Smart choice! YES WE CAN!!!

More like "NO WE COULDN'T" after that abysmal first term in office.

Wish I could have been there with you, Kicks!

how, exactly, would obama make gasoline less costly? you make no sense.

The "Bum" was thrown out in 2008! We now have a REAL President.

Sure... worst unemployment in history, nearly every one of his original campaign promises broken, an administration that the United Nations calls the most secretive in American history (despite those promises of transparency), a White House filled with lobbyist (despite those promises of no lobbyists), a new heath care plan that has already issued exemptions to some of the America's largest employers who this bill was supposed to compel to provide insurance (like McDonalds)...

The military can't stand him, vets can't stand him (I'm a vet and the Legion, VFW and DAV all refuse to support hi), other countries can't stand him (wasn't he going to fix relations with other countries instead of making them worse) and as I type this, we are poised to go to war in Syria and Iran with US Marines and at two Naval battle groups over there awaiting the command and a third on the way.

The man has played more rounds of golf that both President Clinton and Bush's 4 terms combines, has turned nearly every issue in America into a racial problem (if I had son he would look like...) and he and his wife have spent more of our taxpayer money on vacations in one term than Bush, Clinton or ANY other past President spent in their terms.

Bailouts for the rich, rising oil prices, unemployment at a record high... even with him changing the way it's reported to only show those receiving compensation, skewing the numbers by omitting people who ran out of unemployment).

It is truely AMAZING that the real "bum" and his cronies responsible for these past years is NEVER held accountable!! How easy....blame the one who inherited this mess AND ignore all his accomplishments which avoided things becoming even WORSE!!!

Obama has been in office 4 years and you are STILL blaming everyone else but him. Guess what? The excuses have run out and the old line of "inheriting this mess" doesn't cut it anymore. Barack Obama, the candidate, promised before he was elected that within his first term he would, "Lift two million Americans from poverty and jolt our economy back to life." He also promised to "to cut the deficit we inherited in the half by the end of my first term in office."

He did none of those things and yet, you still drink the Kool Aid and talk about "Yes We Can!" What you should be saying is "No We Didn't!"

"PRESIDENT" ROMNEY!!!???? GOD HELP US!!!!

At least we'll have a President who actually cares about the poor. Compare their tax returns that have been released. Last year, Romney donated 14% of his earnings to charity and non-profits. Obama donated 3%. Then there are the attack commercials against Romney that were proven false, but the President refuses to stop running. The one about taxes that was proven wrong by tax experts from the federal government or the one about the old guy who claimed Romney took over his company and he lost his insurance, so his wife died. Turns out Romney had left Bain Capital by the time it took over that company, the guy's wife had her own insurance and she died 5 years later.

President Romney and Vice-President Rice can't come soon enough!

Romney will never be President. I would bet my home on it. The man is an empty suit. When he left office as Governor, he had the lowest rating of any MASS. Governor (34%). Job creation fell from 37th to 47th. During his 4 year term, Romney only increased the number of jobs by 1% compared to 5% for the nation. THE NUMBER OF PEOPLE WORKING DECLINED. Between 2002-2006, the number of people working in Mass declined by 8,500 people, the only state to lose jobs. The rest of the country added 8 million jobs. LOST MANUFACTURING JOBS. Romney lost 14% of the manufacturing jobs in the state, including 40,000 high paying manufacturing jobs. PEOPLE LEFT MASS TO FIND WORK ELSEWHERE. A net 222,000 people moved out of Mass to seek employment else where, a loss of 3.5% of the work force. Romney brags that unemployment dropped, but that's because the unemployed had moved out of the state. WAGES DROPPED. Between 2002-2004, wages dropped 5%. Between 2002-2006, the median wage fell by $10 or 2%. SHIPPED STATE JOBS OVERSEAS. Romney vetoed legislation that would have prohibited sending State jobs overseas and bared state contractors from sending jobs overseas. He even sent State Call Center Jobs overseas. Romney for President? Not a snow balls chance in hell.

Your facts are mistaken and intentionally misleading. Romney didn't create as many jobs as other Governors, that's true. It's also true that he didn't lower unemployment much in his last year in office....... BECAUSE UNEMPLOYMENT WAS 4% UNDER ROMNEY!

Again, resorting to personal attacks because you aren't knowledgeable about the facts to speak extemporaneously about the situation this President has created for our country. I can most certainly be reasoned with, but I can not be fooled as you so obviously have been.

Love the fake indignation to cover up your sheer ignorance, though. It's rather funny.

Nazareth Man....you are RUUUUUUDE!!!!!!!!

