DLC,
I completely agree with your agrument that people should be informed and vote for what is best for the country. I beleive the partisanship has torn this electorial process a part.

DLC, what is your opinion of the Ohio GOP secretary of state restricting voting hours and now appealing a court judgement returning the hours? I agree the GOP used to participate in voter registration and encourage voting by every voter. It is not happening this year. Anyone who votes for the GOP is voting for voter purging, elimination of early voting hours, unequal distribution of voting machines to make lines longer. Not a good trend. and not good for America.

Lynda,
I cannot give you my opinion on what is going on in Ohio because I know nothing about it.
But I will tell you something I do know about. It is the group of bussed in "volunteers" going from one nursing home to another in Maine with absentee ballots for the seniors.
Some nursing homes are turning them away but most are letting them in to allow the Seniors to vote.
One nurse called the state because several people with dementia voted.
All they did was sign the application form that the volunteer filled out.
Absolutely criminal. This also is not good for America.

As a Black republican i take alot of grief for not "towing the line and being a democrat but i respect everyon's right to be a part of and vote for whoever you feel will do a better job

Black america has been sold a bad bill of goods because obama was supposed to solve everything...so far it aint happened and in his ad's its the same "spread fear of what his oponant's gonna do if he's elected"-nothing about what he should have done with his first 4 years because all he did was get obamacare passed

In the first election it was all about white guilt. You had to vote for him if you were black to be part of history and if you were white you had to vote for him to prove you were not a racist...mission accomplished you got what you wanted

In this election since he cant run on his record, its a negative ads not toting his accomplishments but gaffs and "what Mitt will do if he's elected"

VOTE because its important but most of all look at what they stand (and have stood) for. No one candandate is the best but the one you choose will be the one who will take the country in the direction YOU believe is the best and that is what makes america the best but i am so tired of being shepared. i cant believe that so many people are effected by on liners and gaffs in commercials.

Do youselves and america a favor THINK FOR YOURSELF and quit letting the media choose the president for you, GOOD POST DLC!

Thank you DLC & Sam, how refreshing to have voice of reason instead of unreasonable complaints & insults by liberals, which is the only thing they know well!
As for you Lynda I see you are bouncing from post to post spreading your selfish views, why don't you stop & think about the hard working poll workers from 7 am to 7 pm who deserve to finish up early to reserve 5 to 6 hours for counting millions of votes!

Last president to keep all of his promises was Polk. He was smart, only made 4 promises.

Yeah I remember him also...that was when I first became a vampire long ago, but he did not keep his promise about lowering the price of blood.

Just following Historical Documentation CJ. If you do not follow history, especially in politics we are doomed to repeat it.

Sorry Michael...but it struck me as funny how you made it sound like you could remember him...are you a vampire also? Thank you for your fact about Polk...I ''did'' find it interestig..just couln't resist to having a little fun here...lol! Is he the President also responsible for naming the weed, Polk? That's good stuff cooked with some onions and back bacon...

Eileen - Agreed. Too many politicians focus too much on getting re-elected vs our long term interest. We need to make getting elected more about public service and sacrifice vs enriching yourself. In my view, I wish politicians will start channelling Steve Jobs- Simple, simple, simple. Tax code is so complicated its a burden and too easy to avoid because of loopholes. I find if ironic that so many were talking about Romney's and Buffet's tax rate when its the tax code that's the problem. Remember the original purpose of the AMT? We're broke and the system is broken. We need to hold all politicians accountable. Both candidates have flaws, but I'm leaning towards R until O provides some credible reform plans. I also like R so like Bloomberg not focusing on lining pockets. In future, I wish both candidates agree to pick loser as VP. We need more common sense and solutions. BTW - I usually criticize congress but hat's off for investigating that potential risk from that Chinese company. Really, they don't get much done, but keeping us safe is a top priority.

Splinter, I agree with Tax reform I have posted on other boards here. If you remember all the loopholes and everyone pays a straight 18% then the burden of the middle class goes down, everyone pays teh same amount, and the amount of revenue of the government goes up.

I was also once a Republican, but that was when the party still had moderates in it. Now the Republican Party is filled with anti-science religious fundamentalists, extremist tea partiers, and those who sign Grover Norquist tax pledges ensuring that the richest in our society will never pay another dollar in taxes. The Party of Lincoln is now sadly the party of Rush Limbaugh, Todd Akin, Michelle Bachman, and Rick Santorum. It's hard to believe that there are still undecided voters in this election. Only if you are a rich male in the top 1% will you benefit from voting for Mitt Romney. Pres. Obama cares about woman's rights, health care for everybody and not just the rich, and he supports the middle class people. Just remember that Romney said let the auto makers in Detroit go bankrupt while Pres. Obama courageously saved over 1 million American jobs by supporting our car makers. Pres. Obama stands up for Main Street while Mitt Romney only stands up for Wall Street and the richest 1% of Americans.

In my early years I voted Republican, then as I entered the working world I noticed trends. While Papa Bush was in I was working but made little...as Clinton came in my salery trippled by his third year and was doing pretty well...When little Bush got in I was layed off by his second year in office...Now, by the 18th month of Obama I am back to work doing just as well as I was when Clinton was in...Words are one thing results are another...I want to stay working, Obama is my man...

