my Top 10 reasons to not vote Obama (LONG)

[Ddawg]

I think reason number one is quite valid. I don't agree with the others cited, but can see where you are coming from. Oh and in addition to number one, I agree with number 9 -- a lack of leadership. That is a concern for me too. I'm still undecided, which matters not one whit in Idaho, but I really don't know enough yet for why I should vote for Gov. Romney. So thought provoking and thanks.

Isn't the fact that Obama is the worst disaster of a president in American history enough of a reason?

With respect, I do not agree with your asserted "fact." And as disappointing as Obama has been to me, Romney and a republican controlled Congress could be worse. I am studying and pondering.

You can't be serious. You actually believe that Romney would be a worse president than the amateur Obama?

Make no mistake - Obama is an amateur. He has no clue how to turn the economy around. His foreign policy in the Middle East is unravelling before our very eyes.

Obama leads from behind continually because he dithers, flounders, and is indecisive. Even a no brainer like ordering the raid on Osama bin Laden - Obama cancelled the raid 3 times. And who's advice did Obama take? It was an unelected civilian advisor - Valerie Jarrett. Not a military expert from the Pentagon. On the 4th planned raid (May 2, 2011), it ended up being a go - after it was delayed and nearly cancelled by Obama a 4th time.

So - the singular event that Obama and his people point to, the raid on Osama bin Laden, to prove he is a "great" leading president - is actually an eye opening "peek behind the curtain" to an indecisive leader.

Look at the disaster that came out of the Osama bin Laden raid - the crashing of a a secret stealth Blackhawk. We had secret stealth technology in those Blackhawks. One crashed during the mission. The tail section was left behind and allowed to fall into the hads of the Pakistani's and Chinese. Our secret stealth technology is now in the hands of the Chinese.

A decisive leader would have destroyed that Blackhawk tail section on the ground and never allowed it to fall into our enemies hands. It was a disastrous decision.

Obama did it again when a secret C.I.A. stealth drone crashed deep in Iran in 2011. This exposed a super secret intelligence gathering program. It was so secret, U.S. officials refused to discuss it.

What was Obama's decision to protect this extremely secret, sensitive and valuable drone? Recover it? Destroy it? No, leave it. The Iranians recovered it and now have our state of the art drone technology. Obama could have destroyed it on the ground - a no braider. Instead, he dithers, and does nothing.

[BoiseBYU]

I think reason number one is quite valid. I don't agree with the others cited, but can see where you are coming from. Oh and in addition to number one, I agree with number 9 -- a lack of leadership. That is a concern for me too. I'm still undecided, which matters not one whit in Idaho, but I really don't know enough yet for why I should vote for Gov. Romney. So thought provoking and thanks.

Isn't the fact that Obama is the worst disaster of a president in American history enough of a reason?

With respect, I do not agree with your asserted "fact." And as disappointing as Obama has been to me, Romney and a republican controlled Congress could be worse. I am studying and pondering.

You can't be serious. You actually believe that Romney would be a worse president than the amateur Obama?

Make no mistake - Obama is an amateur. He has no clue how to turn the economy around. His foreign policy in the Middle East is unravelling before our very eyes.

Obama leads from behind continually because he dithers, flounders, and is indecisive. Even a no brainer like ordering the raid on Osama bin Laden - Obama cancelled the raid 3 times. And who's advice did Obama take? It was an unelected civilian advisor - Valerie Jarrett. Not a military expert from the Pentagon. On the 4th planned raid (May 2, 2011), it ended up being a go - after it was delayed and nearly cancelled by Obama a 4th time.

So - the singular event that Obama and his people point to, the raid on Osama bin Laden, to prove he is a "great" leading president - is actually an eye opening "peek behind the curtain" to an indecisive leader.

Look at the disaster that came out of the Osama bin Laden raid - the crashing of a a secret stealth Blackhawk. We had secret stealth technology in those Blackhawks. One crashed during the mission. The tail section was left behind and allowed to fall into the hads of the Pakistani's and Chinese. Our secret stealth technology is now in the hands of the Chinese.

