Sign in to follow this  
Followers 0
ruveyn ben yosef

Be prepared for a miserable 4 years

9 posts in this topic

We are going to be in for a bad ride. Mitt Romney is a schm*ck and he is going to lose.

Both Romney and Obama, and the fact that they are the choice in the election, are symptoms of the culture. It has been apparent for years what the dangerous trend for the worse has become -- other radical leftists, Gore and Kerry, came very close to becoming president so it was no surprise that in this culture Obama would, and is not being widely denounced across the country for what he is and for the damage he has caused and threatens to make much worse.

Your implication that Obama for four more years is devastating is true. But whoever wins we are in for "a bad ride" for much more than four years, and it's not clear that in this culture, with its growing number of ignorant, resentful entitlement mentalities and power seeking "liberal" tyrants, anyone else could do much better than Romney in trying to stop Obama and his "beyond unmitigated disaster". Too many people have accepted a declining economy as normal and are willing to see their own standard of living become even worse for the sake of the "ideal" of nihilistic resentment that Obama represents. For many of them it's as if they oppose Romney because he is competent in business, knows at least some of what is destroying it, and supports a world in which individual success is possible. They really are egalitarian nihilists. That is the brand of "idealism" superseding economics that Ayn Rand warned of.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The damage caused by Obama is hard to distinguish from the damage caused by Bush. The Tea Party held some promess at some point but they seem to have lost momentum or to have been preempted by Christians. Both Romney and Obama are appaling. Gary Johnson is somewhat better but he's going to be trampled over.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
The damage caused by Obama is hard to distinguish from the damage caused by Bush. The Tea Party held some promess at some point but they seem to have lost momentum or to have been preempted by Christians. Both Romney and Obama are appaling. Gary Johnson is somewhat better but he's going to be trampled over.

I have no difficulty distinguishing Bush damage from Obama's appointment of leftist radicals throughout government pursuing egalitarian nihilism in a deliberate attempt to destroy what this country is supposed to stand for.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Oh, you know - "religion of peace", bank bailout / TARP, prescription drugs, Dollar debasement, etc. It's hard for me to get that excited about the difference.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I look at the differences in what they stand for as the role of government and for America, what they believe about the possibility of individual success and what they are willing to tolerate let alone support, who and what kind of people they appointed to run the executive branch of government, and what they have done with their power. That takes more than reciting slogans deliberately looking for the worst picture to paint for the purpose of sarcastically dismissing the difference before starting because neither represents an ideal not achievable in the foreseeable future, and because haughty armchair politics is so much easier than defending values in the real world where there are real differences in people's lives. Obama is the first American president who hates the country for what it is supposed to stand for and who is actively and consciously out to destroy it. It is easy to find fault with Romney. In the context of this election so what? He's not even close to Obama. The urgent and fundamental issue for this election is getting rid of the nihilist Obama and Democrat control in Congress.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Romney, even being the RINO he is, is light years a better candidate than Obama. It's not even close! I look at the election this way; I am not so much voting for Romney as I am voting to get Obama our of the Whitehouse. with Romney there is actually a chance to save the Republic, but with Obama there is ZERO hope for America.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I look at the differences in what they stand for as the role of government and for America, what they believe about the possibility of individual success and what they are willing to tolerate let alone support, who and what kind of people they appointed to run the executive branch of government, and what they have done with their power. That takes more than reciting slogans deliberately looking for the worst picture to paint for the purpose of sarcastically dismissing the difference before starting because neither represents an ideal not achievable in the foreseeable future, and because haughty armchair politics is so much easier than defending values in the real world where there are real differences in people's lives. Obama is the first American president who hates the country for what it is supposed to stand for and who is actively and consciously out to destroy it. It is easy to find fault with Romney. In the context of this election so what? He's not even close to Obama. The urgent and fundamental issue for this election is getting rid of the nihilist Obama and Democrat control in Congress.

Do you think this grim reality will cause the bulk of American voters to vote wisely?

I don't think so.

ruveyn

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I look at the differences in what they stand for as the role of government and for America, what they believe about the possibility of individual success and what they are willing to tolerate let alone support, who and what kind of people they appointed to run the executive branch of government, and what they have done with their power. That takes more than reciting slogans deliberately looking for the worst picture to paint for the purpose of sarcastically dismissing the difference before starting because neither represents an ideal not achievable in the foreseeable future, and because haughty armchair politics is so much easier than defending values in the real world where there are real differences in people's lives. Obama is the first American president who hates the country for what it is supposed to stand for and who is actively and consciously out to destroy it. It is easy to find fault with Romney. In the context of this election so what? He's not even close to Obama. The urgent and fundamental issue for this election is getting rid of the nihilist Obama and Democrat control in Congress.

Do you think this grim reality will cause the bulk of American voters to vote wisely? I don't think so.

I don't either. Grim reality by itself doesn't educate anyone as to what is right. If Romney wins it will be because there are still enough people left who can understand the difference between a Romney and an Obama and know enough to realize that in that choice Obama is the wrong one -- there are a lot who understand the difference and still want Obama's nihilism, which is the 'moral ideal' emotionally driving them despite the destruction. There is even a large fraction now who believe that Obama's policies have "improved the economy", whatever that is supposed to mean, with most of his support coming from those who realize that he hasn't. The only way to grasp that is that they must have a very different idea of the meaning of "economic improvement" and its proper purpose than those of us experiencing and suffering his results individually. If on a cultural scale people were reacting to his economic results by any rational standards of economics he would already be losing by a landslide in the polls.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 0