I agree some repugs are too socially conservative. However, many of the most extreme got elected on the backs of the fiscal problems. Just look at what is happening on the ground in Greece and elsewhere. We had a 30 year credit bubble pop. It is the new normal. We don't have the productivity gains of the 90s to boost us and are facing fierce global competitors (vs the end of WII). We need to run a much tighter ship with a focus on high rate of return investments and greater efficiency. I've worked in the fed gov't and still shocked at the waste I saw. We need some basic fiscal reforms in place NOW. After that, the fiscal issues will become back burner and we can focus on a better society. Currently, savers are penalized, those playing by rules and within means screwed, working harder for each dime, yet gov't taxing more, still buried in dead and bridges/schools failing.

We're broke and the system is broken.

I am sorry you feel this way. I hope that you will research the facts prior to voting for Mr. Obama. He has not given one strategy for the upcoming four years nor has he fulfilled most of his promises from the last campaign. Furthermore, with the Libya deaths and scandal, his credibility is one to which you might associate with what you appear to have thought of Bush. Additionally, neither Mitt Romney nor Paul Ryan would DARE touch my parents' Medicare ($716,000,000,000) to fund the Affordable Healthcare Act and at that rate, expect to see "Take a Number" at your future doctor's appointment! Finally, any adult male in politics for as long as Mr. Biden has been, behaving in such an immature, rude and conscending manner with the smirks and grunts and eye rolls and over 81 interruptions, during his VP debate, no thank you...I pray to God that he does not behave this way at UN meetings! As a former democrat, I feel they have had their chance to make for "change" they simply didn't do enough. ROMNEY/RYAN for me! BTW, do you realize that "wealthy" 3% of americans who probably employ you or somehow are connected to your product or service, work harder, often studied hard in college + post-grad with more student loans to pay back than you may imagine...and donate billions of dollars to charities every year who are looking for cures for cancer, MS, Alzheimers and more...all the while giving 37% of their EARNED money away in taxes & they have bills and payrolls to employees!

Being a Libertairian is fine, but keep in mind that any vote for someone other than Romeny is a vote for Obama. The problem I have with people who waste thier vote on alternate parties is that it provides no real choice between who will realistically win. I suggest you continue to support Libertairians, but until one gains enough poplularity to be one of the top 2 choices to vote for...make a decision to use your vote on someone who can win...especially in a Presidential election. Yes..it's sort of like picking the lesser of two evils...I can agree to that. Remain a libertairian, but choose between Obama or Romney to use your vote. I do understand how you feel, though. I personally will vote for Romeny. He was not my original GOP pick during the initial canpaigning, but I now see the benefit of having a tough businessman in office rather than a former City Planner who is lost without a teleprompter. Even when Obama won, I certainly was not real happy with the lame McCain as the GOP canidate. It's no wonder Obama won. I voted for McCain, becasue I felt I could see in advance that Obama would fail. After he won, I gave him a chance...but he has failed badly. If Romney wins, if he fails also..then it is one and done for him also. No 2nd terms for ''any'' canidate from me anymore who doesn't make dramatic change for the better during his 1st term. No excuses such as gridlock, etc. We have to demand a President be successful his 1st term. I wish Gort the Robot was running...lol!

You should really be comparing Pres. George W. Bush with Mitt Romney. Both are phony incompetent war hawks who received military deferments and hid from the Vietnam War. Even Romney's five sons avoided military service because they believe only the poor and middle class should have to die for their country. It appears that if elected, Mitt Romney intends to start another major unfunded war against Iran, just like Pres. Bush did in Iraq and Afganistan. Contrary to your statements, Pres. Obama has been a generally successful president despite the endless Republican opposition trying to make him fail. It has been Romney who looked weak in foreign policy when he embarrassed himself in London criticizing the Olympics, and with his uneducated statements in Israel on the Palestinian problem, and his recent uniformed criticism of the causes of Spain's economic problems.

CJ, when you vote for the person you believe in, this is not a wasted vote. I could elaborate, but it doesn't get simpler than that. It's a betrayal to your beliefs when you vote for the lesser of two evils.

We don't need "the top 2 choices". This is the wrong direction. We need all of the choices getting equal consideration, or the system is broken. We can't wait for it to happen. Do you understand why Ron Paul runs every year? His particular cause gains steam every year. And he's not even part of an alternate party's movement, just the movement of putting Republicans back where they started.

In order to get these other movements started, it takes voting year after year. What if they reported the day after the election, that 25% of voters did not vote for Romney or Obama, despite losing? Do you know how huge that would be for the future? This doesn't happen by itself.

I am a Libertarian as well. I have no affection for Romney or Obama. If you watch the press conference aka debate you will hear them say "I agree" probably 15-20 times, though you never hear them say anything about NDAA, CISPA, FISA. Why have both of them supported healthcare mandates or wars in the middle east?

I'm supporting Gary Johnson, and to say that a vote for him is a vote for anyone else is an absolute fallacy. He is the only candidate who promises to submit a balanced budget to Congress in 2013 not 2043 like the Ryan plan. He is the only candidate talking about bringing the troops home now and building a strong national defense rather than offense.

A vote for Robamney is a vote for status quo.