I'll debate you on Romney vs Obama anytime, Frank. As far as leading, we haven't had a real leader since President Reagan. Bush screwed the pooch with those bailouts at the end, and Obama continued them. Clinton screwed the intern and Bush's father was a war hero and a nice enough guy, but not a true leader.

You say that Obama cares about the poor and lower middle class, yet he has issued waivers for a huge majority of companies that employ them for his health care plan. At the same time, he is imposing a penalty if those same people don't muster up the money to buy it themselves.

The true test of character is how much of his OWN money Obama has donated to charity and last year is was 3% of his income. That's pathetic. Romney donated 14%, an indisputable fact. Sure, place your trust in Obama. The prisoners at Guantanamo Bay did and well, they're still sitting around waiting for him to close it or to at least stop the water boarding. He's done neither, despite promising to do both.

You honestly think directing me to a campaign-sponsored website is going to change my mind? Why don't YOU check out this non-partisan site-
http://factcheck.org/2012/08/does-romney-pay-a-lower-rate-in-taxes-than-you/
http://www.flackcheck.org/patterns-of-deception/

I'm guessing you're not a veteran, are you, Frank?

I'll take that as a no, Frank. Maybe if you had served this country and truly understood what it takes to defend it, you'd have a little more respect for a President who also understood it. Obama was wore a cheerleader uniform, Clinton wore a band uniform and both Bush's wore military uniforms. The elder Bush was a war hero. But then again, it's easier to sit back and enjoy the freedom people them them, me and so many others have provided you, complaining about all the ills of the world and getting your facts from Democratic campaign sites and The Daily Show on he COMEDY Network.

Again, ad hominem attacks at me personally, with no factual data. Both of their 2011 tax returns are public knowledge and accessible, and both have been scrutinized by financial experts. The info is out there, you'd just rather bask in the glow of your own financial security and the good feeling it gives you to vote for Obama. Good feelings don't feed the children and most of America don't have that financial security. Our President certainly hasn't done anything to change that, he's made it worse!

Reagan is regarded as a great President by many on BOTH sides of the aisle and our country faced it's greatest prosperity in recent times during his administration. Did he blame the shambles this country was in when he took office on Carter? He certainly could have, but NO, he did something about it instead of sitting around making excuses.

By the way, Obama did donate the Nobel prize money, something that was agreed upon BEFORE he was given the prize and done by about half of its recipients. That was three years ago. What has he done since and YES, that is an issue. When a politician is so willing to spend our money but not his own, that is a serious issue. His income in 2011 was $789,674 (a quarter of what he earned prior and a token of what he will earn after office) and I will have to correct myself on one point. He did donate a significant amount of his income once he became President. I was mistaken in that fact and am willing to capitulate.

Prior to his presidency, he gave nearly nothing, but once he became President and it was pointed out to him that he needed to do much more, he did donate much more. Does it mean that he's a great philanthropist? No. It means that he had smart advisors. Consider that Romney is not President and has been donating that much for years. Here are his returns before becoming President (and 2007 includes questionable gifts to Jeremiah Wright's church- http://taxprof.typepad.com/taxprof_blog/2008/04/obama-releases.html

Can't argue with those numbers, Frank.

Why, thank you. They can have their big lovefest now and after the election, we will have ours... AND a much safer and more economically stable country.

Your reasons are flawed in so many ways. Do you really believe Bush "gave up" on getting Bin Laden, or perhaps, he knew that Bin Laden was being protected by one of our allies in a very dangerous part of the world, one who has nuclear weapons and an already unstable government?

Saved hundreds of jobs? The REAL unemployment number is about what it was in the great depression. Obama simply redefined the number, excluding people who are not collecting unemployment compensation with the assumption that they are now working. Nevermind, that many of them simply ran out of benefits and are now collecting welfare.

Our health care system hasn't changed, we just now require Americans to have it and fine them if they do not. Obama thinks it's wrong to be forced to prove citizenship to vote, but it's somehow right to be forced to prove you have health insurance.... unless you're an illegal immigrant. Then we all turn our heads.

"Fascist tea party" You seriously need to look up fascism in the dictionary. While I am not a member of the Tea Party, you seem to have no clue about them or fascism. Enjoy your Kool Aid. Hope you can use it to heat your house this winter and fill your car's gas tank.

