Message auto-removed

[Name removed]

[Rex]

1. Well if McCain was POTUS right now we would be at war with Russia.

We are not all hot ash right now...you can thank level headed Obama for that. If for nothing else...he did NOT start WWIII. Can't say the same thing about the GOP...their track record is pro-war all the time.

So go vote, your still alive and breathing...crisis averted.

[geek tragedy]

5. Say, Rex, do you know any actual Democrats

who say they don't care about civil rights for women, blacks, Latinos, or GLBT Americans, as this person does?

[Rex]

6. Actually I don't know any as uninformed as the OP.

Asking about all sorts of questions that are easy answers. Then again I doubt this person ever votes...just a hunch.

[geek tragedy]

8. I bet this person votes.

The "it doesn't affect me so I don't care" line sounds exactly like someone whose favorite book is Atlas Shrugged.

[Rex]

10. Yeah not much empathy out of that one, does remind me of a certain

mentality. Not usually associated with this website.

[Rex]

42. What do you think he is doing with DHS?

Such as what?

[geek tragedy]

44. "Always for a Democrat president"

They just can't help themselves

[MohRokTah]

50. People can say anything they want in anonymous internet forums.

Obvious

[MohRokTah]

52. Obvious is obvious

You never in your life voted for a DemocratIC, just "Democrat" presidents.

[Smarmie Doofus]

68. Parading your Civil War credentials will do you no good here.

Besides it's all over and we won. ( I think; didn't we?)

>>>Always for a Democrat President, because I was a Union Officer and I knew how destructive Republicans are to unions and the well being of the common man. >>>

Just kidding. Actually you raise some good.... and sensitive ( as in "some people are touchy about&quot .... questions.

I didn't vote for either of them in 2012, but probably would have voted for O if I were in a battle ground state. They're both corporatists... i.e. anti-working class and anti-union... but one is allied to the anti-everything wing of his party on "cultural issues".... which ARE voting issues for me; some of 'em, anyway.... and one is not.

[Jackpine Radical]

78. CONFEDERATE officer, more likely.

"Democrat" President indeed.

[geek tragedy]

14. Fuck Rand Paul and his idiotic supporters.

Libertarian fuckwits and Randian sociopaths are not welcome here.

[Rex]

17. I really don't get where they think libertarians are on the left side of Obama.

The LEFT does NOT want the total destruction of the federal government nor does it want to destroy society by dismantling all social safety nets! Where does this crap come from!?

Their mindset is baffling, but you called it...no empathy is a tell-tale sign.

[geek tragedy]

20. Not only no empathy, but a complete lack of interest

in policies' impact on the collective . Just me, me, me. And Rand and the NSA.

[betterdemsonly]

32. What about your lack of interest in civil liberties

and labor rights? If you support a candidate that lets people who care about those things down, than that is your callousness. Is it not?

[betterdemsonly]

24. Don't claim you care so much about winning elections

if you think people who care about those issues are all fuckwits. I care about labor and disability rights most, and dems sure as shit aren't serving my interests of late. Why don't you understand coalition building? Again you have to win voters.

[muriel_volestrangler]

54. Labor and disability rights? Do you think the thread starter, advocating Paul, gives a toss

about those? Whether it's Ron or Rand they are pushing, both of them are totally against such things.

[Rex]

15. How do you know McCain wouldn't be into a second term by now!?

Even a broken clock is right twice a day...that should apply to all libertarians. However, the total destruction of the federal government does NOT put Paul on the left side of Obama...but clearly into the seat of a corporate fascists. IOW...way...way to the RIGHT of the POTUS...who did not start WWIII (thank you sir).

You want a corporate fascist running the country? I don't.

[Spider Jerusalem]

18. Sorry, but that's plainly stupid.

Rand Paul not "to the left", he's "more libertarian". He also wants to repeal the Civil Rights Act, abolish the minimum wage and income taxes, and privatise everyting. Rand Paul is not by any definition a "leftist"; what he is is a right-wing anarchist who wants to abolish government and replace it with corporate feudalism.

[Rex]

22. This is why libertarians are so confused, they don't even understand their own leaders

ideology! It is way...waaaaaaaaaaaaaay to the Right.

