We are *expletive deleted*ed

[Battle Monkey of Zardoz]

Enjoy going to court then.

Nope. Right to work state. No court needed. And from my experience finding a reason, legit, to terminate the employment of a lefty is damn easy.

[SADShooter]

I cannot help but think of the situations before WWI and WWII where we look back and wonder how anyone thought something other than war would result.

I understand much better now. Although there were many Cassandras that did see it and were warning, leaders were willfully blind (and incompetent.)

Yes, I am saying that's where we are today. I have a very bad feeling that a real war will occur in the next few years. (No offense to those who served in Iraq and Afganistan, but what we faced there cannot be compared to facing the military of a country that has the capacity to wipe you out, as we did in WWI and WWII.)

I was thinking along similar lines. We humans never think we will experience the same problems because we are better informed, will process the information differently, and our actions will avoid the mistakes of prior generations. Our arrogance and ignorance bite so often...

[AJ Dual]

I think the tea party / GOP house should go full scorched earth.  Debt ceiling?  Don't raise it.  Tax increases?  Don't pass it. Etc.  let the government shut down...

Think about it, without a debt ceiling increase, we BY DEFINITION obtain a balanced budget.

The ONLY vote mandate there is in this election is that the people prefer the house the way it is. MIT shifted dramatically in 2010, and the people responded with a substantial margin with "more of that".

The sooner the correction occurs, the less overall damage there will be.

Let the house force a choice between overwhelming statism (forced by the fixed debt ceiling and thus a forcing of a budget and selection of what matters) and an alternative, because I think only by experiencing the former will the population ever get a clue.

I suspect 10% or less of the GOP majority in the House actually has the stones to do this. John Boehner? LOL...

It's a nice dream, but just a dream. 

[HankB]

I suspect 10% or less of the GOP majority in the House actually has the stones to do this. John Boehner? LOL...

You mean the same John Boehner who, two years ago, campaigned on a platform of rolling back spending to 2008 levels? THAT John Boenher?

[Fitz]

You mean the same John Boehner who, two years ago, campaigned on a platform of rolling back spending to 2008 levels? THAT John Boenher?

I can promise you a unicorn to get elected... doesn't mean i'll have the balls or ability to provide it.

[drewtam]

What? Over? Did you say "over"? Nothing is over until we decide it is! Was it over when the Germans bombed Pearl Harbor? Hell no!

And it ain't over now. 'Cause when the goin' gets tough...
The tough get goin'! Who's with me? Let's go!

[charby]

Nope. Right to work state. No court needed. And from my experience finding a reason, legit, to terminate the employment of a lefty is damn easy.

If I was fired because of my political beliefs you bet I would be dragging my employer to court.

[kgbsquirrel]

[Boomhauer]

If I was fired because of my political beliefs you bet I would be dragging my employer to court.

If he never says anything about firing you for your politicsl beliefs then youve got no case

[charby]

If he never says anything about firing you for your politicsl beliefs then youve got no case

He has posted it in a public forum, well if he was my boss.

[ArfinGreebly]

I work for a company which has as some of its better funded clients some very large insurance companies -- including health insurance -- whose landscape is about to change.

We're scrambling here to position ourselves to respond to their evolving needs, but there is nothing in the current events that offers a rainbow to go with the clouds.

If we're gonna survive and thrive, we're gonna have to shovel an epic amount of coal.

Additionally, my wife and I will have to speed up our plans to move what I do into her business model.

If you are not already the best at what you do, this would be a good time to remedy that.

[erictank]

Monkeyleg,

Really?  I respectfully disagree.  So I just want to get this straight:  there is a contest between two serial killers to have an impact on my life, one has murdered thirteen and the other twelve and I should vote for the lesser of two evils which, of course, means I have a preference for evil. My vote does not mean a damn thing in national elections.  It makes no economic sense nor does it make a difference in the insane sinking statist ship America.

Now once NOBODY is a candidate and a majority of votes leaves the office vacant if NOBODY gets the majority of votes, I will go to the polls.  Until then, I will spend election day reloading and prepping.

Civic responsibility and duty is obedience to government and nothing more ornate than that.

Only way to get somebody besides one of the two wings of the Modern American Political Machine is to VOTE for someone besides one of the two wings of the Modern American Political Machine. My ballot had half a dozen candidate pairs for President and Vice President, one of which was markedly better in terms of respecting liberty than any of the others. Getting them to 5% of the vote total would have added another party to guaranteed 50-state (maybe 51, now) ballot access and access to the election funds donated via tax return every year, rather than having to waste time, energy, and money fighting off spurious ballot-access lawsuits as they do now. Might even get them into the debates, as well, assisting in public awareness that Tweedledee and Tweedledum aren't the only two choices in the race.

Don't like voting for one of the two serial killers, to borrow your example? VOTE FOR SOMEONE ELSE. I did.

[Sergeant Bob]

What? Over? Did you say "over"? Nothing is over until we decide it is! Was it over when the Germans bombed Pearl Harbor? Hell no!

And it ain't over now. 'Cause when the goin' gets tough...
The tough get goin'! Who's with me? Let's go!

Thank you Capt. Wild Bill Kelso!

[Monkeyleg]

We have tons and tons of posts here all saying that there's no difference between Obama and Romney. I can't believe that anyone actually believes that, or believes that there's no difference between GW and Obama.

Yeah, GW ran deficits. His worst budget deficit was $400 billion, and deficits in other years were in small by comparison. Obama, OTOH, has consistently run up $1+ trillion deficits, and will for the rest of his term. Where is it written that Romney would have run up the same sort of deficits?

