I wish that Obama loved the truth more than he does... First, Romney nailed Obama on the amount of permits the Obama administration has allowed for drilling on federal lands... It's 60% less than it was under Bush... Obama's denials were an outright lie... Then, once the debate brielfly touched on Libya, Obama claimed that he called it a terrorist act during his comments in the Rose Garden the day after the attack... In fact, he mentioned "acts of terror", and was not speficifally referring to the attack in Benghazi... And before Romney could reply to that lie, liberal moderator Candy Crowley cuts him off and says Obama is right - that he called the attack an act of terrorism... That was absolutely wrong, and Crowley apologized after the debate when it was pointed out that she was wrong... Of course, the damage was done - Romney was not allowed to pursue that topic further, and then Crowley changed the subject... Had she not interferred, Romney would have asked Obama why, if he had thought it to be an act of terrorism, did he send out the U.N. ambassador, Susan Rice, to hit the talk show circuit to perpetuate the lie that the attack was caused by a YouTube video? It defies common sense and logic... It's not the truth...

Obama never answered a question, never produced his plan to get things better, was not a happy camper and day in and day out demonstrates that he has little respect for the country and its people. Go back and look at his answer to the gentleman that told him of his plight and how was the President going to make it better. Lot of words with no substance. Empty suit.

Passion does not cut a horrible record, the faxts, my stagnant salary and increasing costs. You are falling for style and not substance, like so many in this country. SHAME on you, PLeeeease check facts before you harm the country with your vote...

I don't understand how anyone can like Mitt Romney. How do you even know what he believes? I have never seen a politician change his position on more core value issues than Romney. He is Pro-Choice and then he is Pro-Life; Pro Gun control then Anti gun Control. It's as if he has his finger in the air all the time to determine which way the political wind is blowing. How can you believe anything he says? At least with Obama you are getting a man of real integrity.

Independent Voter's response to this calls Obama a man of "real integrity." That's just oxymoronic! As a state senator voted present more often than not. Hung out with an unrepentant urban terrorist. Learned community destruction from Saul Alinsky. attended a racist church for over 20 years, and then through its pastor under the bus for political expediency. Changed the application of bankruptcy law to favor his union backers. Won't let us drill for energy in the U.S. but offers loans to Brazil so they can drill in their waters. Gave us a racist Attorney General and protects him by invoking executive privilege. And the list goes on . . .

Obama was not the winner. He was angry and desperate and it showed.

A vote for Obama is a vote for socialism. I pray he doesn't win!

Someone must be paying your bills... what reality do you leave on, Sir?

+1!

Romney won the debate and Democrats can't stand it!!

I totally agree, Greendayer... Obama had more energy in this debate, and was a lot more animated... Unfortunately, he still didn't have command of the facts, and had not the moderator interferred on the Libya issue (for which she had to apologize for her error after the debate), it would have been another Romney clear cut win... This despite the fact that Obama, for the second time, got three more minutes to speak, thanks to Candy Crowley's obvious bias... Because Obama was so horrible in the first debate, and performed better here, much of the media will call it a win for Obama... However, if you look at the facts, and how Romney hammered Obama on his record over the last four years, you will see that it was a Romney win... All the spin in the world cannot change the economic nightmare that has been the last four years under Obama... And the continued lies on the Libya debacle are just a disgrace... Four died in a clear terrorist act, and Obama hits Vegas for a political fundraiser... His priorities are not in line with most of America...

I was going to write something on my own, but you did it much better; so, thanks for that. It is amazing how the President keeps stretching the truth and distorting it, and delivering ike a true politician (no praise intended). He can have all the style of the world but a record does not lie (just watch his promises of 2008 and check!). People such as Mr A.Smith (see above) can only dealand deliver soundbites (just read his!) and cannot truly and responsibly into the facts and the truth. It takes time and brains to do so, something so many people playing Zombie Video Games and staying at home (where someone else pays the bills) do not have. And that's why they cannot afford anyting intelligent but writing "OBAMA!" on this site. That people like that actually VOTE is an unfortunate joke on how truly serious the current situation is for middle class, working families like mine.

I agree Greendayer.

@ Diana Bork - I couldn't agree more... And despite moderator bias, Romney is more than holding his own... It would have been another Romney debate beat down of Obama had Candy Crowley not interferred on the Libya questions... That said, it just goes down as a win for Romney... If you lie, like Obama did on gas/oil drilling on federal lands and on Libya, you cannot claim a debate victory... You lose by default...

Candy wouldn't even let Romney speak. She is a liberal and did her best to protect Obama during this debate. Shame on her!

I agree Dale!!! Romney mad his case and Obama just kept repeating the same lie after lie.

@VA_in_VA: Obama was NOT talking about the attack in Libya when he said "no act of terror will go unpunished"... It was a general statement... Nothing specific about Libya... This is backed up by the fact that he subsequently sent U.N. ambassador Susan Rice to hit all the talk shows to discuss the administrations view that this was caused by a YouTube video... Keep in mind that the State Department was watching the attack in real time... Are you naive enough to believe that the White House wasn't notified about what was happening there? Please... They just didn't want the truth to come out because it not only shows that security was woefully inadequate on the anniversary of 9/11, but also that Obama's foreign policy initiatives are a failure... The lies are out there for everyone to see, and even the moderators interference last night won't keep the truth from coming out... Romney owned the facts last night, therefore he owned the debate, despite Obama getting three more minutes to talk, just like the first debate... Again, it's quality over quantity, and Romney has it, and Obama cannot run from his record the last four years nor his lies...

Noone knew all the fact, except for the whole world! What network are you watching? The stametent he dleivered was an aftherthougt, a clkose to his speech NOT anything related to what videos, weapons, facts and most of the wolrd (including surely the CIA) were seeing. Have you seen any clips from the Congress gerings on this? It seems not. Just like your president: soundbites sound good, but rthetoric is CHEAP.

Hey you, VA_in_VA.....right on.

Even Candy Crowley admitted afterward that Mitt Romney was 100% right on Obama's day-after response about Libya

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/video/2012/10/16/cnns_candy_crowley_romney_was_actually_right_on_libya.html

VA in Spinland

Apparently you don't understand two things - Obamas intentions and English.

“No acts of terror will ever shake the resolve of this nation, alter that character, or eclipse the light of the values that we stand for,” are his words verbatim. So any non-partisan with a command of English understands he was speaking in general terms and in NO way called the Bengazi attack terrorism.

A act of terror doesn't amount to terrorism that is planned implemented and used as a weapon of intimidation. You really ought to have your clock checked before you call someone sick when you are ill informed troglodyte. Let the adults have this discussion and pick up your broken crayons and go away.

"liberal moderator"? How often have you observed Candy Crowley in action? My concern was that she would be too conservatively biased and favor Gov. Romney! (She wasn't...for the most part, she stayed admirably neutral.)
Crowley did a pretty good job. But it really is too bad she didn't cut both of them off more quickly so more citizen questions could be asked.

Btw, the formats for all have been set for some time.

The curious thing about the "town hall debate" was that the two men were assigned floor areas in which they were supposed to stay. Several times Gov. R started going around in a wide circle, and Pres. O then did the same -- know what it looked like? Alpha dogs circling

Yes, it was rigged in favor of Obama!!! Even the audience members. The Democrats are surely desperate.

@Mike: I disagree... I think Romney was pretty effective at laying down his plans for turning the economy around, creating jobs, and reeling in federal spending... Whether you agree with those plans or not, it's at least a positive vision economically, and we haven't had that in a long time... Obama's plan is simply four more years of the same, and all he offers during these debates is attacks on Romney's plans... I don't want to hear his view of why Romney's plans won't work... I'd much rather hear alternative ideas, but we don't get any from Obama... Just stay on the path of the previous four years, which have been a economic disaster... I cannot imagine anyone wanting another four years like the last four... That's not a plan... Say what you will about Romney, but he has a proven, successful track record in business and in fixing economic problems - With the Olympics, with Bain Capital, and in MA, where he worked well with Democrats... Obama has four years of economic misery...

In the CNN snap poll afterward - 7% more thought Obama won the debate (46-39) but, when polled about the issues, Mitt Romney won them all handily.

Joe - I hope you vote. We need Obama out of the White House and America's freedoms restored.

Oh, dear.

Well said!!! Obama spends to much time playing and not enough time doing his job.

I don't think you were watching the same debate as the rest of the country.....

I think you are exactly right Patriotic. I also think that both man's temperment was clearly on display, and I wasn't thrilled with what I saw from Romney.

@APL: I think you must have listened when Obama spoke, and not so much when Romney did, or you wouldn't think that Obama won this debate... Other than being more energetic and animated, he didn't bring anymore to this debate than he did in the first one... He ignores his own record the last four years, and encouraged Candy Crowley to change the subject when it came to Libya, and she obliged him... Imagine that... A liberal moderator quickly changing the subject and shutting down Gov. Romney when he started to hammer Obama on the lies on Libya...

"simple, personal answers"
Yeppa, Ross A, you've got a point.

November6th can't come fast enough!!! I'm voting for Romney and I'm willing to help Obama pack!!!

Romney gets my vote also!!

Candy Crowley was anything but neutral last night. She did her level best to help Obama on the libya lie he told. She should be banned from ever being a debate moderator again!

Obama is no leader.

wow - you obviously had on your rose colored glasses...hahahaha

Take another sip of the Kool-Aide John, you've earned it!

@John Lovaas: I see you failed to bring up Libya at all, or the fact that Obama lied about the facts on drilling permits on federal lands... Or how about the fact that when Obama was getting hammered on his record the last four years, he didn't have a response at all... And Romney didn't even bring up another one of Obama's green energy company's, A123, that just went bankrupt... After spending the $200+ million they got from the government... Another Solyndra biting the dust at taxpayers expense... Romney has been successful and every business he's been a part of, and for some reason you don't think he can figure out the #'s on the country - yet Obama can, even though he hasn't come close the last four years... Reality check, please...

@John - Agree. Romney really isn't a idealogue. That's why in Boston (and several other online interviews) he was for women's choice, he was against dirty coal, he was for green energy. Then, when such positions were no longer expedient (like when he knew at 34% approval rating in MA that he could not get re-elected), he changed his positions to match the far right GOP. He's not a man of conviction. He's an opportunist.

