ACF 2012 Presidential Election Poll

[Mirra]

"You got into these small towns in Pennsylvania and, like a lot of small towns in the Midwest, the jobs have been gone now for 25 years and nothing's replaced them. And they fell through the Clinton Administration, and the Bush Administration, and each successive administration has said that somehow these communities are gonna regenerate and they have not. And it's not surprising then they get bitter, they cling to guns or religion or antipathy to people who aren't like them or anti-immigrant sentiment or anti-trade sentiment as a way to explain their frustrations." -- Barack Obama

"...I've got two daughters. 9 years old and 6 years old. I am going to teach them first of all about values and morals. But if they make a mistake, I don't want them punished with a baby." -- Barack Obama

"I can no more disown (Jeremiah Wright) than I can disown the black community. I can no more disown him than I can my white grandmother - a woman who helped raise me, a woman who sacrificed again and again for me, a woman who loves me as much as she loves anything in this world, but a woman who once confessed her fear of black men who passed by her on the street, and who on more than one occasion has uttered racial or ethnic stereotypes that made me cringe." -- Barack Obama

"The point I was making was not that Grandmother harbors any racial animosity. She doesn't. But she is a typical white person..." -- Barack Obama

If you’ve got a business — you didn’t build that. Somebody else made that happen." -- Barack Obama

"I am not in favor of concealed weapons. I think that creates a potential atmosphere where more innocent people could (get shot during) altercations." -- Barack Obama

"I believe in keeping guns out of our inner cities, and that our leaders must say so in the face of the gun manfuacturer’s lobby." -- Barack Obama

All of those sound like endorsements to the President in my opinion besides the grossly out of context "you didn't build that" statement. If he had worded that differently so that it wasn't so easy to take it out of context, maybe all of the Republicans I'm surrounded by could stop vomiting out that one line over and over again and come up with something that's actually convincing. In fact just the world "alone" could do wonders for that statement. I'm going to post the entire paragraph and the one following it for some context.

If you were successful, somebody along the line gave you some help. There was a great teacher somewhere in your life. Somebody helped to create this unbelievable American system that we have that allowed you to thrive. Somebody invested in roads and bridges. If you’ve got a business -- you didn’t build that. Somebody else made that happen. The Internet didn’t get invented on its own. Government research created the Internet so that all the companies could make money off the Internet.

The point is, is that when we succeed, we succeed because of our individual initiative, but also because we do things together. There are some things, just like fighting fires, we don’t do on our own. I mean, imagine if everybody had their own fire service. That would be a hard way to organize fighting fires.

I was almost convinced to vote 3rd party... but the arguments in your posts, Bocefish, are so unimpressive and the statements coming from the Romney campaign are so terrifying, I feel I will once again have to vote for the candidate with the best chance to beat the Republican party. I think I need to stop reading this thread. It's getting me really depressed about this election. I feel like I'm having to choose between the guy who wants to kick me in the groin or the guy who wants to cut my testicles off and feed them to a bunch of rich people at a fund raiser.

 

[Bocefish]

If people take those as endorsements, then you deserve 4 more years of his fail, lack of leadership and inability to get congress to do anything and further dividing the country. Even his future press secretary knew it was an epic fail insulting the very sort of people that fought for our independence calling them bitter people who cling to guns or religion or antipathy to people who aren't like them or anti-immigrant sentiment or anti-trade sentiment as a way to explain their frustrations.

 

[Nordling]

If people take those as endorsements, then you deserve 4 more years of his fail, lack of leadership and inability to get congress to do anything and further dividing the country. Even his future press secretary knew it was an epic fail insulting the very sort of people that fought for our independence calling them bitter people who cling to guns or religion or antipathy to people who aren't like them or anti-immigrant sentiment or anti-trade sentiment as a way to explain their frustrations.

Bummer when it upsets people when someone tells the truth.

Your assumption that THESE are the same as the founders is pure fantasy.

 

[Mirra]

If people take those as endorsements, then you deserve 4 more years of his fail, lack of leadership and inability to get congress to do anything and further dividing the country. Even his future press secretary knew it was an epic fail insulting the very sort of people that fought for our independence calling them bitter people who cling to guns or religion or antipathy to people who aren't like them or anti-immigrant sentiment or anti-trade sentiment as a way to explain their frustrations.

I grew up feeling like an outsider in a hick town in South Carolina. I feel like a lot of what he said of those small town Pennsylvanians applies to a lot of the people where I grew up. Guess it's all about perception.

 

[morment]

If people take those as endorsements, then you deserve 4 more years of his fail, lack of leadership and inability to get congress to do anything and further dividing the country. Even his future press secretary knew it was an epic fail insulting the very sort of people that fought for our independence calling them bitter people who cling to guns or religion or antipathy to people who aren't like them or anti-immigrant sentiment or anti-trade sentiment as a way to explain their frustrations.

