice and I'd rather go with the devil I know.

[szh]

I'd rather go with the devil I know.

Sometimes, this is the advantage that incumbents have ... for any office.

Z

[themadscientist]

But the promise of the unknown is alluring as well. It worked well for Obama in 08'.

[szh]

But the promise of the unknown is alluring as well. It worked well for Obama in 08'.

Yes true. But there wasn't any incumbent then. Bush was no longer eligible ...

Z

[themadscientist]

Doesn't matter. The bulk of the Obama campaign was he wasn't Bush. Anybody could have one on that,

[szh]

Ah, I get your point.

Z

[stebo0728]

I have to say my one tipping issue where Romney wins, is the fact that he has defined business experience. He may be an unknown, but its kinda like betting on a Lakers Pistons game, where the Pistons have had a lousy year, have 2 starters on the DL. You haven't watched a Lakers game this year but you know they are probably going to do better than these sh*tty Pistons.

[themadscientist]

Romney's business experience and having been Governor with a hostile legislature do give him weight. It's that whole flip-flopping, big bank feeding, no math-adding up, confused playboy who really really thinks it would be cool to be president thing I can't get past.

[s0m3th1ngAZ]

"We're a nation that believes we are children of the same God" Romney actually said that... in the same round as promoting religious tolerance. Can you double-talk any harder?

[themadscientist]

Explain how the two things are incongruous.

[s0m3th1ngAZ]

I thought it was obvious but, now I'm curious as to why it isn't...

[themadscientist]

It's your premise, please expand on your abstract.

[s0m3th1ngAZ]

He claimed that we all share the same god yet went on to promote religious tolerance... two statements that don't really go well together.

[themadscientist]

Why not?

[s0m3th1ngAZ]

....because they don't? I'm really wondering why this is continuing as it is. He says everyone in the country shares the same God then says he means to promote religious tolerance? Are we talking in circles here?

[themadscientist]

No, you just haven't answered the question yet.

[stebo0728]

Hey guys, ponder this:

With the exception of atheists or secular humanists, does not everyone believe that we are all children of the same god? The god may differ, and that is where religious tolerance comes in. As for the afore mentioned atheist, well we'll let them play int the sandbox too as long as they dont bully everyone.

[themadscientist]

Hindus believe in many gods. The argument could be made that Christians, Jews and Muslims believe in the same god, but have different interpretations. As far as atheists bullying people, whens the last time they tried to kill someone for believing in a god? that sort of behavior is pretty much monopolized by various "spiritual" people.

[s0m3th1ngAZ]

Hey guys, ponder this:

With the exception of atheists or secular humanists, does not everyone believe that we are all children of the same god? The god may differ, and that is where religious tolerance comes in. As for the afore mentioned atheist, well we'll let them play int the sandbox too as long as they dont bully everyone.

Gee, thanks for letting us come play.
And true, he might have meant it as you say, but I have a hunch he really didn't.
The two things are incongruous because you can't claim that EVERYONE believes the same thing and then promote tolerance. It's like saying everyone who lives in the U.S. is a white person. Not only are they untrue, broad statements like that don't go very far in showing tolerance.

[s0m3th1ngAZ]

As far as atheists bullying people, whens the last time they tried to kill someone for believing in a god? that sort of behavior is pretty much monopolized by various "spiritual" people.

Right, we kill people for various other reasons.
This is getting into dangerous territory, I'm out.

[themadscientist]

Gee, thanks for letting us come play.
And true, he might have meant it as you say, but I have a hunch he really didn't.
The two things are incongruous because you can't claim that EVERYONE believes the same thing and then promote tolerance. It's like saying everyone who lives in the U.S. is a white person. Not only are they untrue, broad statements like that don't go very far in showing tolerance.

Wait a minute. Are you saying they aren't? I'm going to need a moment.

Statements like he made don't offend me because of how rediculous they are. I prefer people to speak their mind so at least i know what i'm dealing with. I long ago figured out Romney was a dufus so he would have to pull out something monumentally stupid to shock me. I mean two weeks ago he wondered publically why airliner windows don't open!

[s0m3th1ngAZ]

I f*** hate you.

[themadscientist]

Hate me or love me you silly man.