New York Primary Election Sept 14: Wi...

New York Primary Election Sept 14: Will you vote?

Created by Top Mod2 on Sep 13, 2010

3,724 votes

Click on an option to vote

Yes

No

Other (explain below)

nac

Southold, NY

#9765 Sep 8, 2012
Reality Check wrote:
<quoted text>
Take your head out and get a load out of this...Fox News Debunks Years Of Its Own Commentary By Accurately Reporting That Health Care Reform Reduces Deficit.OK now you can put it back in.
I didn't say anything about fox news nor health care reform.

I said I'm judging Obama on his actions, not his words.

If you're proud of Fast and Furious, the NDAA, high unemployment with no plan to fix it, ever rising gas prices, no plan for a budget, a stimulus that was nothing more than a crony pay-off, cash for clunkers, record numbers of poverty and welfare precipitants... hey, by all means support 4 more years of it.

Understand though, those of us that believe in the Constitution and those of us that produce aren't impressed by his disgraceful record.
liberal

New York, NY

#9766 Sep 9, 2012
Where did obama go against the constitution?
Reality Check

Hicksville, NY

#9767 Sep 9, 2012
Why would we elect a Republican for president when the last one elected, who was in office only three and a half years ago, can't even show his face in public lest we be reminded how royaly he screwed up our country?
Reality Check

Hicksville, NY

#9768 Sep 9, 2012
and yes we are much better off than we were 4 years ago. Now we must get all the jobs back we lost under Bush.
democrat

Ithaca, NY

#9770 Sep 9, 2012
NAC,where's your specific proof that the stim.,was just a crony payoff?As far as the NDAA,it was a legally passed bill and he signed it in the light of day.Romney,said he'd sign it,so did McCain,Bush did sign it,and the majority of conservatives said signing it was the right thing to do.So why do you keep implying it's a democratic law and they are the blame for it?This bill has strong support on both sides of the aisle,so why the continual implying that the dems are trashing the constitution.
liberal

New York, NY

#9771 Sep 9, 2012
Because fox news told them to. They dont know any better.
Karen

Hicksville, NY

#9772 Sep 9, 2012
Jill Stein... I wish the Democrats had her balls so I will vote for Obama which is as close as we can get right now.

http://www.ontheissues.org/Jill_Stein.htm
Karen

Brightwaters, NY

#9773 Sep 9, 2012
Obama and Romney, Questioned about Science

http://www.nature.com/news/obama-and-romney-t...
just me

Utica, NY

#9774 Sep 9, 2012
I'll vote, but it will not be for a dumbocrat. I've been voting for over 50 years and in all of that time I voted for one dumbocrat for president. Yep, it was JFK and what a disappointment that s.o.b. was. The only good dumbocrat ever elected president was HST, the rest you can stick where the sun don't shine. As a whole, dumbocrats have no redeeming qualities and if you need an example look at the jackass in there now.
Karen

Westbury, NY

#9775 Sep 9, 2012
just me wrote:
I'll vote, but it will not be for a dumbocrat. I've been voting for over 50 years and in all of that time I voted for one dumbocrat for president. Yep, it was JFK and what a disappointment that s.o.b. was. The only good dumbocrat ever elected president was HST, the rest you can stick where the sun don't shine. As a whole, dumbocrats have no redeeming qualities and if you need an example look at the jackass in there now.
You seem to be a better example of a jackass to me. You can't even spell democrat.
democrat

Ithaca, NY

#9776 Sep 9, 2012
Just me:are you saying clintons 8 years of prosperity,didn't happen.That LBJ, didnt get passedsome of the greatest civil rights legislation in American history.You also conveniently leave out the fact that the dems controlled congress,all through the cold war,and it was a dem. congress that passed bills and appropriated funds that allowed us to build the best military in history,put a man on the moon and win the cold war.Whoever says the dems are soft on natl. defense,doesn't know his ass from a hole in the ground.One more thing,the US' vaunted and much feared Cruise Missile,was a direct result of Jimmy Carter pushing for funds to develop and perfect it.Just thought a repuke like you would want to know that.It's not good to revel in your ignorance.Turn off fox and visit a library or some good online history sites.
its past time

Corinth, NY

#9777 Sep 9, 2012
It's LONG past time to outlaw the republican party for the terrorists they are
Teddy R

Mclean, VA

#9778 Sep 9, 2012
Remember how Obama keeps telling us how he saved GM, and how our economy is getting better, it seems the car company he bought is being saved by Govt employees using our tax money to buy new cars. 79% of GM’s sales last month was government purchased.