The huge difference between that statement by Obama and Romney's comments about the 47% is that Obama went on to say that he needs to find a way to reach out to those people and Romney's completely written them off as a lost cause.

And how is Obama supposed to work with the Republican's in the Congress/Senate when they got together the very night he was elected and said that their number one priority was to make him a one term president?

 

[Jupiter551]

"You got into these small towns in Pennsylvania and, like a lot of small towns in the Midwest, the jobs have been gone now for 25 years and nothing's replaced them. And they fell through the Clinton Administration, and the Bush Administration, and each successive administration has said that somehow these communities are gonna regenerate and they have not. And it's not surprising then they get bitter, they cling to guns or religion or antipathy to people who aren't like them or anti-immigrant sentiment or anti-trade sentiment as a way to explain their frustrations." -- Barack Obama

"...I've got two daughters. 9 years old and 6 years old. I am going to teach them first of all about values and morals. But if they make a mistake, I don't want them punished with a baby." -- Barack Obama

"I can no more disown (Jeremiah Wright) than I can disown the black community. I can no more disown him than I can my white grandmother - a woman who helped raise me, a woman who sacrificed again and again for me, a woman who loves me as much as she loves anything in this world, but a woman who once confessed her fear of black men who passed by her on the street, and who on more than one occasion has uttered racial or ethnic stereotypes that made me cringe." -- Barack Obama

"The point I was making was not that Grandmother harbors any racial animosity. She doesn't. But she is a typical white person..." -- Barack Obama

If you’ve got a business — you didn’t build that. Somebody else made that happen." -- Barack Obama

"I am not in favor of concealed weapons. I think that creates a potential atmosphere where more innocent people could (get shot during) altercations." -- Barack Obama

"I believe in keeping guns out of our inner cities, and that our leaders must say so in the face of the gun manfuacturer’s lobby." -- Barack Obama

They all seem like perfectly reasonable, intelligent statements. They might not be YOUR point of view, but that doesn't make them wrong. I actually agree with some, and relate to others.

 

[Nordling]

 

[Anonymous]

Obama getting that dirt off his shoulder. :lol:

http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.p ... fid=535752

 

[Bocefish]

Posing at fundraiser hosted by a former crack dealer who later shot his own brother over some bling and also pled guilty for stabbing a record producer. :thumbleft: Well done Mr. President.

 

[LucyGoodtimes]

FYI: Romney has been rumored to have said he'll enforce Federal Obscenity laws.

AKA no more legal porn

Idk how legit that is, because as far as I know it hasn't been publically stated, but I am concerned

I wrote a post about it if you're curious at www.lucygoodtimes.com

The post is like halfway down the page, titled "Laws on Porn"

 

[Anonymous]

hosted by a former crack dealer who later shot his own brother over some bling

I think you straight-up trippin', yo. I haven't heard the term 'bling' used in a looong time...LOL.

 

[Candygirl3x]

hmm....

Obama 2016 and The innocence of the Muslims...?
Same Creator...?

Same S**t Anyway.... Pathetic... Just some cheap production to stir up some s**t.... IMO


Candy xxx

 

[Nordling]

FYI: Romney has been rumored to have said he'll enforce Federal Obscenity laws.

AKA no more legal porn

Idk how legit that is, because as far as I know it hasn't been publically stated, but I am concerned

I wrote a post about it if you're curious at http://www.lucygoodtimes.com

The post is like halfway down the page, titled "Laws on Porn"

 

[LucyGoodtimes]

FYI: Romney has been rumored to have said he'll enforce Federal Obscenity laws.

AKA no more legal porn

Idk how legit that is, because as far as I know it hasn't been publically stated, but I am concerned

I wrote a post about it if you're curious at http://www.lucygoodtimes.com

The post is like halfway down the page, titled "Laws on Porn"

Hahahahaha duh i posted that video on my blog! How did I miss that part where he says he'll enforce obscenity laws? Jeez yeah anyway to do so, in the age of the internet, it'd be another war on drugs aka a giant waste of taxpayer money - BUT our selling videos would be illegal, and bascially anything sexual that has no "literary or artistic" value would be illegal. I have links to the actual laws in my blog post

Political values aside, if theres one thing I think we can rally around on this site, its our freedom to watch porn! :twocents-02cents:

 

[Bocefish]

Federal obscenity law in the U.S. is unusual in that there is no uniform national standard. Former Justice Potter Stewart of the Supreme Court of the United States, in attempting to classify what material constituted exactly "what is obscene," infamously wrote, "I shall not today attempt further to define the kinds of material I understand to be embraced…ut I know it when I see it…"[2] In the United States, the 1973 ruling of the Supreme Court of the United States in Miller v. California established a three-tiered test to determine what was obscene—and thus not protected, versus what was merely erotic and thus protected by the First Amendment.