Fascinating to me that with 25 years in business, he did not know of ANY qualified women for cabinet positions as governor. He never answered the question on pay equity for women. He still just doesn't get the whole female thing, totally oblivious to the disparity. It is very difficult to believe that as a man of finance, Romney continues to deceive that somehow this is a normal recession and should demonstrate the same recovery curves as the Reagan recession.He never mentioned we NEVER recovered from the 2001 recession (no net new jobs in 8yrs, no actual stock market recovery - all 'fake money' based on a credit and housing bubble, no organic corporate growth). Romney knows better - and yet he does NOT step up. He hasn't stepped up on any subject that goes against his financial supporters - which is why he's for coal now (see Koch brothers for their financing). Romney is a business man and knows how to hit quarterly profit goals - he is not oriented to serving the public.

He serves only one - himself.

@ John Lovaas...Romney could have just stated that he would have a 800 million dollar deficit each of his 4 years and he still would have been a better choice than Obama. I am sure there is an excuse for that though...like it's bush fault or something.

Obama didn't bring on his game he brought to us a show of just how desperate he is to keep his job.

A stagnant salary most likely has more to do with you than anyone else.

I agree that it is every woman's right to take care of her body, but it is also everybody's right to not have to pay for it.

If we're paying for Viagra, we better dang well pay for The Pill. Taking the pill IS taking personal responsibility. NOT using a condom or getting a vasectomy and having sex (and then, overwhelmingly abandoning the financial responsibility of raising the child) is most definitely not taking personal responsibility.

And, anyone who has ever known a woman, KNOW that the pill also provides medical benefits such as dealing with hormonal regulation. It's a quality of life thing. Denying coverage for the pill is completely irresponsible and discriminatory.

@locally involved. So you are saying that much like my asthma and allergy medication, it is a quality of life issue? Are you kidding me? You have essentially boiled a woman down to a sex having machine and since she can't control her natural urge we must protect her and civilization from her progeny that she won't take care of, all in the name of QOL. We should not be paying for Viagra either. What a terribly bleak outlook on our young ladies. By the way, would you send me 50 for my asthma meds, they are due for refill. It's a Quality of Life thing, I'm sure you will help, plus the steroidal component helps keep my skin clear. Bonus

I agree, Marc. If "if's" and "but's" were candy and nuts it would be christmas all the time. Some personal responsibility is exactly what the doctor ordered. Of course that would require people not being satisfied with eaking out a meager existence on the federal dole. That would require people to have vision and perserverance, and I am afraid that much of that original pioneer sentiment is dead. What do you think?

Obama had both houses of congress with veto-proof majorities for his first two years, and democrats proceeded to ram through thousands and thousands and thousands of pages of bills that are utter abominations, without any republican votes to speak of--no bi-partisanship whatsoever, against the will of the majority of the American people we had Obamacare shoved down our throats by the psychotic Nancy Pelosi and the megalomaniacal Obama, Dodd-Frank written by the two biggest criminals in the entire housing crisis...Obamacare would never have gotten through if not for the worst election fraud I've ever seen, the blatant stealing of the Minnesota senate seat by Al Franken (an election decided by 312 votes, wherein 1,099 convicted felons illegally voted, and wherein 177 people have been tried and convicted for election fraud, with 66 cases still awaiting trial!).

Anyone who complains that republicans aren't being cooperative with the tyrannical socialist enemy of this country, Obama, needs to be taught a lesson. Obama is lucky he's escaped prosecution thus far...republicans should NEVER cooperate with Obama, period.

Completely agree. The blatant disrespect is unbelievable. Romney may not agree with Obama but he should have some respect for him as the current President of the United States and some respect for the Office.

It was Biden during the VP debate, and Obama last night, who were disrespectful and bully-like... It's part of their desperate plan to make up ground that they lost in the first debate... Continually interrupt them, and try to take them off their game, while simultaneously taking more time to get their message out... Stealing time from the other candidate... Very disrespectful, but it did work to some degree... In all three debates, the Democrat got more time... Also a by-product of liberal moderators... However, Romney just goes with quality over quantity... He nailed Obama on his pitiful record the last four years, the lies on Libya, and the lies on drilling permits on federal lands... All the spin in the world cannot make that an Obama victory, even with Crowley's assistance...

+1! Bully is a great description. Despite all of the GOP's obstructionist ways, unemployment is still down (2009 7.6% with 600k monthly job losses to 2012 at 7.8% with 120k+ job increases for 31 straight months). Stock market as doubled (from 6500 to 13,400). New Real estate construction was up 15% in September and revised up to almost 5% in August. Home foreclosures are at a 5 year low.

but none of these accomplishments will be addressed by any commenter - they'll find something else to say "but!".

I don't think the debates have changed anyone's opinion who already had an opinion. As for the undecided voters - I don't get it. No one ever has perfect information in making a decision, so I just don't know if they even truly intend to vote.

Maybe the President and Vice President should consider conducting themselves as soberly as the office dictates. Speaking and acting in a juvenile, schoolyard manner, would garner the same types of response from anyone. What you label as "bullying" is in fact someone who is scared for the future of our great country and has the insight to see what is looks like when the american populace are herded together and led toward the showers. We are in the midst of a train wreck and the current administration, rather than trying to help the survivors, is rifling through the pockets of the dead looking for coins and valuables.

Anasarka, that was very well-said.

.

"Libya is irrelevant," huh? Good luck with that. The worst attack on sovereign American territory since 9/11/01, with our diplomats raped, murdered, beheaded and their corpses dragged through the streets by mobs, and with 20 of our embassies throughout the 'Muslim world' under attack, and Obama is jetting around to hip-hop fundraisers with Jay-Z and Beyonce in Vegas, and to ghetto-rap radio station interviews with the likes of hosts named "the Pimp with a Limp," to chat shows like Letterman and The View...Obama has blown off 2/3 of his vital national security intel briefings, golfing well over 100 times, whereas Bush golfed only 24 times his entire 8 years.

The man asked the question why the consulate in Benghazi was refused additional security--it had been attacked repeatedly in the months leading up to 9/11, numerous incidents and IEDs discovered, the British ambassador was nearly assassinated there, 240 security related events in the past year, etc--and Obama simply DID NOT ANSWER THE MAN'S QUESTION. Obama and his entire administration have tried to deceive everyone about the Benghazi debacle. Susan Rice and Clinton and Obama all spun the awful lie about a YouTube video for day after day after day, in major speeches, even with the bodies of our citizens only a few feet away in coffins...

As far as your allegation about taxes, Romney did not refer to a 60% tax rate, he was referring to the fact that the very richest in this country pony up 60% of the total tax revenue paid. Contrary to you leftists' allegations, Romney has no plans to eliminate the mortgage interest deduction, whereas Obamacare features(among 20 other new taxes) a 3% tax on the proceeds from the sale of your home!

I had to laugh when Romney said he'd eliminate the capital gains tax - the vast majority of folks don't have enough in investments for that to make a hill of beans difference (the average 50+ year old has something like $50k put away in investments for retirement). The capital gains elimination benefits only Romney's income class where the only income they have is capital gains - taxed at 15%.

If lowering/eliminating capital gains and lowering tax rates helped - where's the jobs? Been 10+ years.... still waiting.... nothing trickling down here...seems to me, those that have the benefit aren't investing in job growth.

Mad Men is awesome though!

Some of the comments here are unbelievable. Obama can 'stay the course' for four more years, spend trillions more on failed policies driving the debt to $20 trillion plus and double down on a failed foreign policy.. but if women get their contraceptives (paid for by the government) nothing else matters.. Obama gets their vote.

Don’t fret face that I just cut off your nose!

@EJ -

"they want to kill Planned Parenthood"

Cutting funding for PP will most certainly NOT kill it as the Komen flap from earlier this year showed.

"do not support equal pay for equal work for women (Ryan voted against the Lillie Ledbetter law)"

Because the law actually makes it harder for women. Or is it any wonder why more women are out of work or underemployed thanks to President Obama?

and the aliens are still in Roswell....and the US plotted 9/11....and countless other fear mongering illegitimate theories...

You sir, are insane, and possibly the only reason I still read these political threads, because your stuff is often funnier than Laugh Lines, albeit blatantly disrespectful to anyone you disagree with.

Um, thank you for the back-handed compliment, my ego is somewhat stoked and all, but everything I say is backed up by solid evidence.

And what plan does Barack Obama have for the next 4 years? Where are his specifics?

Actually, after the debate, the moderator said Mitt Romney was correct on Libya.

+1!

My daddy who was an ecconomist used to say "The devil too can quote statistics." He also used to say "There are lies, damn lies and then there are statistics." Depending on how how you couch them you can make statistics dance. Reducing the deficet doesn't reduce the debt. It reduces the rate at which you go deeper in debt. However every nation operates at a deficit and to some extent the measure of a nation's wealth is it's credit worthyness hence it's debt. This is not to say that we should be profligate but doesn't it make sense to borrow when interest rates are low and the need for jobs and infrastructure repair are great? A better measure of indebtedness is the ratio of deficit to GDP. This is probably the "statistic" we should be focussed on.

Archer Jordan, the existence of staggering amounts of debt is NOT an indicator of "creditworthyness(sic)." For that matter, our credit rating has been downgraded twice, for the first time in our history, under Hussein. The ratio of deficit to GDP is fast approaching over 100%. Get a grip, and learn where and when to use apostrophes.

As opposed to the empty binders Obama has given women over the last 4 years? How many more women are in poverty and out of work due to Obama's policies (like Lilly Leadbetter Act)?

Oh please, I've never seen as much hate and disrespect directed at anyone in all my life as I saw coming from the Left towards George W. Bush and his supporters--with the possible exception of the vitriol and even physical attacks leveled upon republicans by Obama's legions of union thugs, New Black Panthers, feminazis, and radicals from the "Occupy" and militant Muslim factions.