Does anyone here think that any president--Democrat or Republican--other than Obama would have allowed our people in Benghazi to be killed as they were? Does anyone think that Romney would have extorted the bond holders of GM and Chrysler as Obama did?

Y'know, it's funny. Liberals will get behind a candidate who doesn't support some or even all of their views, and will support him enthusiastically. Conservatives and libertarians too often take an all-or-nothing approach, and candidates get beaten half to death just in the primaries. Maybe that's why we don't get candidates that are more to our liking. Who wants to go through that?

For all of his shortcomings, Mitt Romney is an honest man with an unimpeachable character, and a history of success and of selfless generosity. Barack Obama is a gangster and con artist, a serial liar, and so self-absorbed and selfish that he let people die at the hands of our enemies rather than damage his chances for re-election. He makes Nixon look like a choir boy.

Yeah, there's no difference.

[lupinus]

Thank you ML, for summing it up better then I could have.

[brimic]

Y'know, it's funny. Liberals will get behind a candidate who doesn't support some or even all of their views, and will support him enthusiastically. Conservatives and libertarians too often take an all-or-nothing approach, and candidates get beaten half to death just in the primaries. Maybe that's why we don't get candidates that are more to our liking. Who wants to go through that?

The problem is that the entire system of government/media has been sliding to the left for many many years. Liberals know that all they need to do to eventually get everything they want is to defend their politicians, no matter how bad they are- having no morals is actually their biggest advantage.
Republicans time and time again nominate a candidate who is closer to the middle, has a marginal backbone, but might be of choir boy character. It works out ok in the short term, but in the long term, they inadvertantly give way small steps further and further to the left. The liberals still get their agenda through, just on a protracted timeline.
We are at a point where a lot of people's personal political lines in the sand have been crossed and they have little to no patience left for a candidate who is sort of righty on some issues and sort of lefty on others when we really need a candidate who is willing to stand up and take back the ground that has been lost over the decades.
We are at a point in our country where romney would be a slow growing, yet still deadly tumor, and Obama would be full blown AIDS. Electing Romney is just putting off the inevitable  by a few more years.

[Waitone]

For all of his shortcomings, Mitt Romney is an honest man with an unimpeachable character, and a history of success and of selfless generosity. Barack Obama is a gangster and con artist, a serial liar, and so self-absorbed and selfish that he let people die at the hands of our enemies rather than damage his chances for re-election. He makes Nixon look like a choir boy.

Yup!  And remember the people handling Romney had to agree // coordinate with the opposite team // big media to shut off any discussion of the Benghazi fiasco.  So, yeah, Romney is a Certified Good Guy but his handlers are not.

[Battle Monkey of Zardoz]

He has posted it in a public forum, well if he was my boss.

Good luck. There are millions of lawyers waiting to take a case, of they had one they could win.

[Monkeyleg]

Electing Romney is just putting off the inevitable  by a few more years.

Just what is "the inevitable"? A Red Dawn scenario? Greece? Do we get to shoot people? I'm itching to try my M4gery on live targets.

[Blakenzy]

I don't think it's about the individuals anymore Monkeyleg. Romney on a very personal level may be all that you say he is, yet he is still a willing cog in a terminally FUBARed system. Any cogs that won't fit and work the twisted mechanism as intended aren't allowed anywhere near where he got.

[BlueStarLizzard]

Just what is "the inevitable"? A Red Dawn scenario? Greece? Do we get to shoot people? I'm itching to try my M4gery on live targets.

The full adaptation of socalism or a dictatorship (and no, considering who won, I really don't think it's too much a streach to think he won't be leaving in four more years)

What we the people choose to do about it is another story entirely.

[charby]

Does is really matter, Cthulhu is going to torture and eat us all on Dec 21, 2012.

[charby]

Good luck. There are millions of lawyers waiting to take a case, of they had one they could win.

So do you own your own company?

[MicroBalrog]

His worst budget deficit was $400 billion, and deficits in other years were in small by comparison. Obama, OTOH, has consistently run up $1+ trillion deficits, and will for the rest of his term.

As requested, or as finally enacted by Congress? Obama has requested a $901 billion budget this year.

Frankly, I don't care what Romney's character is. I'm sure he's a good family man - but I'm not marrying Romney.

Romney's ideology was non-existent - he was therefore unable to compete with Obama in a contest of ideas.

I'm not some advocate for perfection - throughout this process, ever since the primaries started, every time this was brought up on those boards, I listed many candidates I viewed as superior to Romney - and most of them were not some kind of conservative radical bomb-throwers.

[Strings]

>Only way to get somebody besides one of the two wings of the Modern American Political Machine is to VOTE for someone besides one of the two wings of the Modern American Political Machine. My ballot had half a dozen candidate pairs for President and Vice President, one of which was markedly better in terms of respecting liberty than any of the others. Getting them to 5% of the vote total would have added another party to guaranteed 50-state (maybe 51, now) ballot access and access to the election funds donated via tax return every year, rather than having to waste time, energy, and money fighting off spurious ballot-access lawsuits as they do now. Might even get them into the debates, as well, assisting in public awareness that Tweedledee and Tweedledum aren't the only two choices in the race.<

You know, I've been hearing that for years now. Don't think the few who would endorse Third Party candidates are enough, not with the current lock the big 2 have.

Of course, no incumbent next election cycle. Maybe it's time for the third parties to... subvert the process