Cast your vote!

[KG's Supra24]

Kane, i feel the debt will decrease if Congress can come together. Sure Obama hasn't delivered on his promises but can you say he hasn't faced a huge battle, due to partisanship, around each corner? They fight to fight. In reality, i think Congress is a larger issue than the presidential election for the progress of the next 4 years.

American blood ... I'm assuming you are referencing the one event that was dramatically over politicized. What about the soldiers that are home from an unnecessary war and the soldiers that won't be sent back overseas from a war hungry party?

Sent from my DROID RAZR using Tapatalk 2

[dhyams]

Kane, i feel the debt will decrease if Congress can come together. Sure Obama hasn't delivered on his promises but can you say he hasn't faced a huge battle, due to partisanship, around each corner? They fight to fight. In reality, i think Congress is a larger issue than the presidential election for the progress of the next 4 years.

American blood ... I'm assuming you are referencing the one event that was dramatically over politicized. What about the soldiers that are home from an unnecessary war and the soldiers that won't be sent back overseas from a war hungry party?

I told myself that I wasn't going to reply to any of this, but gahh, there are some things that I can't let slide by uncontested. Character flaw.

On Obama's "battles": For two years Democrats held both the House and the Senate. That's half of his presidency. I know that one can argue that the Senate did not have a filibuster-proof majority, but cmon...there are enough RINOs in the Senate. And I was also not aware that the job of the Congress is the rubber stamp whatever the president wants. If what he was offering was such a great idea, passing would have been no problem in the least. I love how liberals blame <insert boogeyman here> when others reject their ideas, or when their ideas simply don't work because they don't reflect reality.

On Benghazi: dramatically overpoliticized? It was not talked about nearly enough, so much so that Romney declined to bring it up at the foreign policy debate. And it matters. A lot. What is to be thought about a president who deliberately chose not to protect Americans *on American soil*, as embassies are? Help was actively denied. We don't know the reasons why, but knowing the character of the man, I would bet money on the reason being the fear that it would blow up as a campaign issue. Just a guess on my part, and as you can tell my opinion of Obama is not very high.

On soldiers and war: remind me who is the president who has used drones more than any other, continuing to kill civilians along with the intended targets? The one who has assassinated an American citizen with one? And the one who has not ended the war (only escalating it, getting yet more of our soldiers killed) in Afghanistan, and seems to be gearing up for another one in Mali? Our soldiers are still coming home in boxes, and he's had four years to end the war like he said that he would. Democrats claim that they are the anti-war party just to pick up votes from useful idiots, and then do exactly the opposite. Reference again their approval of the war in Iraq. If you don't believe me on the upswing in deaths in Afghanistan, look here: http://icasualties.org/