Support NeoGAF

[Particle Physicist]

Is the micro-machine guy still around? They should get him to do it.

I think they did get him!! looks like it from the picture.

 

[adamsappel]

Never count on any current politician to ever keep their campaign promises. Oh, you might see an occasional one kept, but the bulk of their promises will either be conveniently "forgotten" or at the very least, met with varied stages of compromise. For me, the last real "For the people..." president we had was JFK.

I think you're falling for the mythology. JFK gave great speeches, and did several great things, but had a lot of failures and was a pretty terrible human being.

 

[mckmas8808]

More

Makes sense. And Obama taking a middle ground on many issues will probably help him.

 

[Karma Kramer]

Makes sense. And Obama taking a middle ground on many issues will probably help him.

Why is this good?

He should stand on what he believes, not take the middle ground.

gah

 

[Justin Bailey]

I think they did get him!! looks like it from the picture.

lol! I think that's just the representative trying to get it pushed through, but he really does look like the guy.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mlRgbU3ZJ5g

Man, I would pay good money for this to happen. Do it Obama.

 

[APF]

Because Obama is the head of the whole country, not just one party.

I know you feel like no mortal can exist in the same breath as His Holiness, but the news media does not have to apply the same reverence in their broadcasts (even on MSNBC)

 

[mckmas8808]

Why is this good?

He should stand on what he believes, not take the middle ground.

gah

When I said middle ground, I meant getting to a consenus between to trains of thought.

 

[Steve Youngblood]

He should stand on what he believes, not take the middle ground.

What is it that you think he 'believes' and should stand on?

 

[Karma Kramer]

When I said middle ground, I meant getting to a consenus between to trains of thought.

Maybe I am too much an absolutist when it comes to our liberties, but I think any sacrifice of them is against what this country stands for and moderating those policies for the sake of easing the fears of the nation that only exists because of politicians like Cheney that use fear and evil as a form of justification, is poor judgement on Obama's part.

Most of all I think the American people are looking for independent thoughts, not moderation, they are looking for a president that isn't apart of the democrats or republicans...

Both parties are marketer's and I think its getting time for people to stop defending either side and defend their side.

 

[Steve Youngblood]

Both parties are marketer's and I think its getting time for people to stop defending either side and defend their side.

The problem has and continues to be that these 'independents', free from the corruption of being Washington insiders, have never proven to be electable.

Furthermore, it is simply very possible that Obama is a lot more moderate than people would like to believe. Regardless of what you or I might think we could get him to confess to believing off the record over several rounds of beers, he's never really portrayed himself in the way that some wish he acted.

People like Nader run every election, and every time they prove to be unelectable.

 

[APF]

Remember, Obama ran and was elected as a consensus-builder, not an ideological firebrand.

 

[speculawyer]

He should stand on what he believes, not take the middle ground.

What Obama believes pretty much seems to be middle ground.

That said, I'm sure there are some issues where he would be more to the left (and sometimes to the right) but he takes the middle ground because to do otherwise would make him politically unviable.

 

[Karma Kramer]

The problem has and continues to be that these 'independents', free from the corruption of being Washington insiders, have never proven to be electable.

Furthermore, it is simply very possible that Obama is a lot more moderate than people would like to believe. Regardless of what you or I might think we could get him to confess to believing off the record over several rounds of beers, he's never really portrayed himself in the way that some wish he acted.

People like Nader run every election, and every time they prove to be unelectable.

Well Nadar is a bit unelectable regardless of the party imo... however if you don't see how the media is in either parties pockets then you should pay attention to the type of coverage independents get when they run.

If this country is built on freedom of speech and opinions, why is it that we have two parties? Thats basically one more choice then a monarchy!

The past administration broke the law, yet they suffer no consequence, yet Martha Stewart lies about some insider trading and she is sent to jail? How is our government not becoming too powerful?

I think our founders would be pretty upset with the way this country is headed, and although I think Obama is a great leader, he isn't showing himself as anyone but a politician, calculating how to ensure re-election.

We legalize pot and tax it... it would create jobs and bring in revenues for the economy.
We legalize gay marriage it would end this culture war that has absolutely no basis aside from religious fanatics who want their religion to be apart of rule of law. (church vs. state)
We end the Patriot Act and stop the removal of our liberties and we will restore our faith in the founders of this country.

Benjamin Franklin said: "He who sacrifices freedom for security deserves neither"

If these aren't things Obama stands for (our constitution) then he doesn't understand the law and he shouldn't be our president.