Joe C..I am a Vietnam Vet. I enlisted, even though there was a draft going on. I could have had deferments if I wanted, but i wanted to serve. You are wrong to label people who did not go as cowards. There was nothing wrong with getting a deferment. god knows...amny who were drafted wish they had qualified for one. In Bush and Romney's case..or anyone for that matter...if they wer able to get a deferment...then so what? At least in thier case they were still using their lives towards somethingconstructive...and I think that is the only point. If a person got a deferement simple becasue he was afraid to go...the same goes. There is nothing wrong with being afraid. many of the men who were drafted were scared...and it really is too bad and sad they were not able to get a deferement. I would never begrudge someone who got a deferement. War is not for everyone, and our Armed forces are beter off with men who choose to be there. Vietnam was a terrible time...and having a draft was a errible thing. don't be too sure the day won't come that a draft will be put in place again. shame on you for faulting someone for getting a deferem,ntsimple because maybe you couldn't.

Chuck. I am OK with your argument. I just don't agree it is the ''best'' thing to do.I just gave my opinion on the matter...and I am convinced a vote for a canidate who has zero chance of winning will ''indeed'' help a canidate among the other two choices win...and you might not like who it is who wins. As I said...at least plant your vote to sway the election towards your second choice if you know your first choice will not win. You can think what you want. This is common sense...but that is beyond the 47% to understand.

Joe C...Actually, and I hope you see my point...I compare Obama with Bush in this regard...both failed those who helped them win. I consider Obama the Dem version of the GOP Bush for this reason.

Your math is wrong. I do think eventually a 3rd Party may soon become relevant...maybe even next election. Like any primary, it will be easy to tell how a 3rd party is doing. Up to now, they have not done well enough to pose a serious threat to win. If you have 3 choices then you rank them in order of who you would pick. If your choice is the one who does not stand a chance at winning..then it was cool you supported him up to to now...but you should now give your vote to your second choice. It does not mean he will win, but at least your vote went to a chocie you felt was in the running. With Romeny and Obama is such a close race...to not give your vote to your second choice enhances the possibility of you being a total loser. If you ''can't'' rank the 3 choices in an order you prefer...then I can't talk to you. It's not complicated logic. Think of it this way...I bet a lot of people who helped Obama win are sure sorry the Dems abandoned Hillary for Obama. I would not have voted for her, but if she had won instead of Obama and then gone on and did a good job...I might consider voting her in for a second term. I think she might have just done that if she had been the Dem Canidate last elections. If Romney wins, it will be then the Dems will regret ever having backed Obama in the first place. Just some food for thought.

CJ, what the heck are you talking about? I am not discussing the viability of a 3rd party at all. What I am talking about is turnout for Obama voters and what will happen as they become disillusioned with him as they did with Carter in 1980.

A independent 3rd party is not viable in our country and will never be with our present structure. I cannot even respond to this, but good luck with your analysis anyway.

I think I agree with you more than you realize. I ''am'' voting for Romney . I did not vote for Obama. I am GOP. I think we are both making compicated points to verbalize , but I see your point. I was just throwing in how I approach the ''alternate choice'' deleima. i may indeed like some of the other alternate choisces...but I try to vote between the two I feel are the ones that are going get the most votes. Of course, I might add...living in Florida makes it more inportant that ever you try and prevent your choice not lose by a small amount of votes and then regret later if for example you voted Libertairian ''out of principle''. It's better to make sure your second choice win if your first one can't.

Mary,
I'm no Obama fan, but really? Obama is the only one to swing and fail on investing government money in businesses. I'm assuming you are saying that Bush, Clinton, Bush, Reagan, Carter, Nixson, all didn't miss on investments. If you take the amount of money that was invested in those companies, it doesn't move the needle less than 1% of the money in this country. I have no problem with a few misses, its call investing. If Mitt gets into office in four years are you going to list all the misses he has that equal less than .001% of this countries GDP.
Just seems nitpicky to me.

I agree with Michael. I will not hide that I am a huge proponent of alternative energy, especially of it enjoying similar tax breaks and incentives as oil. However, compare this money to that spent on the military and nation building. It's absolutely of no consequence. The DoD received around 700 billion for 2012. If you're going to complain about dollars wasted, please don't forget the largest and most obvious area where money can be saved.

Chuck,
Please stay away from DoD spending, I like my contractor paychecks. That is all.

Good comment, Chuck. Those voters are a large part of the 47% Romney was referring to.

Cool. Visit an awesome web site called isidewith.com. It is just one resource for researching candidates, but it's a pretty neat one.

...''who's'' assessment..it's not clear who you are directing your reply to.

Chuck,
It's a nice sight. This is the first time in my years as an eligible voter I will not see all the candidates (not just the 2 major ones) live. I also never make a decision before the second debate. Though I'm doing research on all 8 candidates, I further behind this election than I have been in the past.

Samual,
I believe that Johnson should be allowed in the debates, at the very least to raise a different voice.

Samuel Clemens...may I call you Mark...lol ? How many are undecided? If Romney is saying there is 47% who will never vote for him..then maybe he means another 47% will vote for him...that leaves 6% who are undecided?? I dunno if that sounds about right to you or not. What do you think, Mark?

