What will it take for for liberals to turn their backs on Obama?

This was one really creepy post.

Anyway, Obama's supporters must recognize, on some level, that he has furthered virtually every policy they hated Bush for, but still they support him slavishly. It's fully evident by now that Obama is virtually identical to Willard, and that both candidates are worse than Bush.

 

I don't think of it as the lesser of two evils, since by definition all US Presidents are evil personified, that's one of the problems here, only crazy people can get elected. Because you'd have to be nuts to want the job.

Who else wants to sit around with a nuclear button in their hand while everyone throws feces at them? Only a crazy person wants that!

So the question is degree of crazy, divided by degree of idiocy times degree of adherence to dogma...and I can't see Romney doing too well on that formula. Obama has at very least kept the wheels on the car, when it was clearly set up to fail under his watch, by the party that just keeps trying to make us forget how bad they screwed us, intentionally, with lies and manipulations that boggle the mind.

LIBOR was fixing bank rates in this country with Bush's full knowledge, from at least 2005 on, until recently outed during the Obama administration. Coincidence?

Those are the bastards to be smearing with shit, but the press just turns the other way, just like with wikileaks, which exposed a lot of Republican corruption, and wanton malfeasance. The problem isn't lesser evils, but lack of any knowledge by the public of what they have just witnessed in history.

All these people crying about how bad things are under Obama, have a lot of soul searching to do as far as I'm concerned. Your congress is corrupt. Supreme court is corrupt. And for the most part, people think that is normal.

I remember in 1996, listening to the people attacking Bill Clinton, for getting a BJ from a page and lying to congress, and he was re-elected in a landslide, because nobody could stand Bob Dole...Obama has been dogged by birthers, and tea party no-nos and republican stonewalling on a scale I've never witnessed, and I keep wondering why he gives them everything they want, then lets them blame him for it. So, in return, Mitt has agreed to be Bob Dole this time around. The play is cast, just watch it.

Mitt Romney is the John Kerry of Bob Doles.

 

^Where's Obama on exposing any of the bullshit that's happened under his terms?

Like the bank bailouts that helped nobody?

That energy company owned by Obama's friend that failed and was set up for failure from the beginning given millions of dollars from taxpayers?

Running guns to Mexico falling under executive privledge?

Many of his donators given public office positions.

His pardoning of torture under Bush's terms.

You're trying to separate two parties that are equally scummy, and are inherently the same.

 

Indeed, Willard Romney is basically just John Kerry, who had no actual platform of any kind beyond not being Bush. The difference is so minimal that no one really seemed to notice when Willard started using Kerry's old campaign slogan.

 

Except the guy libertarians love (Ron Paul) is a forced-birther, as in vehemently anti-abortion.

Libertarian, my ass.

 

I'd vote for Kucinich in a heartbeat but the corporate assholes, some of whom have wide support on this forum, would never let a guy like that be elected. Too honest, he'd tell Monsanto to fuck off.

 

Fixed that for you, Cletus.

 

The only good conservative is a DEAD conservative.

Discussion of violence is not tolerated here - WW

 

You keep one thing in mind, there are a lot more liberals with guns than you can even imagine. We WILL shoot back.

Discussion of guns and violence are not tolerated here - WW

 

i always thought it was the teabaggers that were the crazy violent gun wackos..

 

Hey, I won't fire the first shot, they already have, anyway. Between the Sikh Temple and George Tiller, the shooting has started and not a single liberal has fired a shot.

But let these right-wing assholes keep it up and things might get pretty interesting.

 

^ Isnt James Holmes a liberal democrat?

 

Was it really necessary to take the bellicose creepiness espoused by that individual to a whole 'nother level?

Can't we try to keep the level of discourse here at least a little higher than the mere exchange of violent threats?

 

If liberals are not willing to fight evil blow for blow, they deserve to lose. Keeping it civil is another way of saying pussing out. Liberals have been doing that ever since Reagan. Saint Rectum could not be criticized and even though every Democratic president since the Rectum has been savaged, excoriated, lied about and obstructed, giving as good as we get is somehow considered less "civil."

Fuck that. I've had enough.

 

No evidence. Prove it.

 

Try that with me. Different outcome, Cletus. CCW is my friend.