Why do people defend such things for the sake of the well-being of one man... when thousands of pot smokers are sent to jail, gays are discriminated against, and people's rights are being removed.

He is change... he is hope... he said these things. I voted for him. All I am seeing is Clinton 2.0.

 

[empty vessel]

If Cheney is to be considered the defacto head of the GOP, then why shouldn't he be treated as a direct ideological opponent to the head of the Democratic party?

Because that would utterly misrepresent the relationship between the Republican and Democratic parties? The Democratic and Republican parties are factions of the same governing capitalist class. They are not "direct ideological opponents" any more than Lenin and Trotsky were.

 

[Door2Dawn]

Well Nadar is a bit unelectable regardless of the party imo... however if you don't see how the media is in either parties pockets then you should pay attention to the type of coverage independents get when they run.

If this country is built on freedom of speech and opinions, why is it that we have two parties? Thats basically one more choice then a monarchy!

The past administration broke the law, yet they suffer no consequence, yet Martha Stewart lies about some insider trading and she is sent to jail? How is our government not becoming too powerful?

I think our founders would be pretty upset with the way this country is headed, and although I think Obama is a great leader, he isn't showing himself as anyone but a politician, calculating how to ensure re-election.

We legalize pot and tax it... it would create jobs and bring in revenues for the economy.
We legalize gay marriage it would end this culture war that has absolutely no basis aside from religious fanatics who want their religion to be apart of rule of law. (church vs. state)
We end the Patriot Act and stop the removal of our liberties and we will restore our faith in the founders of this country.

Benjamin Franklin said: "He who sacrifices freedom for security deserves neither"

If these aren't things Obama stands for (our constitution) then he doesn't understand the law and he shouldn't be our president.

Why do people defend such things for the sake of the well-being of one man... when thousands of pot smokers are sent to jail everyday, gays are discriminated against, and people's rights are being removed.

He is change... he is hope... he said these things. I voted for him. All I am seeing is Clinton 2.0.

I guess you should of voted for Hillary and or John McCain

Oh and I think you might want to look up the word pragmatism.

 

[Karma Kramer]

I guess you should of voted for Hillary and or John McCain

lol... those would have been even worse... I voted for the best option available.. but if in the next election there was a "none of the above" option... I'd vote for it.

People wonder why so few people vote, and I bet its because a lot of people hate both parties... just look at the rising independents... more then any other party. Yet how many independents are actually in office? Very few...

Does this not seem nuts to anyone else? Can't you see these two parties are both trying to block any other competition?.. just like two big oil companies.

 

[Justin Bailey]

He is change... he is hope... he said these things. I voted for him. All I am seeing is Clinton 2.0.

I think you're equating your "change" with Obama's "change" which is not the same thing.

-He never said anything about legalizing pot. In fact he said pretty much the opposite.
-He never indicated that he would support gay marriage. Again, I'm pretty sure he indicated that he feels marriage should be between a man/woman and he supports civil unions.
-Once he got to the Senate, he voted (along with pretty much everyone else) for the continuance of the Patriot Act.

Obama's administration has (so far) been pretty much what he said it was going to be. You can fault him for that if you want, but you can't say he's acting differently than what he indicated during his campaign.

 

[Steve Youngblood]

Well Nadar is a bit unelectable regardless of the party imo... however if you don't see how the media is in either parties pockets then you should pay attention to the type of coverage independents get when they run.

If this country is built on freedom of speech and opinions, why is it that we have two parties? Thats basically one more choice then a monarchy!

The past administration broke the law, yet they suffer no consequence, yet Martha Stewart lies about some insider trading and she is sent to jail? How is our government not becoming too powerful?

I think our founders would be pretty upset with the way this country is headed, and although I think Obama is a great leader, he isn't showing himself as anyone but a politician, calculating how to ensure re-election.

We legalize pot and tax it... it would create jobs and bring in revenues for the economy.
We legalize gay marriage it would end this culture war that has absolutely no basis aside from religious fanatics who want their religion to be apart of rule of law. (church vs. state)
We end the Patriot Act and stop the removal of our liberties and we will restore our faith in the founders of this country.

Benjamin Franklin said: "He who sacrifices freedom for security deserves neither"

If these aren't things Obama stands for (our constitution) then he doesn't understand the law and he shouldn't be our president.

Why do people defend such things for the sake of the well-being of one man... when thousands of pot smokers are sent to jail everyday, gays are discriminated against, and people's rights are being removed.