Michael, As far as that goes...all the canidates who will be on the ballot should be in the debates for the same reason. Good point. I have actually forgot about the fact there are other canidates other than Romeny and Obama. This is the first elelction in a long time that the alternate canidates have been kept so far out of the public stage. I had not even realized that until your comment. This is a more important election than we have had in a while. I think a lot of people sense that. That feeling could end up really making this elelction a big surprise on how close it is. If the Vice president debate goes well for Ryan....and if Obama bombs out again in the next one with Romeny....I have a feeling we have the set up like was present between Carter and Regan. It would be nice to not have such a contested close outcome like is the last few elections. I'd like to see a more united front of rour country. Whoever wins....I pray they bring some dramatic positve actions. We need that.

I have to agree with you, Robert. I also have had discussions with Lynda about trying to reason with her. You made excellent, clear arguments that are hard to dispute. I am dissapointed that I have not been able to get her to be more open minded. She write many things on other topics that I have had her back on, but in politics...no. She is s shining example of the 47% that Romney refers to that would not change their vote from Obama to Romney ...''no matter what''. It's frustrating to read how '''so many people'' have treid just like you have here...and how I have also in the past ...tried to make a diiference with her. I beleive in success with one eprson at a time...and it bothers me to fail with someone like Lynda. She isone person I have really wanted to be able to feel like I made a difference with. It's sad to understand first hand just how very ''right-on'' Romney's 47% remark was. I know he has apologized for it. I am OK with that...he has compaassion...but the truth is...I'd like to see him really pour more of the same on sronger and stronger and not let up. Lynda...I have never said I don't like Obama. he seems like a decent enough person. I just don't like him as President. How can anyone approve of how he has done. As Robert pointed out...it's like you are programmed or something...and it demonstrates why many describe Obama followers as ''zombies''. Doesn't it both you that so many people look at you that way? There is no crime in changing your mind.

Robert, I never posted that the GOP is "suppressing the vote" in listing the documented actions taken by the GOP Ohio secretary of state and here in Florida. I am absolutely shocked at the open tactics by the GOP in many, many states to restrict voting through laws passed and through administrative actions when those laws have been struck down. This is not the GOP I grew up with and not one I will ever support. I believe strongly in showing up and taking part in national, state and local voting. I don't need a link to just one article to prove my point. The GOP actions have been documented for months. I, like the League of Women Voters ,in Florida washorrified by the actions of the Florida GOP to eliminate voter registration by restrictions. To characterize this as anything but an attack on democracy is unbelievable. My question to DLC was one I could put to any loyal GOP voter. How can they still be loyal when the party has changed from encouraging voting to restricting it in every way it can?

CJ, while you won't change my vote for the Obama/Biden ticket, you have made a difference while trying to reason with me! However, I do wonder about your support for Gov. Romney since you are a Vietnam vet. Most vets I talk with resent Gov Romney's support for that war while he spent it on deferment in France. I guess I am glad you don't hold grudges for those who are willing to send other to war, but not willing to go themselves. And I am glad you came back ok; so many I knew did not nor did the ones who went to jail as war protesters. Thanks for pointing out how many Patch topics we do agree on. There is community life after this election.

Lynda...funny you would respond. I just discovered a littel while ago that this is a ''Lutz'' Patch...not the Gulfport oe. I don't have any idea how I ended up on it. It made me wonder if you were the same Lynda I was thinking of...lol! I do participate in more than just the Gulfport Patch, but never the Lutz one before. As i said, it is a mystery to me how I got on it. That said..it appears as if you get around also...lol! In regard to the deferment topic....I am not sure which veterans you talk to...but I don't agree with your generalized assessment that most vets would resent those who had deferements. I want to qualify my credibility a bit more by mentioning that I was not simple in, I retired out. I assure you, most vets think anyone who managed to get a deferement was a lucky sob....but there was little resentment towards them. If anything, most GI's though enlistees like me at the time needed out heads examined for volunteering during a time when the draft was on. They also thought it was pretty dumb to not take a deferement if they could get one. As I stated before, the military ''is not'' for everyone...and ...trust me..it is better off without those who don't want to be there. A draft is a terrible thing, but also a necessary evil unfortunately at certain times.

Additionally, keep in mind that as long a person is being productive in life, he is performing just as important of a service to our country as someone who was in the military. The business at home needs to carry on as normal as possible. Soldiers serve...so you don't have to interupt our American lifestyle anymore than required. Any degree of interupting our way of life is a small victory for our enemies. Romney, Bush, and many other politicians time was well spent preparing for politics to help run our country. Dn't fool yourself into believeing many Dem never served, either. Thank you for the note. If Obama wins, good luck to him. I have never wished ill upon a canidate that won who was not the one i supported. I gave Obama a chance, but really, Lynda..how can you still stand by him considering the shape of our country. He is trouble. If he wins, just wait till people start seeing the new deductions for healthcare come out of their paychecks. Imagine the youth all over our country all falling into bad graces with the IRS over unpaid health insuance premiums. And we thought the IRS was a pain about taxes. This health expense is coming directly out of income that used to go into our bank accounts because employers used to pay for our insurance. Think about what I am saying.

Robert,
Both parties have tried to surpress or manipulate the vote. During Maritenez's reign as governor of the state of florida he changed the voting district lines to reflect a republican vote. One distrinct in the Gainesville area looks like a snake flowing between three counties. Jeb did some questionable things in Jacksonville, and lets not get into how a Electorial Commissioner promised a republican victory to Bush two weeks before an election. Both parties have/are trying to cheat the game. The old adage if your not cheating, your not trying applies to both parties.