Don, I can see you're upset about the direction you feel things have gone. I'm unhappy too. My point was to say stop attacking each other and making accusations and find a way for both sides to compromise and move the country forward. America is still a melting pot. Not Republican or Democrat or independent. It's all sorts and all that rhetoric about Black panthers and Muslims is not doing anything but compounding the fact that there is an uncalled for nature to the attacks that people will point to and use as an excuse to direct attention away from what Romney is really saying he will do to make things better. That's what should be talked about.

Proud Vet/Virginian, I see your point. I'm just concerned about the Fifth Column among us, which has largely prevailed over the decades at so many levels and has about taken over almost all of our institutions, and with whom there can be no compromise nor quarter given. I swear I will fight them until the day I die, I am a vet also and I took the same oath you did.

understand Don. See the passion and love for our country. Thank you for your service. The thing I love about Virginia is the way we can vote Republican or Democrat and pretty much have a stable government. We've gone back and forth for almost 20 years between the two and have a balanced approach. We should be the symbol for the country to follow. Able to sit down and have a conversation. Not run to the tv and berate the other party without listening. Hurry up November 6th. Let's get this over with and move in the right direction.

Proud Vet/Virginian I tend to agree, but this is what we have to deal with these days.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=z6b1VOAATNk

Yup a result of our 2 "divisive" parties holding hands to ensure there was never another Ralph Nader-like incident. The rules pretty much give the opinions of one political party on television touting the same mantra, with slightly different solutions.

Wow did a little follow up...proof is in the pudding.
"Stein and Honkala say their ticket will appear on 85% of ballots in November's election, and have qualified for federal matching funds."
http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/2012/10/17/debate-protest-lands-presidential-candidate-in-jail/?iref=allsearch

chefgio1, thank you and God bless you!

I know you're using Obama's middle name out of disrespect and in order inflame islamophobia. It's kind of like that infamous film, "Innocence of Muslims." You should be ashamed.

Except the fact that, according to the CNN poll, Romney beat Obama on all the issues that mattered. On MSDNC, their undecideds swayed toward Romney.

http://www.buzzfeed.com/zekejmiller/the-debate-romney-won

Nothing new here. Anybody who watched the debate saw that even at the moment that she gave Mittens credit for what he was getting confused on.

Except Romney wasn't confused at all--Crowley was merely trying to cover her own giant posterior because she was wrong in what she said, and wrong for violating the signed agreement about the rules of the debate, and her role in it. When you read the entire text of Obama's Rose Garden remarks, he referred to terrorism only when he was talking specifically about the attacks of 9/11/01, not the Benghazi debacle.

@Watts - I watched Candy Crowley grill David Axelrod on Sept 30 over the Libya response where she asked Team Obama's Meyer Lansky why it took so long to call Benghazi a terrorist attack. Was she off her game and gushing over being in the same room with our Dear Leader?

Q- Which candidate has taken the MOST money from Wall Street ever?

Hint: It's not Obama

Cheney, you sound exactly like someone concerned in the up and coming 1960 election about a Catholic in the White House. We would be under the direction of the Vatican, and the Pope, and that the constitutional separation of church and state would be compromised! Don't vote for that Kennedy guy!

Lee Hernly, you're wrong--it IS Obama. And his entire administration is packed with Goldman-Sachs people.

You're 150% right Don Joy. Must have suffered a brain malfunction there. I meant 'It's not Romney'

http://dailycaller.com/2011/10/10/obama-attacks-banks-while-raking-in-wall-street-dough/

Let's keep it real and factual. I am a true independent and am upset with both parties. I share views with both on issues and disagree with some. But I do see this. BOTH are acting in a pompous, arrogant, and selfish way. Facts are the Republican House has been stalling to win the White House while we suffer. The Democratic Senate has tried to act like the House is sending over crazy legislation and they can't pass it. No one is talking or compromising. Where are the moderates? Extreme left and right ruining the country. Will Romney be better then Obama? No. Because 1 party cannot run everything and have it go right. Checks and balances are needed. We don't need 1 party rule in this country. We need to return to compromise and cooperation. Not flinging insults or questioning someones intelligence because they don't agree 100% with everything you do.

Funny, I recall how libs were ranting that we would have an Evangelical Christian Theocracy in place if Bush were elected...which never came to pass. Do not worry Archer, the sky is not falling!

I've been saying the same thing Arvin. Too much fighting over nonsense and not enough listening to each other. We need to get it together or our country will fail as we splinter apart for ideology.

Arvin Chawla wrote: "Look, President Obama won the second debate as clearly as Gov. Romney won the first one."

Possibly the most false comment ever posted on Patch! In the first debate, Romney beat Obama down like a Epic Beard Man beat down Ambulamps on that Oakland bus...the most thorough scorched-earth trouncing of any presidential debate in U.S. history, and Arvin Chawla claims there is even a basis for comparison to this second debate!! LOL

My hats off to you Proud Vet - I couldn't have said it better myself. This slash-and-burn, my-way-or-the-highway crap no only weakens our country as a whole, but it drives up debt and creates uncertainty. Each side only wants the other side to fail. They don't seem to care if the country as a whole is successful and healthy.

- Fellow Vet

I whole-heartedly agree with both of you, and it is what makes reading these comment threads more entertaining than enlightening or useful. The problem with the US is the system, and lack of compromise. Everyone is arrogant enough to think that they know it all (just follow these threads for evidence of that), it permeates our government and our politicians entirely. No one is 100% right on this Earth, and anyone who thinks that they are doesn't deserve anyone's vote. Both sides are clearly more interested in stopping the evil that is their opposition than they are in doing anything good for this country...of course they see these things as the same in their minds eye, which is doubly troubling.

-A non-vet who sincerely thanks both of you for your unselfish service to the rest of us in this great country.

Anasarka, there you go again with your blatantly racist comments! This will not be tolerated here, I'm reporting you to the Patch cyber-diversity enforcement squad.

This is ridiculous; you are obviously joking, right? If you care about a future for yourself, and especially for our children if you have any--Gov. Romney's goals are primarily to serve big business and increase the wealth of a few. Romney-Ryan are not supporting well-being for all humans and human survival on the planet.
Pres. Obama has a good start on turning around our economy under extremely difficult circumstances and he SHOULD CONTINUE FOR 4 MORE YEARS. Gvien that chance, AND if enough people LEARN the basic issues, we will all succeed.

FALSE - Romney is not increasing defense spending.

http://blog.heritage.org/2012/10/12/biden-wrong-on-defense-spending/

That's actually false as PCT is based on current growth of around 1% which doesn't keep up with population growth. The TPC study that President Obama and Team Obama refer to assumes 0% growth (and was written by a former Obama employee).

If we had a leader that knew how to grow the economy, you'd see growth at 4-5%. At that rate, it becomes close to or at revenue neutral.

http://www.romneytaxplan.com/

I believe it is on file next to the Fast and Furious Papers and the information about consulate security protocols. Should be easy to find. Of course to view some working models, one should look no further then the rescuing of the Olympics and Staples. Maybe these aren't vacuous enough to be a credible business plan like this administrations wink and nods or "trust me's".

Sure Cheryl, it's called Liquidating America. I believe it reads 1) Eliminate all taxes and regulations for my buddies 2) Crush the poor with taxes they can't afford 3) Export as many jobs to China as possible 4) Rape middle and lower income Americans for everything they have 5) Jump ship when it all goes down.

So t-bird are you saying the five point is just the same as what is happening now? Oh man, that stinks.

Cheryl, almost all of these people voted for Obama in 2008, were undecided going into the second debate, and here they give their take on the results of the second debate--they overwhelmingly are won over by Romney:

http://www.therightscoop.com/frank-luntz-focus-group-overwhelmingly-thought-romney-was-more-presidential/

Exactly!! I'm all about real solutions to real problems. I'm for whichever candidate dares to stop blowing sunshine up our nether-regions and admits that they can't fix all of our problems with policies and plans. Give us an "ask not what your country can do for you" speech and show some presidential leadership instead of promising that they can fix everything without spending any money.

Cheryl, I didn't cite a poll, I directed you to a focus group. My sources are far more reliable than anything you ever post.

That focus group proves you wrong when you said that undecideds don't exist, aren't influenced either way, etc. Just because you dislike facts does not change facts. Play the video.

GetReal omits the fact that President Obama is half white. Why is it that Liberals, when they have no record of success to run on, always bring up race?

You're an idiot.

Cheryl, your drivel is getting very old. Romney did not tell Jim Lehrer he'd be unemployed. He merely used the subsidy to PBS as an example of unnecessary spending that doesn't justify borrowing from China and endlessly saddling our grandchildren with unfathomable debt. PBS, Jim Lehrer, and Big Bird are doing fine and will do fine without wasteful federal subsidies, money flows to them from other sources by the millions upon millions.

Cheryl,
Obama had four more minutes than Romney in the first debate, and I think at least three minutes more in the second one. Biden also had more time--not to mention all the interruptions.
Also, Crowley interrupted Romney 28 times--and Obama no more than 9. She did not cut Obama off as often as she cut off Romney. Neither did she "fact check" Obama like she tried to do with Romney. (For example, Romney was accurate on the permits of drilling on public land and Obama denied it.)
As far as the Libyan issue, I do think Obama was speaking generally about terrorism in the Rose Garden as he made that statement right after the discussion of 9/11-not while he was discussing Libya. Nevertheless, for two weeks after that the administration including: Rice, Carney, Obama and others pushed the video lie and stated that they didn't know if it was a terrorist attack--when they knew in real time that it was a planned attack. Obama didn't call it terrorism when asked by Letterman or on The View. The media constantly pushed for a committment on it in the press conferences.

Cheryl, how did you feel about the honorable vice presidents behavior?

Excellent post.

That is very difficult to do when Sen. McConnell decreed that Republicans would not let Obama do anything, Ryan told Boehner not to let any Obama proposals. This has nothing to do with leadership. It has to to with the far right's hatred for
Obama. If Romney is elected, he'll be in a bad position to try to get any cooperation from Democrats. If you think he'll be able to repair the damage inflicted by his surrogates, you are sadly mistaken. Democrats have been reviled, called unpatriotic, even communists. Romney was able to get elected in Massacusetts because he ran as a pro-choice moderate. Even though he claims to have reached across the aisle, he vetoed over 800 pieces of legislation. With the disdain shown for Obama, if he's reelected, I fully expect Republicans to dig in their heels and refuse to do anything. so, no matter who wins, unless we all agree to put aside our differences, we will continue to have gridlock. Compromise is not a dirty word, abd it is the only way to pass any legislation.