He is change... he is hope... he said these things. I voted for him. All I am seeing is Clinton 2.0.

I'm not TRYING to be condescending, but you sound like a college-aged idealist who thinks things can and should change overnight. Whether I should be regarded as a cynic or a pragmatist is of little interest to me, but the stuff you're rallying for are issues that, while I agree with them, I concede to be political suicide. As such, I don't particularly want to see Obama go down in flames to win these divisive issues.

Mind you, I'm not gay, and I don't smoke pot. If put to a public vote, I'd happily vote in their favor, but these issues aren't my fight. Frankly, I was largely content with Clinton 1.0.

 

[Karma Kramer]

I think you're equating your "change" with Obama's "change" which is not the same thing.

-He never said anything about legalizing pot. In fact he said pretty much the opposite.
-He never indicated that he would support gay marriage. Again, I'm pretty sure he indicated that he feels marriage should be between a man/woman and he supports civil unions.
-Once he got to the Senate, he voted (along with pretty much everyone else) for the continuance of the Patriot Act.

Obama's administration has (so far) been pretty much what he said it was going to be. You can fault him for that if you want, but you can't say he's acting differently than what he indicated during his campaign.

Just because they don't say it, doesn't mean they don't believe it. They are politicians ffs... they say anything to get elected.

And this wouldn't be a problem if there was no parties and candidates ran on principals rather then party lines.

The division we are seeing in this country is cultural and geographical... its not because we as people are more fucked up... its because of what our government has turned into.. the media always trying to be "balanced" when really they aren't giving people facts and aren't doing any investigative journalism...

 

[Karma Kramer]

I'm not TRYING to be condescending, but you sound like a college-aged idealist who thinks things can and should change overnight. Whether I should be regarded as a cynic or a pragmatist is of little interest to me, but the stuff you're rallying for are issues that, while I agree with them, I concede to be political suicide. As such, I don't particularly want to see Obama go down in flames to win these divisive issues.

Mind you, I'm not gay, and I don't smoke pot. If put to a public vote, I'd happily vote in their favor, but these issues aren't my fight. Frankly, I was largely content with Clinton 1.0.

So... you don't think I don't understand how unrealistic this vision is? Of course I know this... its why I am so upset.

However, I think its more absurd to just accept it and not do or speak out against it. To just be content is not standing for principals.

I think the Government could do a lot of good, if it was just re-structured. Only way that will happen is if there is a revolution... and judging from the fact that nothing happened over the past 8 years... I don't see how it will ever happen.

I mean how fucked up does our government have to get before people start speaking up?

 

[Steve Youngblood]

The division we are seeing in this country is cultural and geographical... its not because we as people are more fucked up... its because of what our government has turned into.. the media always trying to be "balanced" when really they aren't giving people facts and aren't doing any investigative journalism...

While I'll happily concede that the media falls way short of their lofty ambitions of being "The Fourth Estate," I also think you suffer from sheltered surroundings (i.e. college aged progressives who think like you), and thus you think these are the pivotal issues this country faces.

The reality is that not everyone cares about pot. Plenty of people are against it. Not everyone cares about gay marriage. Plenty of people are against it. Responsible journalism and legitimate third parties aren't really going to change that. A lot of it DOES have to do with a cultural divide, and this isn't going to change overnight.

 

[Karma Kramer]

While I'll happily concede that the media falls way short of their lofty ambitions of being "The Fourth Estate," I also think you suffer from sheltered surroundings (i.e. college aged progressives who think like you), and thus you think these are the pivotal issues this country faces.

The reality is that not everyone cares about pot. Plenty of people are against it. Not everyone cares about gay marriage. Plenty of people are against it. Responsible journalism and legitimate third parties aren't really going to change that. A lot of it DOES have to do with a cultural divide, and this isn't going to change overnight.

1)Majority are for it. (new poll shows this)

2)Doesn't matter if people are against gay marriage... its against the constitution. If we don't stand for the constitution then what do we stand for? I suppose slavery should be allowed in states that still think that is okay... (although it kind of already does with the amount of illegal immigration going on)

It won't happen overnight? How else is it going to happen? We pass 1/3 of the bill for legalizing gay marriage today... in 6 months we will past the next 2/3's!

 

[mckmas8808]

Maybe I am too much an absolutist when it comes to our liberties, but I think any sacrifice of them is against what this country stands for and moderating those policies for the sake of easing the fears of the nation that only exists because of politicians like Cheney that use fear and evil as a form of justification, is poor judgement on Obama's part.