There is no evidence. Repeat, no evidence that voter fraud which could be corrected by showing ID at a polling place has caused significant problems or been prosecuted under current laws. Absentee voting? That is the real voter fraud opportunity. What is being done by GOP legislatures (including Florida)? Nothing, because more Republicans than Democrats vote using absentee ballots (including my mother in assisted living).

Robert, I followed the Franken/Coleman recount very closely. Minnesota is usually the state with the highest voting participation rate, generally nearly 70%. Citizens take their right to vote seriously; local election officials are often seniors who have been doing their volunteer jobs for years. In most precincts voters know one another well so fraud through dead people voting was just not an issue. Minnesota elects non-partisan election officials who take the right to vote very seriously. Absentee voting requires an actual excuse such as illness. The entire recount was on TV, the entire court case was on TV for the whole world to watch. Yes, it was a close vote. Out of the nearly 3 million voters, the difference between the two candidates was so slight. However, no one was able to find fraud. The corrected mistakes were the usual human errors from 70+ year olds working over 12 hour shifts or disputes about signatures which changed with age. The myths that circulate among the GOP are just that myths.
Former Senator Coleman was rewarded with a job by the GOP for pushing the recount beyond reasonable limits just to keep Sen Franken out of the Senate. Please don't repeat nonsense unless you have evidence which in this case just does not exist. The GOP appointees of the Minnesota Supreme Court were satisfied that the best possible recount had been done.

..that was a great analogy comparing them to a douche bag and a turd sandwich...lol...

MLH,
Great reference to the 2008 South Park Election Eposide.

MHL, Thanks for weighing in. Is there a certain topic you're hoping to hear more about, or are you generally just waiting to hear something that wins or loses your vote?

MLH
If you reduce the choices to being between a ''douch bag and a turd sandwich''...that is your business. But...you should still make a choice between the two in order to have a voice with your vote. Remember...a vote not cast is a vote for the canidate you are against. I vote ''always'' helps ''someone''...even if neither are your pcik to be ruynning...you should still vote. Romeny was not my choice, but I accept the fact he won in the primaries...so I go on...and now am face with who to vote for..Obama or Romney. Personally...I pick Romeny not simply because he is GOP...I pick him because I felt Obama did a poor job. It only stands to reason and logic that if he wins...then it will 4 more years of the same. He divdides our country moree that typical canidates...he is trouble for our country. Romeny is a better businessman...and in genreral...most in the GOP probably are. that's what we need now. Like it or not...making it in the world stae is all about money. Don't doubt that. Health care, etc are important...yeah...but money is what pays the bills.

SUMMARY: This amendment would overturn a part of the state Constitution that blocks taxpayer funds from being spent on religious institutions, including any churches, sects and religious denominations. The new language, replacing a provision in the Constitution going back more than 125 years, says an individual or entity may not be denied funding, benefits or support based on religious identity or belief.
Well, the title of this amendment, “Religious Freedom” sounds good. But in reality it should be titled “Religious Restrictions and Taxpayer Subsidies.” By allowing the state to fund religious institutions, we open a Pandora’s Box of unintended consequences and litigation. Though I firmly believe that faith-based charities and organizations provide a valuable benefit to Florida and the Nation, I also strongly reject those same organizations being funded with tax dollars.
If the State of Florida wants to ensure that churches, synagogues, mosques and other faith-based charities are well funded, perhaps they should cut taxes so that the people of Florida would have more disposable income to donate to the faith of their choice.

Dee,
There is a list of those amendments in another Patch article written earlier this week.

Romney proves you can’t trust him!

Politifact.com: Romney has told more total lies than Obama
http://www.politifact.com/personalities/mitt-romney/
http://www.politifact.com/personalities/barack-obama/

Fact Check.org: Romney told more lies at the Presidential debate than Obama, and Romney came off as a “serial exaggerator.”
http://factcheck.org/2012/10/dubious-denver-debate-declarations/

Robert,

Please stop the Obama-socialist nonsense. That was disproved by Politifact more than 10 months ago. See: http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/statements/2012/jan/08/rick-perry/rick-perry-says-barack-obama-socialist/

You Republicans have nothing but lies and distortions to tell. Abe Lincoln would be pissed off.

Hey Beth. Do you live in America? There is still such a thing as FREEDOM OF SPEECH!

Freedom of speech, Beth, does give the GOP right wing the technical right to lie, but the facts are that these "socialist" claims are total crap.

President Obama is more like President Eisenhower, the great GOP centrist, and the bold Teddy Roosevelt, and not at all like the left wing President which some Democratic Party extremists want him to be. Yes, the Democratic extreme left are pissed that Obama has been so reasonable and thoughtful and working with Republican moderates, just like the Republican extreme right is pissed at him for not embracing their Ayn Rand-like hatreds.

Great presidents from both parties govern from the center, and not from either extreme. They work for the good of all Americans, and not just segments of our society.

If it wasn't for the GOP House members of the Tea Party, Obama would have accomplished a lot more, but even in the face of their obstructionism he has been bringing back the American economy from the abyss that he inherited.