Romney spent his entire life profiitting from other people's misfortunes, which he caused by buying up companies and leaving people unemployed without pensions, insurance, or severance. Nice guy.

Right, Cheryl, except for the many prosperous and strong companies that he helped save and launch, employing thousands and thousands of people, not to mention his miracle turnaround of the near-doomed Olympics and his stewardship of the state of Massachusetts. Admit it, you've got nothing.

Don Joy keeps forgetting that Romney relied on massive federal funding to have a "miracle turnaround of the near-doomed Olympics." From Mitt's own book: "In Romney's book "Turnaround: Crisis, Leadership and the Olympic Games," Romney describes in a chapter entitled "Funds from the Feds" how he lobbied Sen. Ted Stevens, R-Alaska, and Sen. John McCain, R-Ariz., for funding, saying he "would need hundreds of millions of dollars worth of federal support from a long list of departments. No matter how well we did cutting costs and raising revenue, we couldn't have games without the support of the federal government," Romney wrote.
So as usual Don and Mitt cherry pick facts to try to support their baseless, worthless arguments. Can't wait for Nov. 6 and an Obama victory. Then Romney can go back to private life or move to the Cayman Islands....or play with his car elevator in La Jolla.

to Mr. Sutherland....it takes one to know one. You misjudge President Obama and show what a hate-filled person you are. When you can't argue the issues, attack and name-call.

oldtowner, gosh, good thing you caught me out where I was prattling on and spewing nonsense about Romney not having used a single dime of federal money in the amazing turnaround of the Olympics. What if my comments had just been allowed to go unchallenged and uncorrected? Sheesh, if not for keyboard vigilantes like you, all kinds of disinformation would be sprayed everywhere. Oh, and could you please direct me to where I said anything like that, so I can be sure and do what I can to delete the comments? Thank you so much for your diligence and your concern.

Romney was no bully. All he was trying to do is speak but the moderator was doing he best to shut him down. Obama was clearly angry. Romney wins this debate.

[...]

"you questioned my comment I made about Romney wanting to increase defense spending. I have heard him say this many times."

Mr. Romney's plan, as he has stated many times, is to maintain defense spending at 4% of GDP which would give the military virtually no increase as the President incorrectly stated. As Mr. Romney stated in the video you cited, it is important to not cut the military down to very low levels and give our troops and veterans the support they need. Especially considering how much China is building up their Navy and other military forces.

Gutting the military as this President wants (Kaine & Moran too) will be very harmful to NoVA and Virginia as a whole. Restoring the historic gutting of our military is not an increase.

It was not 2 against 1. Romney is not a samaritan, but a fenture capitalist. The Preident is not a thug, I find that higky offensive,

Then don't. Vote for Mitt Romney instead.

Barbara -

Having worked at DoD for many years, I will handily admit there are many programs at DoD that can be cut just like there are in the Federal Govt (Dept of Energy, Dept of Education are great examples).

All I am saying is, the way China has been building up their Navy & military might over the last several years, it makes NO sense to cut back on our fleet or our aircraft to WWI/WWII levels. I know people that work for the JCS that are in complete agreement with that statement and also yours about capability over size. I'm sure Mr. Romney would happily look for the medium. Gutting our military at this stage with the sequester is NOT the right move. It's going to adversely affect the NoVA & Virginia economy's.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-asia-china-16063607

Cheryl, firstly I am sorry you had hat experienc growing up. I run a non-profit for child abuse prevention, so I see these cases every day. Secondly, there is no on post in which I name call or defame th President especially for race. Incidentally, h represents both races, so I am no sure of th relevance. What you labeled earlier as boorish behavior is a sliver of the "show" put on b our VP. I have never been more embarrassed fo our nation. This is h second most powerful man in the world and h cited lik a schoolyard bully. Further, I will not allow you o paint all conservatives with a hateful brush, especially with so much venom oozing from the left. Your passion is notable but I have found uninformed passion to lead to the Gestapo. The President must be held accountable for his actions, which is our constitutional right.

Sorry about the dropping letters, I'm not sure what happened.

Ann -

Unlike our current President, I am sure Mr. Romney would listen to JCS on military decisions ( http://www.wired.com/dangerroom/2012/09/surge-report-card/ ).

As I told Barbara above, having worked at DoD for many years, I will handily admit there are many programs at DoD that can be cut just like there are in the Federal Govt (Dept of Energy, Dept of Education are great examples). There are $487 Billion dollars in planned defense cuts already. Starting Jan 2013, there's another $500 Billion on top of that - cuts even JCS doesn't want.

All I am saying is, the way China has been building up their Navy & military might over the last several years ( http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-asia-china-16063607 ), it makes NO sense to cut back on our fleet or our aircraft to WWI/WWII levels. And especially gutting the military the way Liberals want through sequestration is bad. It will be really bad for the NoVA & Virginia economy and that is something everyone agrees on.

http://www.navytimes.com/news/2011/11/defense-panetta-letter-to-mccain-sequestration-111411w/

@ Mitch -

False. China has been building, not purchasing, its fleet of naval ships and aircraft.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-asia-pacific-13705204

The Chinese President has also told its military to prepare for warfare in the Southeast.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-asia-china-16063607

@Lee you specifically referenced an air craft carrier. They have 1(single) and I was mistaken it is not Russian but Ukraine and it set for training purposes only.
http://www.nytimes.com/2012/09/26/world/asia/china-shows-off-an-aircraft-carrier-but-experts-are-skeptical.html?_r=0
You prove my point by referencing an industry sponsored publication. The military is a for profit industry and its growth has little to do with the threat level at any given time.

@Mitch -

Once again false. I said several times above 'China has been building up their Navy...' Not once did I reference a particular type of vessel.

In our discussion, I referenced the BBC News. Is that 'industry sponsored'?

Yes but, Benghazi did happen on his watch and Liberals are tripping over themselves trying to blame the GOP for it. And they think the Romney campaign is trying to politicize the issue?

I will proudly vote for Obama.

Yes, that is exactly what Bush did regarding 9/11.

"A great president is able to push his agenda regardless of who controls congress. This was true of Regan and Clinton." @Tim Reeves Thurs Oct 18:

One fact is ignored in this statement. IMHO -- FDR, Truman, Eisenhower and JFK were all "great presidents" in their own ways in their respective times. Reagan and Clinton were each in their own unique category.

THE MAIN DIFFERENCE in those days was that the majority of our elected representatives of both parties were rational, thoughtful, caring and widely informed Americans who put "country first".
Many Republicans and Democrats worked together for the good of the country.

The Tea Party control in Congress--whether secular or religious extremist ideologues-- changed that. Do you really think that any of the prior great presidents would have been able to counteract the stated goal of Republican leaders, such as Mitch McConnell in the Senate who stated that their top priority for the next 2 years will be to deny Pres. Obama a second term?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=W-A09a_gHJc

These attitudes, the negative zealotry, are not what AMERICAN SPIRIT should be.

Nor is Gov. Romney running for office as his own man or for the relatively unselfish reasons of most prior presidents.

Bush never took responsibility for 9/11.

Because it wasn't his fault. It wasn't his decision to cancel the Able Danger program; it was the decision of ACLU-minded leftist lawyers. It was Clinton's decision, repeatedly, to blow off opportunities to whack Bin Laden, because he was too busy playing golf and playing grab-ass to answer the phone calls from the field--Lt. Col. Buzz Patterson was the one trying to get Clinton to come to the phone, and he details it all in his book, "Dereliction of Duty." It wasn't Bush's decision to build an unnecessarily high and thick wall of separation between the criminal investigative function and the intelligence function of the FBI, it was Clinton's deputy AG, Jamie Gorelick, that did that.

Obama did not attend his national security briefing on the anniversary of 9/11. Of all days to blow it off, as he has blown off two-thirds of such meetings, you would think he'd at least have paid some goddamned attention on the anniversary of 9/11, especially since the Benghazi consulate had seen over 240 serious incidents in the months leading up to the murders of our diplomats there...but no, not only did his administration deny repeated, desperate pleas for adequate security there, Obama abdicated his responsibilities and the result was that 20 of our embassies throughout the Muslim world wound up under attack, on fire, with the Al Qaeda flag hoisted high over them as Obama lies again and again about some video and jets around to jive-ass hip-hop radio interviews, comedy chat shows, and fundraisers.

But let's suppose, Cheryl, for the sake of argument and of principle that Bush did "take full responsibility" for 9/11. What should be the consequences? By the same principle, what should be the consequences for Obama?

Cheryl, I have looked back over my posts and I can't seem to find the post that states me holding Mr. Obama responsible for anything Bush did. That being said, I only hold Mr. Obama accountable for what Mr. Obama said. He said that he would cut the deficit in 4 years. He said that he would cut healthcare costs in 4 years. He said that he would lower unemployment to near 2007 levels in 4 years. He said that we would be more secure both in our borders and in our daily lives in 4 years. He said that if he could not accomplish these things, that it would be a 1 term run. I am simply holding him accountable for what HE said he would do. None of those things have been accomplished and the opposite is true. Please do not presume to know what I think and that I am so dense as to blame this President for anothers actions. Why aren't you holding this President accountable for what he said he would do? Why is that such a bad thing to hold someone accountable for doing what they said they would do? We hold everyone else in our lives accountable for things, but not the President or the Federal Government at large? I can't believe this. If you employed someone that said they would do some things and not only said it but emphatically said it, and none of what they said happened, what would you do? Every President is responsible for what they say and what they promise. I suppose, I still expect people to do what they say. I should be more aware of the new normal.

Anasarka, that was a phenomenal post.