Bush transferred manpower and intelligence to invade Iraq which took resources away from where the real fight needed to be. We had no reason to go to Iraq. Plenty of A holes in the world have weapons of mass destruction and despotic leaders. Sorry but jobs were being shed left and right under W and while they have not been great since Obama took over at least they are being created. Of course rt. wing governors have gutted the public sector in some states which hurts those numbers. The health care system can no longer deny those with pre-existing conditions, students can stay on their parents plans longer and people are getting rebates if their insurance companies are paying less than a certain % on health care costs. I know fascism well as I have studied its origins in Spain, Italy and nazi Germany. I believe the tea party shares so many of the same characteristics: build and never cut the military, wrap yourself up in false patriotism, show a reverance for big business etc. The biggest complaint I have against Obama is that he gave birth to this movement by doing a terrible job explaining health care reform. The funny part is that a lot of the reform came right out of the Heritage Foundation which your side just cannot run from no matter how hard you may try. Your boy Romney will not win PA, Ohio, Wisconsin, Michigan, Nevada etc. etc etc. We surived W and you are going to have to survive 4 more years of Obama. Best of luck!

Nazareth Man - You seem to have leaped to some conclusions. Someone in this thread is commenting anonymously but it's not me.

I have some questions for you though. Are you one of the people who still believe that Saddam Hussein was responsible for 9/11 even though 15 of the 19 hijackers were Saudis? Why was no one who participated in the Bush Administration’s completely illegal wiretapping ever charged? Who, exactly, benefited from the Iraq War(s)? Is Iraq really better today than it was before we went in to "save" them? Did you know that just a few weeks ago over 100 were killed in Iraq by bombings? Do you think that the hundreds of billions of dollars, that the US didn't have, that were spent to fight the recent Iraq War might have anything to do with the present state of the economy? Speaking of which, have any bankers, even just one, been indicted for the massive sub-prime mortgage fraud? Why is that do you think? Have you seen any crazed Iranians hiding in your neighborhood? Have you heard about any Iranians anywhere in the US causing trouble? How soon do you think it will be before that war starts? Do you believe that a corporation is a person? Has a corporation ever been born in a hospital delivery room? Do you know that there are over 25,000 corporate lobbyists in Washington? Do you actually believe that with over 500 lobbyists to every Congress person that We The People come before big money?

Sorry, I'm not a liberal. But be careful, you might be one and not realize it. I say this because you seem to believe that the nearly 4300 dead and more than 30,000 wounded American military and the hundreds of billions of dollars spent for the Iraqi people were worth it. What about the more 100,000 Iraqi civilians that were killed as a direct result of our aggression? It seems that American weapons have killed a heck of a lot more people in recent years than any other country's WMDs.

By the way, I hope you're working on answering at least a few more of my questions.

So, assuming that your assertion is true, that the US economy booms when the country is at war, and assuming that it’s booming legitimately, that is, for reasons other than the Federal Reserve just printed the dollars to fight the war (thereby creating more inflation), how do you explain the economy at present give the Iraq and Afghan conflicts? Why is the economy down the tubes?

Granted, Ron Paul is not going to be a candidate like Ross Perot was, but if he were, if all the Republicans and Independents wasted their votes for him, in the end they wouldn’t be wasted, would they? No, you’re wrong, wasting a vote is voting for more of the same, for one of the corporate puppets.

Nazareth Man - OK. You got me. The more than 100,000 number does include Iraqi military. Perhaps I should have asked you this question: Do you believe that it is the responsibility of the US to come to the defense of all the subjugated peoples in the world?

I agree with nearly everything you said, except that Obama is a good speaker. The man is like a bumbling buffoon without his teleprompter.

Thank you for your long and faithful service to this country.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2wS8B1Qp5kQ&feature=related
http://youtu.be/t4-AKcH3eC8

You make some valid and interesting points and I will vote for Obama. Romney will, as all Republicans do, allow the affluent to attain larger bank accounts. Now, there is nothing wrong with earning money – earning. To take away from the less fortunate in order to accomplish that is wrong. More tax breaks for whom? Do you want to guess? The middle class, poor, disabled and elderly will suffer again. Most of the businesses, owned by reps have already gone overseas to increase their wealth by paying the employees nothing. We all are aware of those practices, so there is no arguing that fact. Mitt's standing record, or rather what he is allowing the citizens to see, does not fit well. It does not add up. However, to see this rich man flaunt his wealth and try to come off as a “good old boy” makes a good comical story.

He has a net worth of over $250 million and millions in offshore tax havens. He has not divulged how he got it, how he invests it and if he pays all his taxes on it. Since he has not stated those facts, you can be sure he will be a sneak. I don't want a sneak leading this country. His father George, in 1967 released 12 years of tax returns. Mitt declines to release any of his returns. Something is amiss. That will be Mitt.