Additionally, his foreign policy successes have been much more than anyone expected, and his military decisions, with the guidance of his JCS chiefs, has been nothing short of spectacular. Not only has Bin Laden been eliminated, but scores of other Al Qaeda leaders, in four countries, have also been eliminated, after managing to evade the US for the entire Bush and Clinton administrations.

So, yes, you hate Obama, and that is your right. But you have no right, ethically, to spreading lies about him.

Yep. That's exactly what Eastwood said.

Thank you Robert, I am a woman who is fed up with lies & put downs for the last 4 years, time for healthy America to put the lazy back to work, no more hand outs for free loaders!
Time to save our country, Time to elect Romney as the 45th President of The United States!
God Bless The USA!

And now he has Hillary taking his fall!

Ok, so Obama is the only one to misread a threat. Hmmmmmmmmm...... Really? Read the 9/11 report. I have cover to cover twice. A lot of people died that day from a lot of people on both sides dropping the ball. And some really lazy airport security people. It's a bad situation, but it's not the first embassy to be attacks and people die. Not the first American deaths for poor judgement by our government officials. This tragedy isn't politics like the others ones should not be politics.
Secondly, Obama lied, wow new information. Bush Jr. lied, Clinton lied, Reagan lied, Bush Sr. Lied, etc... and in some of those cases of those people lying, people died. The 24/7 new cycle is the only reason people are making a big deal of this. It's unfortunitely and thoughts go out to the families. But to the people trying to make this a political message, shame on you.

Good I will find you & shake your hand :)

Robert, It is obvious that you have never taken a political science class. You have no idea what a Marxist is. Pres. Obama's political views would generally be defined as slightly left of center and moderate. In fact, he has disappointed most liberals in America by not advocating more progressive issues during his first term. With the possible exception of Pres. Obama's health care legislation, which was modeled after Romneycare in Massachusetts, the President has generally advocated mainstream moderate political policies.

Joe C..It is not necsssary for Robert to take a political science class to teach him what he needs to know about Obama. Just have him read George Orwell's ''Animal House''. Obama would be playing the part of one of the pigs.

Robert, you're the typical conservative... NO FACTS, only OPINION. Me, angry? Not in the least. I, like any educated folks, just laugh at you.

Good Day Robert forget these liberal fools, they have no smart juice in them & they never will, they are bunch of puppets who want to be controlled by the government, the ones who try to yell their agenda think they are control freaks but they are never going to control us because we believe in Freedom & the good of our beloved nation, that's right all you lieberal has beens get over yourselves, we are Proud & Brave, we love our country much more than you ever will ;)

Robert, you forgot to add that Obama is also an American hater, communist Muslim, born in Kenya, and he is going to take away your guns. The Republicans depend on low information voters like you who receive all of their news from Rush Limbaugh.

Joe C, Don't fault Rush for not being right all the time. Even strong consevatives don't agree with him all the time. I will admit, after listening to him for many years...he is getting ''old''..to put it simply. Overall, though, his outlook on things is very good, He is hardly ''low information'''...but he certainly is not the GOP Jesus, either. Your remark about Rush was unfair. He has proven over time to have a solid outlook that is normally fair and accuarate. You have to be careful when you listen to him. His humor and sarcasm are convincing at times when he simply is trying to be humorous. He even puts one over on his ditto-heads now and then.

You list:''Obama is also an American hater, communist Muslim, born in Kenya, and he is going to take away your guns''...is more true than you realize. The jury is still out on his birth documents that are widely consdiered to be possibly forged...but either way..he was nearly born in Kenya any way you define it...so it is a moot point. It seems the only person I can think of that the birther issue is important to woud be Arnold (terminator). It is much easier to argue ther rest of your list is true than it is to dipute it.

CJ, please use any argument you wish, but posting "Obama's birth documents are widely considered to be forged" puts you in the company of true nuts. You are better than that. No one except a tiny, tiny vocal group led by a goofy foreign dentist/lawyer considers there to be any doubt President Obama was born in Hawaii and has proven it. If you honestly believe the "widely considered to be forged" is true, you are just not accessing reliable sources. And what could you possibly mean by "nearly born in Kenya". Is that like being a "little pregnant"? Trust me, it is time for you to comment on another article. By the way I think some of the commenters here have just changed their names and not their silly comments. Too, too boring.

CJ,
I do fault Rush for being a hypocrite when talking about drug abusers in America. I also find him to put opinion before fact on many occassion. Now I do not feel he is as bad as many, but at least unlike many he also does speak a lot of fact. I disagree with some of his visions of America, often over dramatic, but that is radio. I wouldn't say fair, but usually accurate in regards to the facts. Just like most radio host he has a tendency to stretch the facts.

Oh come on Michael...you really are not going there, are you? Obviously you have never had bad pain for a long length of time. It will make you , Rush, or ''anyone'' do things eventually that we might not normally do. He did some things that were illegal in regards to pain pills he needed...but it was for that reason. He was not a street recreationaal user. The man had ear surgery, etc...and pain in that area of the body has made people in past history commit suicide to eliminate the pain. When raising children, few things tug at your heart more when you have a kid with an earache. Hard to believe you can't have empathy for the man on this and cut him some slack on this issue. I hope you never have that kind of pain to deal with and truly ''walk in his shoes'' on this matter....I have...and I would not wish that on my worst enemy...and I certainly would not wish that pain on someome who I simply disagree in a blog with. What a cold comment you made. Completely heartless.