GM’s sales figures for last month were the best since 2008 , up 16% for the month of June. YIPPEE! Well, wait just a minute. It seems that those rosy sales figures are due primarily to a 79% increase in fleet sales to the U.S.gov ernment in June. That’s right. Our tax dollars are being used to pump up GM’s sales figures ahead of next month’s quarterly report so that Dear Leader can point to Government Motors as a huge success. The incestuous relationship between GM, the UAW and the Regime has never been more glaringly apparent. I’ve said it before and I’ll say it again. GM is unsustainable without government subsidies and will ultimately go bust again, taking billions of taxpayer dollars down with it.

We bailed out General Motors to the tune of $50 billion.$30 billion of this is effectively a loss, mostly sunk into fattening the United Auto Workers union—fierce Obama supporters—while the actual bondholders were shown the elevator shaft.

Meanwhile, as NewsBusters reports,“We the Taxpayers are still stuck holding 500+ million shares of GM stock. Which we need to sell at $53 per. Which debuted post-bankruptcy at $33 per. And which is currently trading at just over $20 per. Meaning we’ll lose about $15 billion.”

But it gets better. Despite the overwhelming negatives, the tiny bright spot of positive June sales numbers is being heralded by Obama and the leftist press as proof the auto bailout was a “success.”

Obama is now campaigning on the “success” of – the government buying cars from…the government’s car company. With our money.
Americanvision says That’s like you setting up a lemonade stand for your kids. You buy them the lemons, sugar, cups and pitchers – and then buy most of the lemonade yourself.

The pressure is on Government Motors to appear financially strong as this may be the last earnings report before November elections and sets the stage for how “successful” GM is. One of GM’s past tricks to help fudge earnings numbers has been to stuff truck inventory channels. Old habits die hard at GM. According to a Bloomberg report,“GM said inventory of its full-size pickups, which will be refreshed next year, climbed to 238,194 at the end of June, a 135 days’ supply, up from 116 days at the end of May.” 135 days’ supply is huge, the accepted norm is a 60 day supply. The trick here is that GM records revenue when vehicles go into dealership.
Teddy R

Mclean, VA

#9779 Sep 9, 2012
Biden dares:'Fact check me,' Romney campaign obliges = with the predictable result: Biden's lyin.'

Read more: http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2012/09/08/be...
democrat

Ithaca, NY

#9780 Sep 9, 2012
Yes,it's all the fault of greedy unions.Imagine wanting decent wages and a safe work place.That's why all the jobs shipped overseas,were non- union jobs.These southern states didn't have any problem with bribing foreign auto companies to build there,by offering them hug tax breaks with taxpayer dollars.And don't think for a minute,some fed.tax dollars weren't slipped in there somehow.If the fed govt. is going to buy cars,it might as well be from an American automaker.Rightwingers and republicans don't give a shi t about America.
nac

Southold, NY

#9781 Sep 9, 2012
democrat wrote:
NAC,where's your specific proof that the stim.,was just a crony payoff?As far as the NDAA,it was a legally passed bill and he signed it in the light of day.Romney,said he'd sign it,so did McCain,Bush did sign it,and the majority of conservatives said signing it was the right thing to do.So why do you keep implying it's a democratic law and they are the blame for it?This bill has strong support on both sides of the aisle,so why the continual implying that the dems are trashing the constitution.
You're completely missing the point about the NDAA. First of all, the fact that you said that "he signed it in the light of day" couldn't help but make me chuckle. He signed it on 12/31/2011. New Year's Eve. Would you sign something you wanted on the front page on New Year's Eve? Of course not. It was intended to slip through as many cracks as possible.