Cheryl, I am not going to gang up on you here. I notice several other people jumping in to our discussion and I am not interested in having you feel beat up on. I am appreciating our discussion and I will wait until the others are done. I just wanted to say that I feel like the loss of any American life or any life for that matter that could be prevented a tragedy. The reality of it is, that it is possible that both of these tragedies could have been averted. However, the FBI and other law enforcement agencies thwart attacks on American soil everyday, most we will never know about. The likelihood of a successful attack on American soil is a whole lot smaller than an attack on American soil in Libya. Why is it that we have Marine detachments in Paris, London, Sao Paolo, and Jamaica, but not in Libya? Does that make any sense, especially when a call for help was made? Again, thanks for the lively debate and good spirit.

4 more died on 9/11 thanks to the negligence of this Administration. Does it matter the number of people?

Romney is just Bush II redux. Fool me once, shame on me, fool me twice, shame on you. Only a fool would go with the same exact policies as the previous decade. More debt, more war, more poverty. No thanks.

@ Locally Involved...the "previous decade" includes the previous 4 years. Simple math. And how does your "fool me once" mantra not apply to the first 4 years of Obama? And to say we would have "more debt" under a "Bush II" while ignoring the HUGE (if I could increase font size, I would) debt incurred under Obama without a real plan to bring it down after 4 years in office?

Also, check your statistics on poverty. I think you pulled that one from a place where the sun doesn't shine. According the the Census Bureau, the poverty rate has gone up 4 consecutive years under Obama. It was going down under Bush.

When you're ready for a real discussion with educated answers, I'll be here. The lack of independent thinking and common sense on here is amazing.

In the second debate, Obama kept referring to "the last ten years" as if Bush has been president during that time...he's completely deranged; he doesn't even realize that he's been president for the last 4 years!

@locally involved. Did you say "voter fraud", in that case I am 100% sure that you are okay with people showing a valid ID to vote, right? That way those pesky conservatives can't send in the freshly shaved bearded man to vote a second time, like the Irish immigrants in the "Gangs of New York". Forget ACORN you say? Are we to forget the video's and treasonous tampering with our rule of law and that which seperates us from countries like Congo. You inflammatory, hate filled speech does no service to your cause or someone like Cheryl. Why the hatemongering? What are you so angry about and since when does venom solve anything?

http://www.discoverthenetworks.org/Articles/theclowardpivenstrategypoe.html

Well-said, Susan, and welcome to the conversation!

Is that similar to assuming that Mr. Biden shares the same belief on abortion as the President? Of course after the debate we know that, based on what Mr. Biden said, they do not share the same thoughts on when life begins. How could it be that two people that work closely together could have differing opinions? Either it is possible or someone is lying. Since we know that a politician would never lie, especially a career politician like Mr. Biden, we must deduce that it is possible.

Yes, it does make me happy. Dr. Corsi is also one of the scholars who has actually travelled to Kenya (and was arrested there when they found out he was digging up dirt on Obama) and done an excellent expose on Obama going there as a sitting U.S. senator and campaigning on behalf of his Muslim terrorist cousin, Raila Odinga, who burned Christian churches with people in them and whose supporters rampaged and waged a pogrom of terror, murder, rape, and burnings throughout the countryside when Odinga lost the election. Obama actively campaigned in Kenya for this man! Odinga's terror campaign resulted in his successfully forcing the winning party to accede to a power-sharing agreement wherein Sharia law would prevail in much of the country. Disgusting, that OUR president did this!

Corsi has also turned to eminent Islamic scholars to prove what the inscription on Obama's ring says. It is the Muslim creed, "There is no god but Allah," the first phrase in the two-phrase oath that is all that is required for one to become a Muslim. Can you credibly refute that? Are you more expert in Islamic script/engraving than the foremost academics on the subject?

http://atlasshrugs2000.typepad.com/atlas_shrugs/kenyas_killing_fields/

http://politicalvelcraft.org/2012/09/14/new-book-links-obama-to-massacre-of-christians/

http://www.fourwinds10.net/siterun_data/government/elections/campaigning/news.php?q=1224517679

http://www.politicallyincorrectfacts.com/Presidents/Barack%20Obama%20the%20Candidate/Odinga_Support.htm

http://www.wnd.com/2012/10/obamas-ring-there-is-no-god-but-allah/

http://www.wnd.com/2012/10/report-duke-professor-confirms-arabic-on-obama-ring/

Cheryl, I've never pointed to the fact that Obama is half-white, you're confusing me with another poster on here. Besides, it is Obama himself that is constantly race-hustling and inflaming racial tensions/complexes, exploiting them to get elected, etc. Go ahead, call me a racist for discussing it.

Sadly Cheryl, the Joint Chiefs and Bureau Chief has already stated under oath that we new what went wrong within 24 hours of the event. Sadly Cheryl, we went on with that knowledge and blamed a silly movie. I'm not sure if pointing out inconsistencies and apparent cover ups is not a political issue. At the end of the day, there are two men vying for the same office and both men are using anything and everything to appear the better candidate. I am not a fan of the way either has handled this, but surely you must know the same thing has and is happening on both sides. In light of that, please don't make it sound like Romney is the only person attempting to shine light on percieved issues, otherwise when the President brings up Bane Capital investing in Chinese companies, it would start to ring hollow. Don't you think?

Romney did the right thing when he denounced the Obama administration's first reaction to the attack on/siege of the Cairo embassy--the embassy had issued a grovelling, pathetic, treasonous statement of apology to the swarming mob of attackers, when they SHOULD have instead given a defiant, severe warning to anyone pulling down our flag on sovereign U.S. territory, burning it, and replacing it with the Al Qaeda banner! WTF is wrong with you leftists? Someone had to act as president at that time, and Romney filled the shoes while Obama headed off to yet another hip-hop event.

Cheryl, serious question here and not a trap. Which six independent scholars are you referring to. I cannot seem to find that on Google, but I am interested. If you could paste the link or some other way I could find it, I would love to read up on it.

Thanks for that, I am not personally a believer in this "ring" thing either. I think some people are grasping at any straw they can hold on to. I don't think we need any of that dribble, much like attempting to go after Romney because of his religion. It's just the type of silly thing a person does, when they feel desperate.

But in all fairness, snopes says that they were only people "fluent in Arabic writing" not scholars. We need to be careful not to embellish for the sake of our cause.

Snopes fails to name any authority, nor does it conclusively prove or dis-prove anything. Same with your other source.

World Net Daily names more than one key top scholar in Islamic language studies, etc.

Anasarka, the ring thing is relevant because, unlike the Mormon religion, Islam has declared and is waging war on us. If you doubt that, you are in desperate need of instruction. Also, due to the Muslim doctrine of Taqiyyah(deception in order to advance Islam) and the Muslim Brotherhood's stated goal of toppling the U.S. through steady infiltration, Obama's loyalties are dubious at best. He is on record in his own words talking about how the sweetest sound on Earth is the Muslim call to evening prayer played over loudspeakers, etc.

Don, the point is that there is plenty of local evidence to prosecute the President on without resorting to things like the ring scenario. I am fully aware of Muslim doctrine and the end game of Islamic Extremists. My point is that we can focus on other things that he should be held responsible for rather than chasing his religious perspective. I do think it is relevant and important in that it inevitably informs his decisions, but I do not think that we need to expend a significant amount of energy pursuing the reasoning, since the near insolvency of the United States is the greater looming danger. Either way, by his own measuring stick it is time for him to go, and as I posted earlier, he said that Washington couldn't be changed from within and he also said that reforming Washington was a primary goal, consequently he should leave Washington and get to work, like he said.

Agreed, Anasarka, and well-said--except the part where you referred to the "end game of Islamic Extremists"--it's actually the end game of the entire death cult of Islam, not just the extremists. Even so-called "moderates" in Islam are aiming, ultimately, for the ummah and the entire world to be brought under the sword of Islam in the caliphate.

In order to what? If you mean, to tell that I'm a "racist," where have I ever denied it?

You operate under the assumption that everyone must share the same racial paranoia as you and most.

Bwahahaha! Got any links? I'd love to see them! Bunch of b.s., all of it.

If Obama is so pro-woman, why does he give billions to atavistic, oppressive Muslim terrorist groups such as The Muslim Brotherhood and Hamas? Why do women in his administration complain of a hostile work environment?

http://www.weeklystandard.com/blogs/obamas-female-debate-coach-complained-about-hostile-workplace-white-house_654745.html

Meanwhile the irony continues as it is pointed out that Romney had 42% women as senior staff in his administration as Massachusetts governor, while Obama only has 23%.

You sound like a robot...or very annoying political ad. Women want jobs, for themselves and for their family. They also don't want to strap their kids with an impossible debt...something the President is oblivious to. Lastly, they notice how they are paying twice as much at the pump than they were a few years ago. They notice the prices going up on grocery items.

While the subjects you bring up are relevant, they aren't the most important issues for most women.

Don Joy - You are providing Republican fiction, not facts. Find some credible media sources, not the right-wing Weekly Standard, which is totally pro-Romney.

Peterson come up with something less feeble as a response.

Mark, can you please provide me with a non-partisan media outlet? They don't exist. You know as well as I do, that depending on the slant of the person reporting that bias will bleed through. Can we please no fool ourselves into thinking that anyone doesn't act and speak with presuppositions based on their personal world view. Based on what you just said, we should not be bandying about any "facts" as none of us has direct contact with any of the quoted information, therefore your earlier diatribe is moot. Let's stick with the observable facts then. Gas prices are higher, check I just drove by the Valero and Sheetz. Food is more expensive, check, I recently went to the grocery store and that cannot be denied. Healthcare is more expensive, check, I just started on a new policy and compared it to my premiums 10 years ago and now need a doctor. Teenagers cannot find jobs, check, I know personally 5 teens that have been applying for 6 months and cannot even get hired at McDonalds, and no they are not drug addicts, they are recieving a Governors seal for service etc. Empirical evidence is tough to argue with.

Fascinating that after 25 years as a high power financier that it never occurred to Romney that he knew NO women for a cabinet position as gov of MA. A non-partisan group presented the resumes - NO one on Romney's team sourced the candidates.

And, yet, Romney's campaign thought this was a good idea to fabricate the story that it was Romney's idea - even after he said "it never occurred to me".

Not surprising Romney never answered the fair pay question. Instead he said that to attract good women you needed to have flexible schedules so they could 'get home and make dinner".