[Spider Jerusalem]

35. Again, that's not "left", that's "more libertarian".

The two things do not mean the same thing.

[MohRokTah]

53. The guy alwasy votes for Democrat PResidents

HE has obviously never in his live voted for a Democratic president.

[NYC_SKP]

13. Russia and North Korea, and probably Canada, to boot!

This is a silly thread, the OP sounds unfamiliar with the reality of life, the impact of a RW Congress and Obama's record.

[ann---]

71. McCain ran in 2008

Romney ran in 2012.

[OilemFirchen]

2. Holy shit.

This page intentionally left blank.

[geek tragedy]

3. So you don't care about other people's civil rights.

Please, MIRT, please.

[Spider Jerusalem]

4. I'm reminded of what Winston Churchill said.

"The best argument against democracy is a five minute conversation with the average voter."

[nolabels]

56. Perhaps with a superior intellect

One might see only what one wants to see

[OnyxCollie]

7. Because the other guy was worse.

Welcome to Sucks Less.

[winter is coming]

9. If you don't remember why, are you sure you did? n/t

[Rex]

12. IKR!?

One does have to wonder with that opening statement.

[JI7]

19. "Other then the Social Issues, which don't effect me and I don't care about"

[betterdemsonly]

26. and you don't care all that much whether social security get privitized

or whether card check legislation is passed, so long as abortion rights are protected. You are willing to throw those of us who prioritize those issues under the bus.

[frazzled]

66. If you're so all that about personal privacy

Why are you here, telling the whole world who you voted for?

You must think not only that you are the center of the universe and that everyone somehow wants to get all up in your privacy (note: they couldn't care less), but that you are more important than everyone else. Who cares about other peoples' rights? That's for the little people.

Sheesh. Not a great entree into this community.

[JI7]

21. fuck rand paul, ron paul, and ayn rand

[Rex]

23. +1

I'll drink to that!

[betterdemsonly]

28. but if you are also saying fuck you to voters

that care about issues they publically represent then don't whine about losing their voters, and don't whine if you lose because of it.

[JI7]

30. you just mentioned social security above and it's Ron, Rand, and Ayn who support privitization

[betterdemsonly]

31. We are also having meta conversations about Nader

n/t

[Zambero]

27. Nobody has to remind me

Given the choices of less-than-perfect and completely unacceptable, the choice is not too difficult. The Republican strategy in Congress from 2009 on has been 100% obstructionist, blocking or attempting to block any and all significant legislation that could put Obama and Democrats in a positive light. And at the same time blame Obama for things not getting done, save executive orders in which case he is labeled as a "lawless tyrant". The GOP goal is to increase their power in 2014 by energizing their own base with phony scandals and contrived conspiracies, while dampening enthusiasm and voter turnout on the left. After reading your post and a number of others, I would regretfully acknowledge that they seem to know exactly what they're doing and might just pull it off.

[betterdemsonly]

29. and your answer to that is to say fuck the voters

who care about those issues and minimize the betrayals as being merely less than perfect.

[Cha]

39. Mahalo Zambero.. well said. "Energize their base.. ".. with Ratfucking..

"After reading your post and a number of others, I would regretfully acknowledge that they seem to know exactly what they're doing and might just pull it off."

It ain't gonna happen, though.

[sendero]

64. Really...

.... on the issues the OP mentioned it is not congress that is the problem, it is Obama's policies. Please don't act like we are too stupid to see the difference because we are not.

My problems with Obama have fuck-all to do with congress.

[Hekate]

33. Did you really?

Enjoy your stay.

[Cha]

36. I doubt you did. But, if you did you've had your head

in the sand for 6 years if you don't know what's been accomplished. Willful Ignorance.

The "Social Issues"? you mean like Gay Rights, Women's Rights, Social Security, Health Care.. the Environment? You don't give a shit about any of these? Neither do the fucking teabaggers.

Fortunately for our Country there are so many more people who educate themselves and aren't satisfied with being in the dark. They turn on a damn light.

[Cha]

41. Yeah, all issues that bave been helped with President Obama in Office. Thanks Obama!

[geek tragedy]

45. "But don't call it a marriage"

Get the fuck out of here with your bigotry already.