Lynda...I don't need your approval to be here. Being older and the fact I retired from the militry over 20 years ago gives me all the credentials I need. My viewpoints are not nuts. Either is someone like Donald Trump or the Arizona Sherrif...to just give a sampling of names of people who presented sensible un-resloved questions on this. How can you not at least keep an ope mind on this. Besides...my partial point of this is how much does it really matter anyway if he was born here or not...other than the fact if he did it knowingly...it constitutes ''at least'' an impeachemable offense. Me mentioning this does not mean it is what I beleive...but how can you completely, 100%, totally, discredit any and all possible truth on this. I do know this...when you are dealing with people at this high of a level of access to paperwork they need...coming up with a birth certificate to say anything you want it to would obviously not be a hard thing to do. I tried to humourously bring up the ''Arnold'' connection because it has been know for many years he had hopes of running for President some day...but has alwasy had the obsticle of not being born here. I personally don't see the real importance of wheter someone is born here or not, consdiering what a melting pot we all are here in the USA. That said, I do think it is OK to have ''some sort of line drawn''....such as requiring aperson to always have gone to school here, for example.

Lynda, Your smart aleck ''almost pregnant'' crack was funny. I admit it made me laugh, but I have no problem with some humor around here. You probably know better than I do what my ''nearly a Kenyan'' comment mean't. You like to pretend. I am actually fuzzy of all this, becasue I never thought it was that relevant of an issue to dwell on. The man had already been elelcted. I am unsure when the last time his mother was in Kenya and how old he was when , if he ws indeed US born, he got here. I don't think the fact he was very much a baby at the time is in dispute. You probably are now laughing at my ''very much a baby'' phrase. Maybe you know more exactly when he claims he was here. Whatever the time was...he was almost born in Kenya seems like that pretty much explains what I mean't by ''nearly a Kenyan''. Does ''nearly not a Hawaiian'' sound better....lol?

The group of people that still hold his birthplace in question is much larger than what you mentioned. I mean really, Lynda...''just what if'' (let's play that game) it turned out there was proof the birth certificate was forged and he indeed was born in Kenya and he knowingly lied about it. Don't you think he should receive sever punishment for the mockery of our systen that act would imply? I don't think it is going to happen, but if it did I think he should be come down on hard. He should at the very least be considered a felon after that the rest of his life, even after the obvious pardon he would get.

CJ,
I would cut him some slack if before and after the incident he wasn't crucify the people using perscription drugs and assuming all were recreational. There are many others that have needed those drugs for pain, but the way he describes it he was the only one that needed it for the pain. I'm lucky enough that I didn't get addicted to them when I was on them, but I know many people I used to compete with that did. Because of pain or the preceived pain. But he was the only one who was in that situation, whiile everyone else should be lockup. And yes, he was railing against people with perscription addiction regardless of the reason.

Lynda. Just to point out how easy it is for me to not completely doubt his lingering birther issues: Being new here, we recently had to help our son get his Florida Driver's liscense. The Dept Of Homeland Defense has made it hard to get even the most simple ID project/task accomplished...unless you are an illegal immigrant...lol. He needed his ''birth cetificate''. We had his original one from the hospital...with his footprint...seals...signatures...etc, etc, etc on it. Seemed pretty real to me. Duh.
Wrong.
We had to send of $67 for a ''Florida DMV Approved'' one. When it came...I swear...it was such a simple document that I could have easily forged it...but his original one was not good enough?? When we took it in, the clerk looked at it a whole half second or so. $67 for that. Have no doubt....Obama's could be a forgery. There have been many things pointed out about it that it's technically missing. Again...the point is...now that he has been elected...short of a time machine...this is water under the bridge. I think the main thing that matters is there is 100% proof that he has live here since being a baby. Yeah...it's a crime if he knowingly faked anything....but this has hardly been enough to derail the main emphasis being on the more important issues facing our country. I think the thing that really upsets people about this is how it makes mockery of our legal systems and the shameless, insulting amount of gual it would suggest if it turned out he knew it all along.

Mr. Ripley,
I am assuming there are many out there that are like that, I am undecided because I haven't finished my research on all 12 candidates that will be on the ballot. The posts on the different boards make me wish more of those who have picked were silent.

This talk brought up here about wishing people would be silent about thier choice is an interesting one. This is often an attitude of people who don't want to listen to others, be left alone, and do whatever they want simply out of stubborness. Many Obama supporters really know very little about the canidates, issues, etc...including not knowing much about Obama himself. They simply want to vote for Obama...''becasue they want to and ''that is that...close discussion''. This a a strong part of the 47% Romeny refers to. And yes....it includes many who are simply voting along racist lines...they want to vote for Obama because he is black, they are black...and ''that's that...end or discussion''. To be fair...there are whites who would ''never'' vote for a black man. The argument is which of these groups has the most people in it. ''I'' think there are ''lots'' more blacks who will always vote for the black canidate than there are whites who will never vote for a black person. Most whites I know would defintely vote for a black person...and have. I am among that group. The reason I won't vote for Obama is because he did not do a good job....''not'' because he is black. I think I am a typical white. This group of people you guys wish would ''remain silent'' are often bigots and don't care to discuss the reasons for their vote. The silent ones are the ones who should ''all'' be worried about. They often vote without conscience, and don't want anyone to know it.