Most of all I think the American people are looking for independent thoughts, not moderation, they are looking for a president that isn't apart of the democrats or republicans...

Both parties are marketer's and I think its getting time for people to stop defending either side and defend their side.

:lol

No they aren't. If that was the case then why did the DEM and REP nom get like 98% of the vote in 2008?

 

[mckmas8808]

Benjamin Franklin said: "He who sacrifices freedom for security deserves neither"

If these aren't things Obama stands for (our constitution) then he doesn't understand the law and he shouldn't be our president.

Why do people defend such things for the sake of the well-being of one man... when thousands of pot smokers are sent to jail, gays are discriminated against, and people's rights are being removed.

He is change... he is hope... he said these things. I voted for him. All I am seeing is Clinton 2.0.

First of all Ben Franklin can suck a dick with his slave okaying ass. I like the guy, but lets not act like those "forefathers" were anywhere close to perfect.

And second of all, I think most people in the country would LOVE a Clinton 2.0. Just as long as Obama can keep his dick in Michelle's mouth and not any other lady.

 

[Karma Kramer]

:lol

No they aren't. If that was the case then why did the DEM and REP nom get like 98% of the vote in 2008?

Turnout = 132,608,519

Total US Population = 306,480,482

Obviously underage (18 and younger) can't vote... but you get my point.

 

[mckmas8808]

I mean how fucked up does our government have to get before people start speaking up?

Dude it was so fucked up that we elected a black man in 2009. Think about that for a second.

Nobody thought that was possible. Just 40 years ago blacks just got all their civil rights.

 

[Karma Kramer]

First of all Ben Franklin can suck a dick with his slave okaying ass. I like the guy, but lets not act like those "forefathers" were anywhere close to perfect.

And second of all, I think most people in the country would LOVE a Clinton 2.0. Just as long as Obama can keep his dick in Michelle's mouth and not any other lady.

I want progress... not just to go back to the 90's.

 

[mckmas8808]

1)Majority are for it. (new poll shows this)

2)Doesn't matter if people are against gay marriage... its against the constitution. If we don't stand for the constitution then what do we stand for? I suppose slavery should be allowed in states that still think that is okay... (although it kind of already does with the amount of illegal immigration going on)

It won't happen overnight? How else is it going to happen? We pass 1/3 of the bill for legalizing gay marriage today... in 6 months we will past the next 2/3's!

First where in the Constitution does it say that? And if it is the Constitution then you have an issue that the Supreme Court should take a look at.

 

[Karma Kramer]

Dude it was so fucked up that we elected a black man in 2009. Think about that for a second.

Nobody thought that was possible. Just 40 years ago blacks just got all their civil rights.

LOL this is pretty racist. No offense.

 

[mckmas8808]

I want progress... not just to go back to the 90's.

And do you see that Obama has given us progress in just 115 days. Why do you want 99% progress within a year?

You surely understand that these issues are hard and complicated and will years to figure out and deal with.

The only thing I can tell you is to keep applying the pressure to Obama and maybe you'll get DADT done away with this year. MAYBE....

 

[Karma Kramer]

First where in the Constitution does it say that? And if it is the Constitution then you have an issue that the Supreme Court should take a look at.

All men are created equal?

 

[mckmas8808]

LOL this is pretty racist. No offense.

Karma I AM A BLACK MAN! The point is no black person was going to get nominated in this early in the 21st century unless the previous president was a total screw up.

Why change the face of the President when the whole "White men only" thing has been working out. That's the thought of the average person deep down inside even if they don't know it.

 

[Karma Kramer]

And do you see that Obama has given us progress in just 115 days. Why do you want 99% progress within a year?

You surely understand that these issues are hard and complicated and will years to figure out and deal with.

The only thing I can tell you is to keep applying the pressure to Obama and maybe you'll get DADT done away with this year. MAYBE....

They could be implemented a lot faster if people demanded it more. Instead of defending the slow process which it takes... to do what? Sign a bill...

Yeah that really is so difficult that we have to wait until his second term... when really its obvious that he's just looking out for himself.

 

[Particle Physicist]

I know you feel like no mortal can exist in the same breath as His Holiness, but the news media does not have to apply the same reverence in their broadcasts (even on MSNBC)

:lol i think you are confusing me with someone else. ..

anyway, obama isnt just the head of the democratic party .. he is head of the US (elected by the majority), thus i dont see how they equate.