[SidDithers]

73. +1...

The poster's very first post at DU:

"It is time that progressives on the left talked to crazies on the right"



Sid

[MFM008]

37. So whats the alternative?

McCain? Romney? Ted Cruz?
If he dumps the XL pipeline, hes my hero again.

[bobGandolf]

43. Don't be fooled.....things would be much worse with McCain in White House n/t

[TheKentuckian]

46. If you don't care about the next person's rights then you don't really even care about your own

You'll fit right under the same wheels they did in your own time, you see the foundations being laid to do it.

Rights are no such thing when access to them can be restricted on wicked whim and access to nothing means a struggle in vain.

It is batshit crazy feeling to be having to explain to folks that there are no two sides to this, access and what you have access to are tied too tightly to to be arguing about which is important, they are the same or close enough to that exclusive focus on one is to risk destroying all meaning of both, making twisted mockery in their stead.

[Botany]

47. Troll much?

Obama was the better person, he has gotten a lot done for America despite non
stop obstructionism, and Mitt Romeny was and is a no good shit who made his money
screwing people.

[lame54]

48. So all SCOTUS decisions don't end up 7-2

[MohRokTah]

49. Dude, this isn't RandPAulUnderground.

You're obvious.

[muriel_volestrangler]

51. Have you ever considered caring?

It's a suggestion for a future lifestyle - not just for politics, but in society in general. Try caring about someone other than yourself - you never know, you might like it.

[dawg]

55. We got Janet Yellen as Fed chair instead of some Republican hard-ass ...

who would have quickly started hiking interest rates in order to please the rich, throwing millions more workers out of their jobs in the process.

[Nite Owl]

57. Seems you need to read some

history of what it was like before theses social issues were fought for. It isn't all about you.

If you think it's bad now think of what it would be like under a repuke. The environment gone mad,wages worse than they are now.War, War, War! Do you realize how many troops would never come home, how many innocents would be killed to keep Halliburtin happy?
We have to fight for these things, they don't happen overnight.

[HERVEPA]

58. To sum up

You are saying you are the problem, based on your not caring about other people's issues and your threat not to vote.
The correct word is "affect" by the way.

[liberal N proud]

59. This isn't enough?

[DrDan]

62. I believe that was 2008, not 2012

a picture of Mitt and the wonk would be appropriate, however

[liberal N proud]

67. Maybe this would be enough...

[Erich Bloodaxe BSN]

60. 'Other than the Social Issues, which don't effect me and I don't care about'

Well, dunno. I guess you were in a generous mood and voted on behalf of the people such issues do affect?

But I agree with you in large part - we need Democratic candidates who WILL be different on economic and military issues. Who won't continue to spy on every American, who won't quietly use drones across the globe in undeclared wars. Who won't keep hiring on the same batch of Goldman-Sachs cronies into every major economic position.

We need Democrats who aren't afraid to actually be Democrats to attract voters like you, and most of the youth vote who likewise have no interest in voting in 2014 because most Democrats are too much like Republicans on handling the economy.

[WinkyDink]

61. You don't care about "Social Issues" because they "don't effect (sic)" you?! Are you a NON-human?

[SidDithers]

63. Fuck Ralph Nader...nt

Sid

[McCamy Taylor]

65. "Social issues" are economic issues, so they do affect us.

[intaglio]

69. Apart from social issues?!

Society doesn't matter? Who are you channeling, Margaret Thatcher?

[ann---]

70. I regret that, too

I should have written in Dennis Kucinich's name the way I really wanted to. This is a disaster.

[treestar]

72. Oh so you're here to try to depress turnout for 2014

[spanone]

74. if you don't know....nevermind.

[bigwillq]

75. You should always vote.

There are other candidates out there if you're not happy with the current crop.

[MineralMan]

76. You'd be the best one to explain your vote.

We don't know you.

I do know that Obama=Bush arguments are specious, at best, though.

[ismnotwasm]

77. You 'don't care' about social issues

What an interesting comment.

[JustAnotherGen]

79. You tell us

It was YOUR vote.

You OWN It.