NO, Fair pay for equal work is paramount. Access to affordable health care. Romney does not get women's issues. And, apparently, many of the men on this board don't either.

Welcome to 1950. For the men out there that need an education:
http://www.heartless-bitches.com/rants/goodwife.shtml

Anasarka, just what do you expect Obama to do? Bush left him with a total disaster and now the racist republicans are blocking everything he tries to do!!

@ Locally Involved...did you really just refer to a source called "http://www.heartless-bitches.com/rants/goodwife.shtml";?

Debating with you would be a riot. "I was talking to this group called "heartless bitches" about women's rights". You would make Biden look like a saint.

Mr. Joy, per your request http://www.wnd.com/2008/03/57678/. http://youtube.com/#/watch?
v=MQ 00O3rC0Y&desktop uri=%2Fwatch%3Fv 3DMQ_00O3rC0Y. Since you have used both these sites in your posts, I assume you find them credible.

https://www.facebook.com/photo.php?fbid=278699148914147&set=a.107369906047073.9021.100003221924532&type=1&theater

Hardly. Ayers and Bernardine Dohrn are like godparents to Obama. Not only did they know each other back in NYC at Columbia in the early 1980s, they all wound up in Chicago together, living in the same neighborhood, working at the same law firms, serving on the same boards together, Ayers and Dohrn babysitting the Obamas' kids and Ayers ghost-writing Obama's "Dreams From My Father" for him, launching Obama's political career from their kitchen table/living room...

Good to know you don't pay any income tax.

Anasarka, I have worked and paid taxes since I was 17. However, Romney said that 47% of voters would vote for Obama, that that 47% did not pay taxes or take personal responsibility for their lives, i'm voting for Obama and don't fit his stereotype. In fact, the 47% who don't pay federal taxes include military personnel on the front lines, retirees, students, and a lot of people in both parties.

Mitt was merely saying that 47% are going to vote for Obama no matter what, and that it isn't his job to worry about converting them. In his quick, off-the-cuff remarks, he wound up lumping all kinds of people in together, which he has acknowledged was wrong. There are many extremely wealthy taxpayers who will vote for Obama no matter what, just as there are also many deadbeat derelicts who will vote for Romney no matter what--there's plenty of overlap, but overwhelmingly the growing classes of true leeches of society support Obama fiercely.

Did you know that the 47% figure used to be around 25% in the 70s. With 36% of the workforce not working and 47% not paying Federal taxes, see the problem? Liberalism redistributes misery.

Hoax

I merely believe that anyone who denies having some level of racial bias is dishonest. Further, the timing of you claiming to have had your sign defaced like that, after just prior to it having bemoaned rampant racism on here, makes it sound like just another race-hustle by a leftist to me. Give it a rest, why don't you.

Dear Beth -

Please be advised that Politifact has been busted as being slanted toward Liberals just like the MSM.

http://blog.lib.umn.edu/cspg/smartpolitics/2011/02/selection_bias_politifact_rate.php

Can't trust Politifact.com! (unless you are a mindless democrat who loves liars)

You'll need more than that.

Hey Cheryl, without getting into detail for your own privacy, what area of the 'burn are you? North,South,etc.?

I think i know of some other people getting some tweaks to their stuff as well, including some cars bumper stickers.

Believe it or not, I pray for you also. In case you didn't know, you have the choice not to constantly play the victim, you know.

But if it makes you feel any better, democrats have vandalized my car at various times for having republican stickers on it, acted as if to run me off the road, etc. Furthermore, you really have no idea of the kind of racist hate I've encountered directed at me for being a white male in Washington, D.C. Your own version of stereotyping doesn't involve such scenarios.

Wow, that's way there! I assumed wrongly that you were in the Ashburn area. So I guess the lack of civility is wider spread than I thought, but that doesn't surprise me this election.

Its good to know there are some open minded folks that way out West.

Be well, Cheryl. I mean that sincerely.

LOL! Well, you have to admit GetReal, Romney is efficient! Not sure it was the best use of that 90 minutes, but he sure 'accomplished" alot. It is laughable, tho, eh?

Just standard republican candidate stickers.

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2008/president/us/general_election_mccain_vs_obama-225.html#polls

Polls are puzzling things. However, in 2008, around this date, Rasmussen polled Obama up 7(very close to the actual win by Obama).. On the poll closest to election day, Rasmussen was the closest poll to the actual election results. I agree that it is a right-leaning pollster. It also has had very good predictions.

As far as the article, there is one thing we now know for sure: Obama's numbers don't compute. The jobless claims went up this week, now that California is back in the mix. California was left out last week when the "unemployment numbers" went down. Fact: fewer people working today than when Obama took office.

By "right-leaning" one means to say that Rasmussen doesn't oversample democrats as much as other pollsters. Romney is probably actually up by about 10 or so.

Don Joy: "Romney probably really up by about 10 or so"

Now that is delusional and utterly absurd statement. Yes, Romney will probably win the state, but up by ten or so? Come on and be somewhat rational. No poll has ever had anyone winning this state by 10.

Plus everyone is forgetting about Gary Johnson. Why he isn't included in some of these likely voter polls is just wrong. Some guesses have him pull anywhere from 2 to 8% ... and guess what - those votes ain't from the Obama column :)

VA_in_VA, please show me where I mentioned a particular state. I didn't. The polling we were discussing is nationwide polling, showing Romney up as much as 7 points. The major pollsters this season have been shown to be basing their numbers on 2008 turnout models, which are not only unrealistic in terms of the dynamics in this very different race, but also heavily inclined to be weighted toward democrat oversamples. Thus, a 7-point lead for Romney is more likely to be closer to a 10-point lead.

Gallup is even more prone to be weighted in democrats' favor, and they had Romney up by 7 yesterday.

But in all honesty, Rasmussen does have it much closer than that(than Gallup) and their track record is more reliable, so nothing is being taken for granted. OPERATION BLUNT FORCE TRAUMA 2012 PHASE 3 EXECUTE

For a healthy economy, capital should be deployed by free enterprise actors to wherever it is best used, efficiently, to satisfy markets. If government policy inhibits this, it will remain largely on the sidelines or elsewhere than the industry/country in question. Anyone who thinks "creating jobs" just for the sake of "creating jobs" is the criteria for a healthy economy, I have some hope and change to sell you at a bargain-basement price.

Job creation must be the cart that follows the horse, not the other way around.

This article really sums up what a lot of us are worried about.

very astute article...thanks......I have often thought that Romney's claim he knows so much about running a business, especially a small business, and creating jobs, is not really accurate....he knows how to make money....and then how to hide it overseas

Sure does, Cheryl--especially this para from the piece

"In pursuit of single-mindedly maximizing the return on an investment, a financier must focus on how to increase a company’s cash flow in order to create value, and herein lies Romney’s greatest political difficulty. A businessman seeking to optimize profitability will look to lower labor costs by reducing head-count, whether through technology, out-sourcing, or rationalization. This is right out of the basic playbook. It is not the mission of the financier to create jobs. In fact, his mission is often to do just the opposite."

As with the Rolling Stone article, it tells only one side of the story, a very lopsided andd agenda-driven hit piece that lacks any kind of balance. Romney was involved in building and helping to turn around many wildly successful enterprises/companies which are now household names. Notice how neither this nor the Rolling Stone piece names any of them? Shall I name some of them?

Thanks, Cathryn. EVERYONE SHOULD READ that financier article and two additional items:
1. A Financier In Chief, which outlines Romney's real "business" record http://campaignstops.blogs.nytimes.com/2012/10/18/a-financier-in-chief/
2. The Undisclosed Mitt Romney
http://campaignstops.blogs.nytimes.com/2012/10/21/the-undisclosed-mitt-romney/
and
3. "Obama's economy in pictures: http://money.cnn.com/galleries/2012/news/economy/1206/gallery.Obama-economy/index.html " that was linked by Locally Involved somewhere in this thread.

Perhaps everyone should then make a few copies of the first two -- yes, old-fashioned paper copies -- and pass them along to friends and neighbors who have not yet voted. I can't find a quick copyable list of Obama's accomplishments at the moment (in a hurry) but maybe someone could suggest something.
Obviously electronic links are faster and more efficient, but so easy to skim past.
Just a thought.
You really cannot get the same well-organized sets of thoughts and information in any debates or sound-bite interviews via media.
People just need to read.
AND THINK REALISTICALLY

I've already read the Rolling Stone article, it tells only one side of the story, a very lopsided and agenda-driven hit piece that lacks any kind of balance--the tactics of the Left are so very predictable and tawdry. Romney was involved in building and helping to turn around many wildly successful enterprises/companies which are now household names. Notice how neither this nor the Rolling Stone piece names any of them? Shall I name some of them?

You simply fail to understand why capitalism is the best economic system. It cleans-out inefficient, outmoded, and ill-conceived, mismanaged entities, and re-deploys capital to where it is best used, according not to the myopic power-madness of the central-planners of socialism, but according to the macroeconomic forces of the entire marketplace and the decisions of millions of free individuals pursuing their happiness. Private enterprise IS the true public service and the true public good, contrary to what statists like you say, because the overall result is more employment, more revenue, technological advancements and higher quality/efficiency, and a higher standard of living. If you disagree with me, then please give me an example of an advanced, robust economy somewhere in time and space that does not prominently feature speculators and financiers in full array, operating within contract law to leverage capital to its best use--not to throw good money after bad, but to maximize return on investment, as is the natural and appropriate human activity.

Tell me, when you go shopping for groceries, do you look for the best quality at the lowest price, and when you receive a raise at your work, are you pleased at maximizing your return on activity, or are you somehow morally above such worldly concerns? I know, I know, it's always the OTHER guy's self-interest that you call "greed"--not your own. News for you: It is rational self-interest, not any do-good goal of "job creation," which is the prime driver of full-employment.

http://mises.ca/posts/articles/the-absurdity-of-socialism-and-interventionism/

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RWsx1X8PV_A

Worked with an 80% democrat legislature to resolve a 4 billion dollar budget deficit. What were you saying again?

