I Might Vote For Obama

**MCHammer** · 01-25-2012, 10:54 PM

Along the same lines, I'm convinced that the best thing we could do no matter our various political affiliations is to make serving in Congress a less pleasant experience.

It is ridiculous that so many of these people become millionaires whose stock portfolios magically beat out S&P year in and year out.

They should be paid the median income and no more. I am a term limits proponent, but short of term limits we should have a system that makes serving as a legislator less appealing by drastically restricting salary, benefits, etc.

If I had my way, service in Congress would be allotted by draft and would be thought of the same way. Most of these slugs see public service as access to easy street and grow egos to match it.

**Sword** · 01-30-2012, 10:18 AM

No chance on voting for Obama...
He is trying to take America in the wrong direction..

Sword

**SanAntonioSteelerFan** · 01-31-2012, 07:59 PM

I vote for the person who is the strongest for the middle class.

Hands down, between Obama, Romney, and Gingrich, it is Obama.

The other guys are only shills for the beyond-belief wealthy. We don't more of that.

**fordfixer** · 02-01-2012, 01:59 AM

**AzStillers1989** · 02-01-2012, 04:14 PM

Originally Posted by SanAntonioSteelerFan

I vote for the person who is the strongest for the middle class.

Hands down, between Obama, Romney, and Gingrich, it is Obama.

The other guys are only shills for the beyond-belief wealthy. We don't more of that.

Ron Paul is in no way a "shill for the beyond-belief wealthy". He has voted against every bail out and debt ceiling increase. He is pro constitution and against these undeclared wars. He wants to audit the federal reserve and return this country to a good economic state... so i de believe you are mistaken...

Do a quick google search of ron paul and i am sure you will find his views and policies to be much different than these other candidates....

**flippy** · 02-01-2012, 04:22 PM

The fundamental problem is the majority of Americans are enslaved into the US Federal Gov't in some form. From welfare to social security to jobs and so on and so forth.

And people will vote for what benefits them. And the things all these individual benefits add up to harm us all.

I'd vote for someone that wanted to reduce Warren Buffett's tax bill. This whole idea of tax the rich is stupid. It's not like Warren uses more federal gov't services than anyone else. For the amount he pays in taxes, he should have secret service guarding him. He should have an airport in his backyard. And on and on.

Poor people consume more gov't services, so make them pay for what they use.

Why can't the gov't come out and say this is what we're gonna spend this year and we'll divide it up equally amongst every person. If each person had to pay $50k/person/yr, there would be an uprising. Actually, we should make it a constitutional ammendment that everyone pays exactly the same in taxes. That would drive taxes down to close to $0.

I'm broke. But I still don't see the logic in taxing the rich to pay for the rest of us. Let them keep their money and I'll get by on what I can get by on.

If I can scrape by, why can't the darn gov't scrape by too?

I'm kinda all over the place in what I think, so I know I'll never get a president that wants to cut spending, eliminate income taxes, eliminate business and capital gains taxes, make healthcare universal, cut the military, cut social security, cut medicare, legalize any drug, let the homos get married, allow abortions, free trade worldwide, stop policing and being a douche to the rest of the world....

Bottom line, cut as much spending as you can, lower everyone's taxes, provide a minimum set of essential services, and give me the freedom to do whatever I want within reason.

In the meantime, can I get someone other than Obama or Romney to pick from?

**AzStillers1989** · 02-01-2012, 07:17 PM

Originally Posted by flippy

The fundamental problem is the majority of Americans are enslaved into the US Federal Gov't in some form. From welfare to social security to jobs and so on and so forth.

And people will vote for what benefits them. And the things all these individual benefits add up to harm us all.

I'd vote for someone that wanted to reduce Warren Buffett's tax bill. This whole idea of tax the rich is stupid. It's not like Warren uses more federal gov't services than anyone else. For the amount he pays in taxes, he should have secret service guarding him. He should have an airport in his backyard. And on and on.

Poor people consume more gov't services, so make them pay for what they use.

Why can't the gov't come out and say this is what we're gonna spend this year and we'll divide it up equally amongst every person. If each person had to pay $50k/person/yr, there would be an uprising. Actually, we should make it a constitutional ammendment that everyone pays exactly the same in taxes. That would drive taxes down to close to $0.

I'm broke. But I still don't see the logic in taxing the rich to pay for the rest of us. Let them keep their money and I'll get by on what I can get by on.

If I can scrape by, why can't the darn gov't scrape by too?

I'm kinda all over the place in what I think, so I know I'll never get a president that wants to cut spending, eliminate income taxes, eliminate business and capital gains taxes, make healthcare universal, cut the military, cut social security, cut medicare, legalize any drug, let the homos get married, allow abortions, free trade worldwide, stop policing and being a douche to the rest of the world....

Bottom line, cut as much spending as you can, lower everyone's taxes, provide a minimum set of essential services, and give me the freedom to do whatever I want within reason.

In the meantime, can I get someone other than Obama or Romney to pick from?

Ron Paul

The only candidate who will cut 1$ trillion in his first year of presidency. The only candidate whos voting record has not change from year to year or decade to decade for that matter. The only candidate who is not funded by corporate companies but from people like you and I. Also the only candidate who has served in the military and receives more military support than all other candidates combinded (even more than obama). So the question is not Mitt or Obama cause a vote for either one is just like voting for the same thing we have been doing. But a question of do you believe in personal liberty and a sound economic system as well as a stronge defense and no nation building.

Ron Paul is the answer and as this election cycles continues forward I think people will start waking up at a much faster rate because we know our economy is in terrible shape and these wars are un declared and we need to finish the job.

Don't believe me however, do some research yourself... check out ronpaul2012.com and look up his views and see for yourself... dont understand something?? dailypaul.com is a excelent resorce for freedom lovers like you and I.

**snarky** · 02-01-2012, 08:23 PM

My wife and I went to Freeport to see Ron Paul speak on Saturday. He makes some good points about our growing debt and our overly bellicose military stance/foreign policy.

On the other hand, I felt like he spoke in a lot of generalities and he also said some stuff that is just plain incorrect. As much as I agree with his point of view on a lot of things, there is no way I would vote for him.

**AzStillers1989** · 02-01-2012, 09:38 PM

Originally Posted by snarky

My wife and I went to Freeport to see Ron Paul speak on Saturday. He makes some good points about our growing debt and our overly bellicose military stance/foreign policy.

On the other hand, I felt like he spoke in a lot of generalities and he also said some stuff that is just plain incorrect. As much as I agree with his point of view on a lot of things, there is no way I would vote for him.

Thats the freedom of America, 1st amendment give us all that right.

If you don't mind me asking, what was turning you off to his message?

**edit** it is great to see you both had the interest to go to an event...

**SanAntonioSteelerFan** · 02-01-2012, 10:19 PM

One of the things that turns me off on Dr. Paul is the racist newsletters he published in the 90's. http://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/ ... story.html . Apparently it wasn't a hands-off didn't-know-what-was-being-published-over-my-name kind of thing ... the story quotes his associates as saying he was involved in the content on a daily basis.

So it seems to me he's either extremely racist, or if he's not (as he now says) he's willing to make money off of hard core racism.

Either way, as a result of that I have a hard time thinking of him as my president, whatever other good ideas he may or not have. I've looked for the other side to the story, but haven't found it yet.