Why I Refuse to Vote for Barack Obama

Post Reply New Topic

I actually think Gary Johnson would be a better president than Obama. That may surprise some of you since I have been critical of libertarianism in the past but I have chosen my priorities.

The poor in America have a hard time but so do the people of the Middle East. Who has a harder time? I think that the Middle Eastern people have a worse time.

The American president is elected to represent Americans. The citizens of Middle Eastern countries have their own leaders.

I don't care about patriotism. What is good for the world is right.

I did not know that, I had always thought it came from Magna Carta.

Well still, it doesn't change the fact he suspended it.

So poor Americans shouldnt care about what goes on in their own country purely because people in other countries have a harder time.

Yup, thats how you make progress.

They certainly shouldn't vote for a man who will kill people in other countries.

But Johnson wants to screw over Americans as much as possible...

Warning: this is Rocky Anderson propoganda so favours Mr Anderson:

http://www.voterocky.org/rocky_and_gary

Chapter and verse please? Sorry, but I have been a Christian for over thirty years and have never seen anywhere in Scripture that states the government should pay for people's health care.

What we have though is the farthest thing from a national health service. Think of it this way: it would be nice if everyone could afford to buy a new Rolls Royce every year. However, it is not within the financial means of all to do so. Now, if the government suddenly made a law forcing everyone to buy a new Rolls Royce every year would that change the ability of people to afford one? I cannot currently afford heath insurance. However, a very small minded man by the name of Barack Hussein Obama feels that he has the right to force me to buy it and that by doing so it will suddenly become affordable to me. If, for some reason, I can not afford what the dictator tells me to buy, he will then throw me in jail for not complying with his whims.

Now, for all of you who think that this will finally force employers of low income people to insure their workers, you are sadly mistaken. All they will do is cut their employees below the thirty hour a week threshold for having to insure them and hire more part time workers to cover the slack. As real unemployment is still around 18%, they will have no problem filling the positions. The now part-time workers will now be even less able to buy insurance than they were before, only now they face the threat of the IRS kicking in their door when they don't buy insurance and can't pay the fines for failing to do so. Employers WILL do the right thing and cut their full time workers as businesses do not exist for the good of the employees but rather for the good of the shareholders. Think I am just making this up? Darden restaurants (Olive Garden, Red lobster, etc.) has announced it intends to start doing just that. Orlando Sentinel Story

If by "screw over" you mean "minimize state interference in their lives", than yes, Gary wants to screw over as many Americans as possible...

It has nothing to do with patriotism. It has to do with the autonomy of nations. Each nation has its own leader to represent it. England's leader doesn't represent South Korea, and Mexico's leader doesn't represent people in Iceland.

Jewish communities were required to have charity funds for the community. On the other hand, the fund officials could ask for proof of need, and people receiving the charity were required to give some of it back just as if it was regular income, and they were required to work if able.

You mean return to the Gilded Age where the only kind of government interference was to send in the national guard when the factory proles got too indignant.

If they were "required to have funds for the community" then it wasn't a charity but a tax.

@outofplace

That is exactly it! The people who wrote that law make the assumption that everything is static and every party whose interests are affected by their laws will not react.

How many juries do you think will convict a person simply for being too poor to buy health insurance? IRS resources will be wasted chasing down the working poor non-insured and courts will be even more clogged. Overall respect for the law will drop as news stories of people being incarcerated for being poor start to pop up.

That does't justify Obama's foreign policy at all.