This is indeed a fine benefit for many who have dividends and interest, etc.
Those who have this type of taxable income, also probably have some substantial investment in their homes and taking a tax deduction on mortgages makes a significant difference, also. Gov. Romney has of course not been willing to tell folks WHAT deductions could no longer be made.
I've read somewhere that ALL the potential deductions (for kids, home mortgages, child care, etc etc) would still not add up to make his arithmetic work and the U.S. would be much deeper in the hole than we are now.

Of course, there are millions of families who do not have investments with dividends or interest income, capital gains, or expensive homes. That's a big part of the actual "middle class" by most definitions. But Romney's definition of "middle class" is nowhere near any median household income nationwide. And for many of those, the possibility of losing their tax deductions for mortgages, kids, and child care are much more significant than investment tax breaks.

All this mystery and the unknowns do not inspire confidence in a Romney-Ryan future.
I have ZERO reason to trust these guys. They may be whizzes in their high-rolling specialties, but they can't seem to get the basic math right.

You wouldn't sign a sales contract to buy a house that included pages stamped only with "trust me" or "just boilerplate" would you?

When is the L.A. Times going to finally release the Rashid Khalidi tape? Never mind.

Please stop lying GetReal. It was a cover up by Obama. There is live video that they watched as it unfolded. There was no mob. It was a coordinated attack. Quoting a liberal paper like the LA Times is a joke.

Who said anything about not having rational regulations in place, including rational environmental regulations? I know, I know, you claim Romney's gonna poison the water and kill all the spotted brown Southwestern prairie snails, etc(and we all know that evolution, despite being the vaunted doctrine of the Left, must not be permitted to occur--humans must suffer unemployment and economic hardships so that some environmentally maladaptive un-fit species can prosper!).

Obama has given the EPA carte blanche to kill jobs and push his and your party's psychotic green communist agenda, and that's much of the reason Obama is on his way out in a couple of weeks.

Archer, some folks cannot comprehend the whole of our existence.
Capitalism can be good, but it should not be blind to the physical context of capital ventures and market machinations.
Sadly, those same folks make ignorant jokes about anything environmental or "green" -- apparently not recognizing that they are also personally connected to all those weird "maladaptive unfit species" and potable water is quite fundamental to ALL life forms on the planet.
Gov. Romney has made his dismissive attitude quite clear on science, environment, and even health. He can afford to insulate himself and his family from the vagaries of the natural world and does not recognize the reality that things happen -- I do hope his California home (the one with garage elevators?) isn't in an area subject to landslides/mudslides because it has a lofty view. But of course replacement is not problem and insurance doesn't matter either when one lives at that economic strata.

Obama has a bigger personal pension investment in foreign countries such as China and the Cayman Islands than Romney does, where is your outrage?

Romney wants to make the U.S. competitive again, by lowering our extremely high corporate tax rate so that companies have more incentive to locate here--where is Hussein on our corporate tax rate situation(the highest of all developed nations)--I know, I know, he wants to tax them more, of course. Go after those evil old corporations, as usual and as always. Somebody please explain to half the country how the laws of basic economics work. Thanks, Mitt!

Romney's IRA is worth $87 million. I don't think Obama's is anywhere close to that. I read his Personal pension fund is between $50,000 and $100,000. The entire fund may be larger, but not Obama's "personal" pension.

Locally Involved...you are too much. You continue to throw out ridiculous lies like they are facts. I guess you have learned that from your liberal leaders.

I do agree with you on one point however. The election in November will be a rude wakeup call. People have lost all faith in the "hope and change" rhetoric. We all know the policies of this administration are an absolute failure. LOOK AT THE FACTS. Unemployment (3 points over what he said it would be), the deficit he promised to reduce (which grew by more than all the previous presidents combined), millions more in poverty and on food stamps, the absolute embarrassment of failed foreign policy (including the outright lies by Obama, Biden, Clinton).

Now it's time for real change. Elect Romney to turn this country around for all people, especially our children and grand children.

History will show that Obama will go down as the worse US president in history.

Oooooh, now you've done it! you've poked the hornet's nest!

You mentioned Reagan. You don't want to remind them that Reagan actual compromised and enjoyed socializing with SOH Tip O'Neil at the White House. They routinely had weekend poker games and ate dinner together. As a result, the Republicans and Democrats compromised with some taxes increases and some programs cuts Thereafter, real economic recovery occurred.

The visceral hatred of the tea-party Republicans for our current President doesn't even allow for his legitimacy, let alone allow their openness for compromise. This hatred extends to yelling out "You lie!" during Sate of the Union addresses.

This President has reached out only to have the hand cut off. Biden GOP friends in the Senate have said they were sorry to him but feared their GOP leadership if they attempted to work with him. All who have tried are now "primary'ied and gone"
(eg: Sen Lugar)

Sad, very sad.

VA_in_VA, you omit the fact that Obama DID lie. Joe Wilson was right to call the scumbag out. Go Joe Wilson! Obama and his party have no interest in working with the GOP at all, they have proven this time and again. So to hell with Obama and your party, shoving thousands and thousands of pages of communist bills that the country does NOT want down our throats! With no bipartisan support whatsoever, they rammed through their socialist tyranny and cheated to do so--Al Franken was the one vote they needed for Obamacare, and his seat was stolen; a margin of 312 votes 'decided' a race wherein 1,099 convicted felons voted illegally, and 177 convictions for voter fraud have been prosecuted, with 66 more cases awaiting trial--just in the Al Franken fraud election alone! You people are corrupt beyond belief. Obama must be ousted.

http://www.forbes.com/sites/billflax/2012/10/18/benghazi-four-americans-died-obama-lied-and-the-press-complied/

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/cartoons/cartoons_of_the_week/

Afterward, Crowley admitted she was wrong and that Romney was right. Of course, nowhere near the 67 million people who tuned in to the debate will ever find that out.

GetReal? You should try getting real. How can you support this administration's lies on Libya? Are you a socialist too?

LOL! Cheryl, I do have a way of doing that! But they're so easy to tweak...just a poke and they go like the energizer bunny.

Have to share this link: http://www.christianpost.com/news/dinesh-dsouza-resigns-as-head-of-christian-college-amid-controversy-83538/

Apparently, Dinesh D'Souza, the man behind the 'quackumentary' 2016 has quite a few problems with the truth (honesty, integrity, ethics)...

Now, notice this is a link from The Christian Post, which I am sure will be quickly denounced as a MSM, liberal bias by our far right neighbors. LOL...get the tinfoil.

Your boy Obama is a liar and a socialist and you support him. So, hmmm, what does that make you?

LOL! And, take note, the complete and total silence on the subject from our neighbors. Whenever there is information that is in direct opposition to their own bias, they just ignore it. Doesn't exist. That's the "denial' part of their 3part equation. Actually, deny or pivot. I think pivot is currently being attempted.

Have a great day, all. Off to enjoy the spectacular fall weather! Beer fest in Manassas for those so inclined...

Boehner and McConnell never said that; they would certainly join with Obama to pass legislation that was worthwhile. Their point is that Obama's oppressive socialist agenda must be stopped in its tracks. Romney worked successfully to resolve a 4 billion budget deficit with a legislature in Massachusetts that was 80% democrats. Paul Ryan has won successive terms in his district which is overwhelmingly comprised of democrats. Next question.

No one benefits from name calling. There has been plenty of that from both sides.

Cheryl, I would like a link where Boehner and McConnell said they would not work with the President to pass ANY legislation. Boehner did try to work out a deal with Obama if you recall: The Grand Bargain. They had agreed to a deal when Obama upped the ante. Then, Boehner walked away. Read Woodward's book.

Early in his Presidency, when the health care bill was being discussed, the Republicans brought some suggestions to the table and were told by Obama that "We won." So, it kind of works both ways in this regard.
I still find it disturbing that the DEMS ignored the will of over 50% of the country about the health care bill. They did not listen to their constituents and that is why so many Dems lost their seats in 2010. Many chose not to run for reelection because of the feelings of their constituents. Remember the "Louisiana Purchase" and the "Cornhusker Kickback" when Senators from Louisiana and Nebraska sold their votes for special deals? Remember that Massachusetts elected Scott Brown because they didn't want health care to pass? Yet you think the Republicans should have worked with Obama? He didn't want them then.
Also, could you provide a link for the quotes you attribute to McConnell and Boehner? I can't find them.

Maybe you can just post on my behalf from here on out, seeing as you are able to put words in my mouth.

Don Joy:
Once you whip out the phrases like your side loves such as communist/marxist/nazi/ etc. the simple polite conversation is over.

That's the demonizing I speak of ... and yes, you DID say that.

... or you could be speaking of the 10 points, where you said above...

" Thus, a 7-point lead for Romney is more likely to be closer to a 10-point lead."

Your words not mine.

I know your group you belong to. The Grassroots of NVA is a second amendment waving paranoid right wing echo chamber and I worry for those near you when the election is over.

I did say that part, because it's true. All of Obama's mentors and sponsors have been communists, and his own words(when he is not otherwise trying to hide it) identify him as one. Obama's czar's are invariably people who openly admit to being communists(i.e. Van Jones) and praising Mao and Che as their heroes(Anita Dunn, et. al). Furthermore, here's a roster of who belonged to the American Socialist Party who were members of 111th Congress. This is right from their website:

Co-Chairs
Hon. Raúl M. Grijalva (AZ-07)
Hon. Lynn Woolsey (CA-06)

Vice Chairs
Hon. Diane Watson (CA-33)
Hon. Sheila Jackson-Lee (TX-18)
Hon. Mazie Hirono (HI-02)
Hon. Dennis Kucinich (OH-10)

Senate Members
Hon. Bernie Sanders (VT)

(cont.')