Slyfox, you do realize that businesses are going overseas because of legislation that President Clinton, A DEMOCRAT, signed. Right? You will vote Obama because he is a Democrat and you were taught that Democrats are good and Republicans are bad. Pure and Simple. Don't muddle the truth.

Peter, he has done something. Our country now has the MOST on welfare. And we are streaming right along to socialism. Whether or not the naive liberals want to see it. Soon we will be calling each other "comrades". Just wait until the biggest tax increase really takes effect. (Obamacare)

This man has no regard to the constitution, and has the media in his pocket, including this online paper.

That agreement easily could have been extended prolonging the mistake in Iraq. I also remember when W landed on that aircraft carrier and declared all major combat operations over in Iraq. How many lives and billions of dollars ago was that? Why would anybody vote for a man who will not release his taxes? You need to study the Bain model to see that they helped kill those companies so a few could benefit. And what is Romney, a moderate Republican that governed Mass. or this race to the right to out conservative Rick Santorum and the rest of the nuts?

"Why would anybody vote for a man who will not release his taxes?"

Why would anybody vote for a man who wouldn't release his BIRTH CERTIFICATE until his 3rd year as President? Why won't Obama release his college thesis about socialism? Oh, and Romney HAS released his tax returns. They're online and available to all. Harry Reid was proven a liar and fraud for claiming Romney "paid no taxes for 10 years," but has yet to apologize or retract his false statement.

Oh no you are a birther as well? I agree. Conversation over.

I'm not a "Birther" but I do find it peculiar that every single other Presidential candidate is required to produce their certificate prior to being certified by their party. He is the first not to have done so, since the incarnation of American birth certificates. Why is that? Why did he wait until his third year in office to do it? Could it possibly be that he was trying to manipulate the press and American people by distracting them from all the campaign promises he was breaking?

Perhaps if he leaves another 10 posts Romney will only lose PA by 6%?

Typical Liberals..... can't speak to the facts, so you try to defame me and label me a "troll." It's a shame you are so afraid to look behind the curtain in the Emerald Palace at the real Wizard of Obama. You don't want to learn the truth and find out you've been supporting a fraud.

Published in the Wall Street Journal today...

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10000872396390443537404577577193632921170.html?mod=ITP_opinion_2

31 posts N. Man. What causes such an obsession? Is it because you are looking at the polls in the swing states? Here is the thing, your party has picked the wrong candidate. Folks in Mississippi in Texas won't be able to figure this out but all of the blog posts in the world will not win you the swing states.

More personal attacks on both me and the good folks you stereotyped and maligned in those states. You ought to be ashamed. This is the problem with today's Liberals, they can't have a discussion of issues and facts without getting indignant and resorting to personal attacks. I posted facts, figures and in one case, made a mistake which I promptly took responsibility for and corrected.

I included links to substantiate the things I've said, each one to a non-partisan sight. You offer only insults. The closest thing to a fact you have put forward is the number of posts I made, which tells me you took the time to count each one and seem fixated on ME, rather than the issue at hand. It also tells me that I am living right there in your Liberal brain, rent free.

uh oh the L word! LIBERAL oh no the goverment will take over ahHHHHHHH! Here is a fact for you - we spend more money on the military than the next 15 countries combined. Want to shrink the liberal government. Let's start there. After that, no more neo-con. nation building in the middle east or anywhere else. After that, I will be happy to support cuts in entitlement programs that make some sense. And if we need to use force keep it limitied and use allies. And I'm not talking allies who contribute 2% of the costs and man power. Another fact - The W tax cuts were never meant to be permanent. Let them run out for those who do not need them. Another, our economy is creating jobs which was not happening the last time your party had the presidency. Other facts I posted were about health care: rebates, pre-existing conditions, staying on parents plans until 26, the Iraq War and Bin Laden.
Also, stop the victim routine. If I was personally attacking you it would be much worse. I use some satire/sarcasm but you are not personally under attack.
As far as how liberal I am - Most of my life I have voted split ticket slightly favoring the GOP. With the massive race to the right that is no longer the case. I totally agree with the Rep. from Ohio who resigned due to his party doing nothing more than blocking legisilation. Good for him for tellin the truth.

More insults and no facts. Well, one purposely skewed (or unintentionally ignorant) fact about the military. You fail to note that both Russia and China outspend us militarily and would love the opportunity to take us out of the picture. If you think Russia is tamed and the Cold War is over, I have a bridge in Brooklyn I'd like to sell you.

Point blank, Obama came into office without being vetted and he had no leadership ability. It was a failed experiment and it will soon come to an end, no matter how much you cry and wail. Fin.