Delivering the opinion of the court, Chief Justice Warren Burger wrote:

The basic guidelines for the trier of fact must be: (a) whether 'the average person, applying contemporary community standards would find that the work, taken as a whole, appeals to the prurient interest, (b) whether the work depicts or describes, in a patently offensive way, sexual conduct specifically defined by the applicable state law; and (c) whether the work, taken as a whole, lacks serious literary, artistic, political, or scientific value.

Legal porn does not fit the criteria.

 

[Nordling]

Yups, and PROBABLY he's only saying that to wedge into the fundamentalist voters, and once he's elected, he'll get "porn amnesia."

Similar to Tipper Gore's anti porn crusade, although if I remember she was mostly concerned with children seeing porn.

Either way, to me lying about one's interest in a issue makes one a hypocrite and will never get my vote.

 

[LucyGoodtimes]

Federal obscenity law in the U.S. is unusual in that there is no uniform national standard. Former Justice Potter Stewart of the Supreme Court of the United States, in attempting to classify what material constituted exactly "what is obscene," infamously wrote, "I shall not today attempt further to define the kinds of material I understand to be embraced…ut I know it when I see it…"[2] In the United States, the 1973 ruling of the Supreme Court of the United States in Miller v. California established a three-tiered test to determine what was obscene—and thus not protected, versus what was merely erotic and thus protected by the First Amendment.

Delivering the opinion of the court, Chief Justice Warren Burger wrote:

The basic guidelines for the trier of fact must be: (a) whether 'the average person, applying contemporary community standards would find that the work, taken as a whole, appeals to the prurient interest, (b) whether the work depicts or describes, in a patently offensive way, sexual conduct specifically defined by the applicable state law; and (c) whether the work, taken as a whole, lacks serious literary, artistic, political, or scientific value.

Legal porn does not fit the criteria.

Uh how does it not? Lets run the Miller test shall we:
1. Prurient interest: check
2. Describes sexual conduct: check
3. Lacks literary, artistic, political, or scientific value: check

Unless you wanna argue "scientific value" on that one....

 

[LucyGoodtimes]

Yups, and PROBABLY he's only saying that to wedge into the fundamentalist voters, and once he's elected, he'll get "porn amnesia."

Similar to Tipper Gore's anti porn crusade, although if I remember she was mostly concerned with children seeing porn.

Either way, to me lying about one's interest in a issue makes one a hypocrite and will never get my vote.

Yeah, I have a feeling this issue won't be enforced. Like I said, it would be too costly and time consuming (hey supreme court justices, wanna watch Anal Sluts 5 to determine if its obscene or not?)

Plus, the whole thing would just force porn production underground and then we'd really never see porn with legal consenting adults :twocents-02cents:

 

[Shaun__]

Yups, and PROBABLY he's only saying that to wedge into the fundamentalist voters, and once he's elected, he'll get "porn amnesia."

Similar to Tipper Gore's anti porn crusade, although if I remember she was mostly concerned with children seeing porn.

Either way, to me lying about one's interest in a issue makes one a hypocrite and will never get my vote.

Yeah, I have a feeling this issue won't be enforced. Like I said, it would be too costly and time consuming (hey supreme court justices, wanna watch Anal Sluts 5 to determine if its obscene or not?)

Plus, the whole thing would just force porn production underground and then we'd really never see porn with legal consenting adults :twocents-02cents:

What you just said sounds a lot like the war on drugs to me.

 

[Shaun__]

Double post. I just saw this on another forum, and LMFAO. Mitt is a genius.

Mitt gets hundreds of millions from other rich guys for campaign.
Mitt knows how to funnel money through laundering channels.
Mitt knows the presidency is a lot of work that doesn't pay worth a shat.
Mitts campaign is a disaster.

Add it up.

1) Get Republican nomination
2) ...
3) Profit

 

[Bocefish]

Federal obscenity law in the U.S. is unusual in that there is no uniform national standard. Former Justice Potter Stewart of the Supreme Court of the United States, in attempting to classify what material constituted exactly "what is obscene," infamously wrote, "I shall not today attempt further to define the kinds of material I understand to be embraced…ut I know it when I see it…"[2] In the United States, the 1973 ruling of the Supreme Court of the United States in Miller v. California established a three-tiered test to determine what was obscene—and thus not protected, versus what was merely erotic and thus protected by the First Amendment.