 

[Karma Kramer]

Karma I AM A BLACK MAN! The point is no black person was going to get nominated in this early in the 21st century unless the previous president was a total screw up.

Why change the face of the President when the whole "White men only" thing has been working out. That's the thought of the average person deep down inside even if they don't know it.

You are generalizing that America is racist, when really Obama's success could just be because he is very good at running a campaign etc...

 

[Steve Youngblood]

Turnout = 132,608,519

Total US Population = 306,480,482

Yes, and ALL the people who stay home are part of the progressive left! They would have voted, but no politician represents their pro-marijuana, pro-gay marriage views.

These issues simply aren't AS important to AS many people as you think they are. Furthermore, you referenced polls, which I don't think are as indicative as you'd like to skew them to be.

For instance, me! Am I for the legalization of marijuana? You bet. But do I REALLY care if it gets legalized. Not really. I don't smoke pot and don't have an interest in taking it up. I think it's silly that people are getting arrested and locked up over it, but it's just not MY fight.

 

[Karma Kramer]

Yes, and ALL the people who stay home are part of the progressive left! They would have voted, but no politician represents their pro-marijuana, pro-gay marriage views.

These issues simply aren't AS important to AS many people as you think they are. Furthermore, you referenced polls, which I don't think are as indicative as you'd like to skew them to be.

For instance, me! Am I for the legalization of marijuana? You bet. But do I REALLY care if it gets legalized. Not really. I don't smoke pot and don't have an interest in taking it up. I think it's silly that people are getting arrested and locked up over it, but it's just not MY fight.

Yeah and poor uneducated kids are dying in a war that SERVED NO PURPOSE... but because it doesn't effect you, it is not you're fight. Way to stand up for your principals and further prove my point.

 

[Steve Youngblood]

Yeah and poor uneducated kids are dying in a war that SERVED NO PURPOSE... but because it doesn't effect you, it is not you're fight. Way to stand up for your principals and further prove my point.

That doesn't hold up. I voted for the guy who has opposed the war in Iraq since day one. I didn't vote for the guy who I assumed was going to legalize gay marriage or marijuana despite never promising to do so.

Nice try, though.

 

[Karma Kramer]

That doesn't hold up. I voted for the guy who has opposed the war in Iraq since day one. I didn't vote for the guy who I assumed was going to legalize gay marriage or marijuana despite never promising to do so.

Nice try, though.

It does hold up because you just said:

I don't smoke pot and don't have an interest in taking it up. I think it's silly that people are getting arrested and locked up over it, but it's just not MY fight.

--

I am not in Iraq and don't have interest in going. I think its sucks that kids are dying over there and losing their limbs, but its just not MY fight.

--

Your logic doesn't hold up...

 

[JayDubya]

You are generalizing that America is racist, when really Obama's success could just be because he is very good at running a campaign etc...

Personally, I blame Bush for Obama.

 

[Karma Kramer]

Personally, I blame Bush for Obama.

lol

 

[Steve Youngblood]

It does hold up because you just said:

I don't smoke pot and don't have an interest in taking it up. I think it's silly that people are getting arrested and locked up over it, but it's just not MY fight.

--

I am not in Iraq and don't have interest in going. I think its sucks that kids are dying over there and losing their limbs, but its just not MY fight.

--

Your logic doesn't hold up...

This is false equivocation. Pot and gay marriage should be legal, but aren't issues that are terribly important to me. I didn't vote for a politician based on their views of these topics.

Iraq, however, was an important issue. I voted Kerry, and I voted Obama. Their views on the Iraq war played a large part of this (though they were certainly not the sole issues).

Furthermore, I don't think the human rights violations of people dying in Iraq are anywhere near equivalent to people getting arrested for choosing to smoke a prohibited narcotic, or gays being able to attain the title of marriage when he's proposing the legal benefits that come along with "civil unions."

There are bigger fish to fry. Iraq was one of those bigger fish.

 

[Arde5643]

lol

Ehh, can't really blame JD for thinking that - I don't think we'd have selected a black man if the republicans didn't screw America as long and as hard as they did.

If Bush was just a mediocre crappy pres, we'd probably have Hillary as pres now. Thanks to Bush being one of the worst president in the modern American history, well, here we are now.

 

[Karma Kramer]

This is false equivocation. Pot and gay marriage should be legal, but aren't issues that are terribly important to me. I didn't vote for a politician based on their views of these topics.

Iraq, however, was an important issue. I voted Kerry, and I voted Obama. Their views on the Iraq war played a large part of this (though they were certainly not the sole issues).