Nazareth Man - You can't be serious. It is common knowledge that the US spends more on its military than the next 20 or so nations combined! The US spends 5 times as much as China and 10 times what Russia spends.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_military_expenditures

Obama will be over in about 5 years. Romney cannot win. He is an absurd candidate.
U.S. outspends Russia and China and anybody else by far: http://consortiumnews.com/2012/04/24/world-military-spending-still-rising/
Yes, military expenditures by China and Russia increased in 2011. And in “real” terms, too. But, even so, their military strength hardly rivals that of the United States. Indeed, the United States spent about five times as much as China (the world’s #2 military power) and ten times as much as Russia (the world’s #3 military power) on its military forces during 2011.
Romney has not released his tax returns (duh) http://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2012/08/mitt-romneys-tax-return-time-bomb/260993/
You are not being attacked personally! Paranoid right wing delusions I'm guessing.

Did you seriously just use Wikipedia as a reference? Hahahahahah!

And the other one uses a Democratic Committee funded website as evidence... lol.

You want his return? Here it is-
http://www.washingtonpost.com/business/mitt-romneys-2010-tax-return-romneys-estimated-2011-filing-full-text/2012/01/24/gIQApZ6RNQ_story.html

Salsisbury Falcon...my sentiments EXACTLY!!!! I have learned a long time ago one cannot debate with illogical, vindictive and vial thinking!! These posts are an amazing innacurate collection of the FOX, Limbaugh, Hannity, right wing etc....vitreol and hate rhetoric....the post on the other Patch article you point out is perfect proof!! Again, there is no such thing as "healthy" debate with such hate and filth!

First of all, Salisbury Falcon, not all Republicans are racists or nut jobs like whoever wrote that quote you just posted. Secondly, I agree that Bush spent much more money than he should have and his initiation of bailouts was very wrong, just as Obama's continuing and expanding upon it was. You talk about the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan costing us 1.4 trillion dollars, yet still point out the deficit and blame Bush. We were right to go to war in both situations and I am curious of how you will frame it when Obama announces the new war in Syria and Iran. Somehow you will make it Bush's fault, I'm sure.

You don't want to debate me, because I won't lose my temper of back down from yours and your liberal friends' indignation and antagonistic approach to debate. Civility is lost on the left. So you don't want to debate me, fine, ignorance is bliss

Those comments have been deleted. We invite spirited debate and we appreciate that, excepting that one poster, the conversation has remained reasonably civil without degenerating into this kind of name calling.

I'm not seeing anything in your post that is going to fly. Saying Bush ended the Iraq war is comical. Of course that deadline could have been renegotiated and extended. Obama did indeed end that debacle. With power comes responsibility? Look we are spending far too much for military purposes period. Welfare? Remember the Clinton Gingrich reforms in the 90's? Welfare is a fraction of the overall spending now. That is a word used to fire up the right wing period. I would do that to if I were on your side looking at the polls in the swing states. What your people are after are items like social security and education but again don't touch the military. It's very easy to know what to look for in the tax returns and yes it matters. How much is he paying and at what percent? What's the problem? Are you kidding me? To refuse to disclose the returns is an insult to all voters and George Romney would agree: http://www.buzzfeed.com/buzzfeedpolitics/why-george-romney-released-his-tax-returns

In 2001 house was GOP Senate was 50/50
In 2003 and 2005 Both House and Senate were GOP

So I do not understand how you can say that congress was democratically controlled under Bush.

War debt is always figured into the federal overall deficit. BUT it is not included in the budget figures (ie:current yearly budget deficits) if the money spent comes from emergency spending.

The last 2 years, NOT 3, of the Bush admin was a democratic congress.....meaning he had 75% of his term with a majority. I mentioned the "budget" b/c you did not seem to understand how the emergency spending goes on a budget. The gov't has been working on a budget every year. You must listen to Fox new and the tea party BS a little too much

I guess I didn't clearly make point. No one gave two thoughts about the economy untill the housing bubble burst. I think arguing about the cause of that would be pointless with this crowd as no one is going to change their mind. But for the end of the Bush administration it was a democratically controlled congress, whether it was two or three years. Bush did nothing to help stop the tide, but no one knew it was bottoming out. Never once came up during the democratic primaries prior to the 2008 election.

Now I am going to bed.

Thank goodness!!

bad link

Sorry, take out Presidents:

thanks for the laff! You're a hoot. Have a good day.

Yeah, Lee. louis kootsares is the boards jokester. He really isn't as stupid as he sounds, it's all comedy. LOL!