Delivering the opinion of the court, Chief Justice Warren Burger wrote:

The basic guidelines for the trier of fact must be: (a) whether 'the average person, applying contemporary community standards would find that the work, taken as a whole, appeals to the prurient interest, (b) whether the work depicts or describes, in a patently offensive way, sexual conduct specifically defined by the applicable state law; and (c) whether the work, taken as a whole, lacks serious literary, artistic, political, or scientific value.

Legal porn does not fit the criteria.

Uh how does it not? Lets run the Miller test shall we:
1. Prurient interest: check
2. Describes sexual conduct: check
3. Lacks literary, artistic, political, or scientific value: check

Unless you wanna argue "scientific value" on that one....

Unless the work depicts or describes, in a patently offensive way, sexual conduct specifically defined by the applicable state law.

It's ultimately up to the state just like California recently banned intercourse porn without condoms IIRC. Unless it's child porn or otherwise seriously offensive to the average person there is nothing to worry about. Adding an optional porn filter parents can use may actually help cut down on the adolescent trolls anyway until they figure out a bypass.

 

[Nordling]

:lol:

 

[Airwolfe]

Yups, and PROBABLY he's only saying that to wedge into the fundamentalist voters, and once he's elected, he'll get "porn amnesia."

Similar to Tipper Gore's anti porn crusade, although if I remember she was mostly concerned with children seeing porn.

Either way, to me lying about one's interest in a issue makes one a hypocrite and will never get my vote.

Romney is pandering to his audience. He is telling them what they want to hear. Obama does it. Biden does it. Romney does it. Ryan does it.

Every politician since the beginning of time has done it. If their lips are flapping they are lying or blowing smoke up your ass.

Either way, to me lying about one's interest in a issue makes one a hypocrite and will never get my vote.

Speaking of hypocrisy. Are you fucking for real?

You would not vote for Romney if he was flown down from Heaven by Angels, walked on water, and healed the sick.

You would still vote for Obama.

 

[Bocefish]

Either way, to me lying about one's interest in a issue makes one a hypocrite and will never get my vote.

 

[Nordling]

Yups, and PROBABLY he's only saying that to wedge into the fundamentalist voters, and once he's elected, he'll get "porn amnesia."

Similar to Tipper Gore's anti porn crusade, although if I remember she was mostly concerned with children seeing porn.

Either way, to me lying about one's interest in a issue makes one a hypocrite and will never get my vote.

Romney is pandering to his audience. He is telling them what they want to hear. Obama does it. Biden does it. Romney does it. Ryan does it.

Every politician since the beginning of time has done it. If their lips are flapping they are lying or blowing smoke up your ass.

Either way, to me lying about one's interest in a issue makes one a hypocrite and will never get my vote.

Speaking of hypocrisy. Are you fucking for real?

You would not vote for Romney if he was flown down from Heaven by Angels, walked on water, and healed the sick.

You would still vote for Obama.

Yes, I am for real, and IF Romney really was flown down from Heaven by Angels, walked on water and healed the sick, AND really was a fine fellow, I'd vote for him hands down.

Because I support someone BECAUSE I prefer their policies over his opponent does NOT make me a hypocrite...accusing people of hypocrisy because of their personal beliefs and choices in this world is something else, not sure what.

 

[Nordling]

Either way, to me lying about one's interest in a issue makes one a hypocrite and will never get my vote.

Gee. Someone makes a YouTube video in which they accuse the President of lying about what appears to be everything on the planet and that's the truth? Because it was posted? Notice that those "lies" were not cited?

A lot of what candidates say on the campaign trail are INTENTIONS, and if Congress and/or the SCOTUS doesn't allow it to happen, it's not about lying.

 

[Jupiter551]

(hey supreme court justices, wanna watch Anal Sluts 5 to determine if its obscene or not?)

They can contract out to me if they like

 

[Mirra]

That video is useless. It just indicates each thing he says in several speeches were lies. It doesn't give any more information than that. Just blindly says "Lie #13." I don't find it very compelling. I'm not going to say he's accomplished everything in those speeches... but I also don't think everything labeled as a lie by that video is untruthful.

I'm really hoping you eventually post a video, argument, or even a captioned picture that I find compelling. So far the most compelling argument I've read on these forums against Obama is the interview by John Cusack with Law Professor Jonathan Turley. Give us something compelling.

 

[Bocefish]

A lot of what candidates say on the campaign trail are INTENTIONS, and if Congress and/or the SCOTUS doesn't allow it to happen, it's not about lying.

 

[Jupiter551]

Speaking of hypocrisy. Are you fucking for real?

You would not vote for Romney if he was flown down from Heaven by Angels, walked on water, and healed the sick.

You would still vote for Obama.

Well I think most people aren't voting for Romney because he's a) a complete nutbag, b) a complete asshole and c) did I mention complete nutbag already?

Having been flown down from heaven, waterwalking and faithhealing would be neat, but they're still not essential presidential qualities.