As for support of the bill, you have to understand that you and I form our opinions about bills very differently. You seem to form your opinion based on who supports the bill (Dems/Reps) and who signed the bill. I base my opinion based on WHAT IS IN THE BILL.

Sections 1021 & 1022 of the NDAA are in complete contrast to the Constitution. Indefinite detainment of US citizens without due process is not something I will ever support, regardless of which politicians say it is good. And the fact that indefinite detainment of citizens is about the only thing that both sides could agree on says a lot about the state of our government.

Yet you decide that this, like everything else, has to be a left/right issue. I criticize something Obama signed (based on it's merits), and your response is that the right is all for it too! That does not make it good policy! What is in the bill is far more important than who signed it.

Until we remember that we are Americans, not republicans/democrats, we're going to get un-American laws like this.

Now... Obama said that he doesn't support sections 1021 & 1022 but he signed the bill under the guise that he wouldn't use those fancy new executive powers. Judge Katherine B. Forrest then ruled sections 1021 & 1022 unconstitutional. Problem solved, right? Wrong. Obama is currently appealing that decision.

So which is it? If he SAYS he doesn't support that part of the bill, why is he appealing the court's decision to get that power back? Again, his WORDS are different than his ACTIONS. Is indefinite detainment of US citizens the "CHANGE" you voted for in 2008?

By the way, you know why the Republicans aren't calling him out on this? Because they want this (unconstitutional) power too when they are in charge!!! Wake up! This isn't a left/right issue ... this is an America issue. We should ALL be against this.
liberal

New York, NY

#9782 Sep 9, 2012
I agree. Both sides should be against this.
This law is as bad as the so called pat act.
nac

Southold, NY

#9783 Sep 9, 2012
liberal wrote:
I agree. Both sides should be against this.
This law is as bad as the so called pat act.
Exactly. The left was correct to criticize the patriot act when Bush was in office. Now that Obama is in, though... the tune has changed. Somehow the left now supports not only the patriot act, but also the NDAA that dwarfs it.

What happened???
Karen

Brightwaters, NY

#9784 Sep 9, 2012
democrat

Ithaca, NY

#9785 Sep 9, 2012
I don't support ndaa or patriotic act,but you give a tilt to your posts,nac,saying Obama is a dangerous threat.Well if Romney said he'd sign it,why haven't you also said he's a dangerous threat to our constitution?Also if you check The ACLU,that you on the right are always criticizing as being unamerican, are up in arms about this,and the only group with any promience,promising legal action.So don't tell me the left is hypocritically accepting this bill.The southern poverty center has also cited it's opposition to this bill.What I don't see is any oposition, from the organized right.They tried to destroy acorn,for trying to get poor people to vote,but suspend Habeous Corpus and not a word.I personally sent a letter to my 3 reps in dc and Pres. Obama saying this bill was a piece of shi t and shouldn't be signed,now ask yourself this,how many whiny Americans,who say their rights are being eroded,did like wise.People refuse to register their dissent and disgust,then wonder,why they get shit on.How many called in on Walter Reed scandal,I did.Lazy bastards who don't get off their ass and tell the govt. what they think.deserve what they get.

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Subscribe Now Add to my Tracker

Add your comments below

Characters left: 4000

Please note by submitting this form you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

Cambridge Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
News Cambridge Central School unveils capital projec... Jan '15 Catherine Osgood 1
News Cambridge Planning Board begins review process ... Jan '15 Catherine Osgood 1
News Eastbound Jesus At Arch Street Tavern Dec '14 ijnokp 1
Review: Argyle Veterinary Svc - Ronald J Peters... (Apr '10) Dec '14 LocalLoon 4
News Hoosick to undergo economic initiative, develop... (Aug '14) Nov '14 Jim 2
Review: Cambridge Real Estate - Mark Surdam (Feb '14) Nov '14 Bea 2
News Man arrested for sending nude photos on Facebook (Jul '12) Jun '13 Roman Polanski 4
More from around the web

Cambridge People Search

Addresses and phone numbers for FREE

Personal Finance

Mortgages [ See current mortgage rates ]