Furthermore, I don't think the human rights violations of people dying in Iraq are anywhere near equivalent to people getting arrested for choosing to smoke a prohibited narcotic, or gays being able to attain the title of marriage when he's proposing the legal benefits that come along with "civil unions."

There are bigger fish to fry. Iraq was one of those bigger fish.

Exactly my point.

You aren't standing for principals, only what is important to you.

I am not gay, and I can smoke pot whenever I want to freely. However I try to stand up for these two issues because it is what I think is right.

Also... I don't see how 50% of our prisoners being non-violent criminals isn't as important as Iraq... do you know how many peoples lives are being thrown away because of this issue? And how much money it is costing YOU.

Maybe with this information you will start caring about it.

Also, you are free to do what you want, I am not saying you have to protest these issues... but don't laugh at me for standing up for them... even if it isn't entirely realistic that I will reach my goal.

 

[Karma Kramer]

Ehh, can't really blame JD for thinking that - I don't think we'd have selected a black man if the republicans didn't screw America as long and as hard as they did.

If Bush was just a mediocre crappy pres, we'd probably have Hillary as pres now. Thanks to Bush being one of the worst president in the modern American history, well, here we are now.

I am pretty sure he was making a joke... JayDubya isn't racist. Though he might blame Bush for giving us a Democrat in the White House...

 

[Justin Bailey]

Exactly my point.

You aren't standing for principals, only what is important to you.

uh, what.

I am not gay, and I can smoke pot whenever I want to freely. However I try to stand up for these two issues because it is what I think is right.

Also... I don't see how 50% of our prisoners being non-violent criminals isn't as important as Iraq... do you know how many peoples lives are being thrown away because of this issue? And how much money it is costing YOU.

Maybe with this information you will start caring about it.

Also, you are free to do what you want, I am not saying you have to protest these issues... but don't laugh at me for standing up for them... even if it isn't entirely realistic that I will reach my goal.

You can stand up for whatever you want, just don't cry WHERE'S MAH CHANGE OBAMA for things he never supported in the first place.

 

[mAcOdIn]

Yeah and poor uneducated kids are dying in a war that SERVED NO PURPOSE... but because it doesn't effect you, it is not you're fight. Way to stand up for your principals and further prove my point.

Oh shut the hell up.

You know, if you want to pretend you even give a fuck about anyone in uniform how about not equating them all to poor uneducated morons, how about that? Just give it a try.

Fuck, I mean, who would want that support anyways? It's better to not be supported but not having your intelligence and motives being called into question than being supported by someone who obviously thinks you're too stupid to make you own decisions.

Edit: Truthfully, I'd rather be spit on and called a baby killer than have your support.

 

[Karma Kramer]

You can stand up for whatever you want, just don't cry WHERE'S MAH CHANGE OBAMA for things he never supported in the first place.

So don't protest what I believe in? Don't dissent? I voted for him, doesn't mean I accept every single policy he has.

It seems everyone here agrees with legalizing pot, gay marriage etc... but aren't speaking up about it because Obama said otherwise... just accept what we have and be happy?

Great democracy.

 

[PistolGrip]

Maybe I am too much an absolutist when it comes to our liberties, but I think any sacrifice of them is against what this country stands for and moderating those policies for the sake of easing the fears of the nation that only exists because of politicians like Cheney that use fear and evil as a form of justification, is poor judgement on Obama's part.

Most of all I think the American people are looking for independent thoughts, not moderation, they are looking for a president that isn't apart of the democrats or republicans...

Both parties are marketer's and I think its getting time for people to stop defending either side and defend their side.

The President is suppose to best represent our views in the world stage... The ruler of all not just of some. I dont want an anti-gay president to ban same sex marriage or ban gays from public displays of affection just because his personal beliefs or values... His job is not to do with this country whatever he wants... it is to unite us by finding common ground and make this is a better country. This is what defines a leader... making others follow him.

 

[Steve Youngblood]

Exactly my point.

You aren't standing for principals, only what is important to you.

First of all, that's a stretch and you know it. It's a stab at taking some moral highground that is purely theoretical. "I'm a compassionate liberal, and that's what makes me awesome. YOU may not care, but I bet you wouldn't have cared back in WWII about what was happening to the Jews if you were living in Nazi Germany. That's what makes you and I different."

Second of all, I'd like to point out that you're not really taking a stand here. You care so much about the little man that you did the same exact thing I did -- you voted Obama! The only difference is that I did so with more realistic expectations.