CJ,
Obama is not the only one of the two candidates that have that type of supporter. And in most cases I would say on both sides it has nothing to do with race. The issues of people who follow their party regardless of the candidate and their mistakes. Also those who find some minor/non-exsistant issue and make that what their opinion of a candidate is. Just reading some of the posts in the last two days shows me the system is broken, because the average voter doesn't know what they are voting for. The partisanship has created a monster and the lies of the media have allowed the extremes of both parties to forget the interest of the whole country. There is a "47%" for both parties now a days, regardless of what corpse you throw out there. The extremists of both parties liberal and conservative have highjacked the media. It is that 6% that both candidates/parties are worried about, and what they are more worried about is that 6% growing. Both parties are always going to have the hard core 20%, but what is that is all they had.

As I said Michael..that seems to be a big question. Who has more people now days that vote based on race? Blacks or whites. You say you feel it is an equal amount. I do not agree. I think blacks are more racist than white's now. That is my opinion. Obama has not helped this problem and, if anything, has taken us backwards in race relations. He did this at a time when things really were looking better. I am sure they will recover and again proceed forward again with feelings of unity...but for now..he has taken us back a few years.

CJ,
I'm not saying people aren't voting based on race. Just that the percentage of those voting on race doesn't move the needle. I have not statistics on that, just an opinion. I think the crazies to vote one way or another even each other out regardless of reason. I don't think race is as big of an issue as class. Class lines have gotten deeper and deeper since Bush's second term. And neither Bush or Obama have helped that out. I doubt though that Romney is going to help that out either. Neither of these two candidates are there for the middle class.

Michael. the old saying..''a picture speaks a thousand words.''..comes to mind right now.

I can present you with a visual aid on this...that strongly enforces the notion that blacks are more racist against whites than whites are against blacks. It's not fun to point things like this out that are right in front of all our eyes to see.

If you look at a crowd of Obama supporters...say at a rally for example...you see a pretty good mix of other races along with the blacks who support him. You see a lot of white people. With me so far?

I went to the Romney Rally here at Pier Park , at The Pier, in downtown St Pete. Again...just like Obama crowds....lots of different races...except for one painfully obviously missing one. Blacks. This was a big rally. I had nevee been to one, but it seemed like a hjuge turn-out. I am not sure if it was consdidered a big turn out of not...but it looked like one to me. I looked. I loked for blacks...and I am telling you straight up....if there were ''any'' there...I did not see one black other than one speaker who proceeded Romney tlaking. While walking by people aftger people in the half mile long line toi get to the back of it...no blacks.

You tell ''me'' what kind of message I am supposed to get from that? OK? Tell me what you want...I'll listen...but I already have my own idea of what it means...and it's just like I said.

CJ,
I understand what you are saying, and as I said before there are people who are voting based on race on both sides. I can not say one race is voting more than any other based on that fact. I would say in a number of areas especially the South, I would agree with you on what you are saying. I'm saying with roughly 12.1% (2008 of actually voted) of the voting population being African American. In 2008, 95% of Black voters reported voting for Obama. Right now Statistics say that will be between 85%-90% of Black voters this time around. So lets say that 10.89% (approx. 90%) of Black voters, vote Obama. That is in the 20% that are going to vote that way regardless of the message that I was mentioning earlier. Now White voters made up 76.3% of the voting public in 2008. Approximately 56% of whites voted for McCain in 2008, I'm assuming that number will be closer to 65% for Romney. So I'm not saying there isn't racial lines, what I'm saying there is always 20% that is going to vote one way or another. That racial grouping for lack of a better term is part of that 20%.

Conservatives don't choose life. They choose to have big government take away all women's rights to choose their own family planning methods. Conservatives feel that all women should be denied family planning rights simply because it disagrees with a conservative's personal and religious beliefs. Conservatives also don't believe in a true separation of church and state. They are seeking to create a governmental theocracy with religiously inspired laws that will punish women who don't obey their religious family planning methods. Liberals respect all women to make choices for themselves in consultation with their doctors without government interference. Conservatives want to drag women back to the Dark Ages and force them to have only illegal and dangerous family planning options.

God Bless You Robert for a point well made as in case of White House throws Hillary under the 2012 bus!
Read more: http://dailycaller.com/2012/10/12/white-house-throws-hillary-under-the-2012-bus/#ixzz29UpjKb5F

How is the government to blame for an individual's choice to abuse prescription drugs? Mike, your comment clearly shows that you do not have any faith in people to make decisions for themselves and to take responsibility for their own actions. A government database is not the solution to the problem; but I will agree it is a good tool to fight doctor shopping but there is a slipperly slope. To paraphrase Benjamin Franklin, "Those who would sacrifice freedom for security deserve neither and will lose both."

Adam,
Unfortunitely a lot of people forgot that Benjamin Franklin quote when the Patriot Act was established.

So basically you want to punish sick people by putting them on a database, there is something called doctor patient confidentiality, it is my right to have privacy, it is nobodies business if I am sick & what medication I am taking, there you go folks another flipped out liberal wanting more government control, God Help Us All, Please Do Not Vote For Obama/Biden, remember this they are for killing innocent babies, watch this http://www.180movie.com/
God Bless The USA!