House Members
Hon. Neil Abercrombie (HI-01)
Hon. Tammy Baldwin (WI-02)
Hon. Xavier Becerra (CA-31)
Hon. Madeleine Bordallo (GU-AL)
Hon. Robert Brady (PA-01)
Hon. Corrine Brown (FL-03)
Hon. Michael Capuano (MA-08)
Hon. André Carson (IN-07)
Hon. Donna Christensen (VI-AL)
Hon. Yvette Clarke (NY-11)
Hon. William “Lacy” Clay (MO-01)
Hon. Emanuel Cleaver (MO-05)
Hon. Steve Cohen (TN-09)
Hon. John Conyers (MI-14)
Hon. Elijah Cummings (MD-07)
Hon. Danny Davis (IL-07)
Hon. Peter DeFazio (OR-04)
Hon. Rosa DeLauro (CT-03)
Rep. Donna F. Edwards (MD-04)
Hon. Keith Ellison (MN-05)
Hon. Sam Farr (CA-17)
Hon. Chaka Fattah (PA-02)
Hon. Bob Filner (CA-51)
Hon. Barney Frank (MA-04)
Hon. Marcia L. Fudge (OH-11)
Hon. Alan Grayson (FL-08)
Hon. Luis Gutierrez (IL-04)
Hon. John Hall (NY-19)
Hon. Phil Hare (IL-17)
Hon. Maurice Hinchey (NY-22)
Hon. Michael Honda (CA-15)
Hon. Jesse Jackson, Jr. (IL-02)
Hon. Eddie Bernice Johnson (TX-30)
Hon. Hank Johnson (GA-04)
Hon. Marcy Kaptur (OH-09)
Hon. Carolyn Kilpatrick (MI-13)
Hon. Barbara Lee (CA-09)
Hon. John Lewis (GA-05)
Hon. David Loebsack (IA-02)
Hon. Ben R. Lujan (NM-3)

(cont.')

Hon. Carolyn Maloney (NY-14)
Hon. Ed Markey (MA-07)
Hon. Jim McDermott (WA-07)
Hon. James McGovern (MA-03)
Hon. George Miller (CA-07)
Hon. Gwen Moore (WI-04)
Hon. Jerrold Nadler (NY-08)
Hon. Eleanor Holmes-Norton (DC-AL)
Hon. John Olver (MA-01)
Hon. Ed Pastor (AZ-04)
Hon. Donald Payne (NJ-10)
Hon. Chellie Pingree (ME-01)
Hon. Charles Rangel (NY-15)
Hon. Laura Richardson (CA-37)
Hon. Lucille Roybal-Allard (CA-34)
Hon. Bobby Rush (IL-01)
Hon. Linda Sánchez (CA-47)
Hon. Jan Schakowsky (IL-09)
Hon. José Serrano (NY-16)
Hon. Louise Slaughter (NY-28)
Hon. Pete Stark (CA-13)
Hon. Bennie Thompson (MS-02)
Hon. John Tierney (MA-06)
Hon. Nydia Velazquez (NY-12)
Hon. Maxine Waters (CA-35)
Hon. Mel Watt (NC-12)
Hon. Henry Waxman (CA-30)
Hon. Peter Welch (VT-AL)
Hon. Robert Wexler (FL-19)

You are one sick and sad puppy.

http://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2010/08/american-socialists-release-names-of-70-congressional-democrats-in-their-caucus/

http://www.scribd.com/doc/35733956/DSA-Members-American-Socialist-Voter-Democratic-Socialists-of-America-10-1-09

From your lips to David Axelrod's ears

VinV...I wonder what you really mean? You really need to stop supporting the worst president in the history of our great country and put a man in the White House who has created jobs and knows what it takes to restart the economy that Obama and his cronies have destroyed. Vote Romney!

Romney's tax plan also makes it more attractive for businesses to locate here.

Hey Sharpie, do you think businesses are oriented around the idea of indefinitely losing money in order keep people employed(an oxymoronic concept, because how are they supposed to employ anyone in such a situation), or making profits, thereby being able to justify employing people to satisfy a market? Take your time.

I understand your sentiments, but this election is too important. A vote for Johnson equals a vote for Obama--and more and more government control over your lives.

On what planet is the remotely true. Romney's carried interest in his Bain IRA 10's of millions/year ... oh, so your argument is that technically that's not a pension so its not the same? Come on, really? this is just getting silly and stupid.

I'm out of here. I refuse to talk with deceptive people.

That is the same as technically saying "acts of terror" was speaking about Benghazi, right. I'm with you, petty and silly.

Oh, what a fight that would be! LOL. Of course, no matter how much Obama wins by, the far right will decry it still as an illegitimate presidency. blah, blah, blah...

Won't happen. This election won't be close. The American public is tired of this socialist agenda.

Cheryl, are you quoting heresay as a source. That is equally as strong as using Wikipedia as a credible source. You also extrapolate a conclusion at the bottom with no cited source. I know your better than an episode of three's company. Let's stick to actual facts here if possible, on both sides Mr. Joy.

Who's not allowing women access to affordable contraception? NOBODY is proposing doing anything to prevent 30-year-old elite $50,000/year law school student-activist Sandra Fluke from heading over to Walgreens to snag her pills at 9$ a month.

Again an over simplification of the issue. Not all contraception pill are only $9. The case that Ms. Fluke discussed were the more expensive highly specialized doses used by someone to treat endometriosis (sp?). When denied, her friend's condition worsened and ended up in a hysterectomy.

But your lack of sympathy for someone outside your fold won't allow facts to get in the way. This is the exact kind of case where management health plan would know that the pills are far less cost than the eventual surgery, not to mention the suffering of the individual.

Who is saying she or anyone else should not be able to buy a policy that provides what you describe? No one.

Whereas you support the government forcing me to pay for it, indirectly by my tax dollars. Do you see that this is equally an intrusion on my private life? Why is your private life more important than mine?

If that were your IRA, how much would you give away. How much of your personal wealth do you think it is okay to hold on to. Why live in a house, when we could just as easily live in a smaller apartment and give the difference to the needy. Why drive the car you drive instead of a much cheaper more economical car and give the difference away. Why is it so abhorrent for someone to be successful, by the world's standards, but when running for office demonize them. Also, since when is it a sin to use the US tax code to your advantage. Why have a code at all if it isn't fair. Why hasn't the President fixed the tax code these four years? Please tell me just how much Romney has invested in China, because I am sure it pales compared to the loans this administration has taken out against our bonds in the name of China. This administration is by far the largest investor in China in all history, how many jobs does 6 trillion equal being sent overseas. What a shame.

So what? Insurance companies should be able to cover or not cover whatever the hell they see as appropriate to their business. It is THEIR business. Women should be able to buy insurance or not buy insurance from what ever company they wish, according to whatever is or is not being offered that meets their wants and needs. It's called liberty, something millions of people have fought for over the generations. Forcing people into contracts they do not want to enter into is evil. Go away commies.

You know full well that the Blunt is nothing like what you just described. Please cite the specific places where it gives liberty to a company to patently refuse a coverage that it specifically sold policy based on. Please show me that citation. Otherwise, you must stop assuming we cannot read for ourselves.

Actually, the Blunt Amendment, which did not pass....gave EMPLOYERS (not insur companies) the right to refuse any kind of coverage they felt religiously or MORALLY opposed to. That means, for e.g., that if an employer thought immunizations caused autism (which has been medically refuted) they could refuse all childhood immunizations to employees. What a bad idea....any employer could say he/she is "morally opposed" to a treatment and deny coverage. Altho the Blunt Amendment did not pass, it was very close, and it could come up again and Romney said he supports it. Giving control of health insurance coverage to the whims of individual employers is crazy.

No one is forced to work for any employer, and no employer should be forced to hire or cover or otherwise compensate anyone apart from mutually agreed upon terms. Go away commies.

Your right oldtowner, similar to not letting those pesky business owners decide what uniforms are appropriate, or what salary range is fair, or what kind of service they will provide. I prefer the Chinese model myself. They know what they are going to be when they are born. Where is Aldus Huxley when you need him.

The roster is found on the website of the Democrat Socialists of America.

I, for one, thought the McCarthy era was over. Unfortunately, like racism, i lives.

Cheryl, do you have the link for that list? I have not seen it on the Democratic Socialists of America (DSA) website (http://www.dsausa.org/dsa.html).
That tiny group tries hard, and is dedicated to its cause.
Brad L. keeps spouting about socialism and most of that inclination are firmly convinced that Pres. Obama is a Socialist. What unfortunate misunderstandings some of these folks have about what is "socialist" "communist" etc.

LOOK AT: http://www.thedailyshow.com/watch/thu-march-8-2012/the-socialist-network
Some of you may have seen this. If not, it is WORTH WATCHING!

No company should discriminate the offering of products and/or services based upon gender/ethnicity/religion/etc. To do so is not only unethical, but it's just bad business. See, contraception, maternity, prenatal care, vaccines, and more are not just a woman's issue - it's a man's issue. To deny these services would be to alienate families as what man wants to pay out of pocket to have children? It's laughable. DoJo has no practical business experience.

The only one that takes DoJo seriously is DoJo.

And, again! Do Jo uses the communist name calling! hehehe. Ahhh, guess that means I can say his right amygdala is working over time. Watch it champ, might get a brain cramp!

Nothing wrong with voluntary collectivism, but when you call for violence to be used to enforce it on a massive scale through the armed force of government, the result is most of the totalitarian evil we saw in the last century, and most of the fiscal disaster we are seeing now. Egalitarian, redistributive "equal opportunity" schemes being voted for and enacted by feel-good pandering venal pols of both parties. Enough already. Volunteer in your community and help people, just leave the guns and thousand-page bills out of it.

Cheryl, you do not have the market cornered on caring for people, the difference is, some of us are not interested in enslaving our fellow Americans in a welfare state, where they never want to better themselves. It's great to throw out a life ring when someone is drowning, but you have to pull them in sometime, they can't float forever. Caring for people also involves helping them stand on their own feet, so they can be in a position to help someone else when the time comes. When you were fighting for your life as a child, didn't you want to get out of the situation? All the help in the world would have been worthless if it didn't allow you to escape and find hope in a new life.

What jurisdictional authority gave you permission to buy a soda over 12 ounces?

I'm just thankful I can still buy a soda at all in NY, well the times they are a changin'

ah....Anasarka....don't know where you are from...or where you are coming from. But did you ever hear of the Civil Rights Act? Businesses that serve the public are not allowed to discriminate....it's not just that people will "make the decision to put them out of business, not the government." It's illegal for a business to discriminate. You sound like you are living in the dark ages.