A decisive leader would have destroyed that Blackhawk tail section on the ground and never allowed it to fall into our enemies hands. It was a disastrous decision.

Obama did it again when a secret C.I.A. stealth drone crashed deep in Iran in 2011. This exposed a super secret intelligence gathering program. It was so secret, U.S. officials refused to discuss it.

What was Obama's decision to protect this extremely secret, sensitive and valuable drone? Recover it? Destroy it? No, leave it. The Iranians recovered it and now have our state of the art drone technology. Obama could have destroyed it on the ground - a no braider. Instead, he dithers, and does nothing.

I'm serious.

[Ddawg]

I think reason number one is quite valid. I don't agree with the others cited, but can see where you are coming from. Oh and in addition to number one, I agree with number 9 -- a lack of leadership. That is a concern for me too. I'm still undecided, which matters not one whit in Idaho, but I really don't know enough yet for why I should vote for Gov. Romney. So thought provoking and thanks.

Isn't the fact that Obama is the worst disaster of a president in American history enough of a reason?

With respect, I do not agree with your asserted "fact." And as disappointing as Obama has been to me, Romney and a republican controlled Congress could be worse. I am studying and pondering.

You can't be serious. You actually believe that Romney would be a worse president than the amateur Obama?

Make no mistake - Obama is an amateur. He has no clue how to turn the economy around. His foreign policy in the Middle East is unravelling before our very eyes.

Obama leads from behind continually because he dithers, flounders, and is indecisive. Even a no brainer like ordering the raid on Osama bin Laden - Obama cancelled the raid 3 times. And who's advice did Obama take? It was an unelected civilian advisor - Valerie Jarrett. Not a military expert from the Pentagon. On the 4th planned raid (May 2, 2011), it ended up being a go - after it was delayed and nearly cancelled by Obama a 4th time.

So - the singular event that Obama and his people point to, the raid on Osama bin Laden, to prove he is a "great" leading president - is actually an eye opening "peek behind the curtain" to an indecisive leader.

Look at the disaster that came out of the Osama bin Laden raid - the crashing of a a secret stealth Blackhawk. We had secret stealth technology in those Blackhawks. One crashed during the mission. The tail section was left behind and allowed to fall into the hads of the Pakistani's and Chinese. Our secret stealth technology is now in the hands of the Chinese.

A decisive leader would have destroyed that Blackhawk tail section on the ground and never allowed it to fall into our enemies hands. It was a disastrous decision.

Obama did it again when a secret C.I.A. stealth drone crashed deep in Iran in 2011. This exposed a super secret intelligence gathering program. It was so secret, U.S. officials refused to discuss it.

What was Obama's decision to protect this extremely secret, sensitive and valuable drone? Recover it? Destroy it? No, leave it. The Iranians recovered it and now have our state of the art drone technology. Obama could have destroyed it on the ground - a no braider. Instead, he dithers, and does nothing.

I'm serious.

So, the fact - and it is a fact, that Obama is a divisive, race baiting liar - that does not bother you? I am referring to his Hampton Univ. speech.

[BoiseBYU]

I think reason number one is quite valid. I don't agree with the others cited, but can see where you are coming from. Oh and in addition to number one, I agree with number 9 -- a lack of leadership. That is a concern for me too. I'm still undecided, which matters not one whit in Idaho, but I really don't know enough yet for why I should vote for Gov. Romney. So thought provoking and thanks.

Isn't the fact that Obama is the worst disaster of a president in American history enough of a reason?

With respect, I do not agree with your asserted "fact." And as disappointing as Obama has been to me, Romney and a republican controlled Congress could be worse. I am studying and pondering.

You can't be serious. You actually believe that Romney would be a worse president than the amateur Obama?

Make no mistake - Obama is an amateur. He has no clue how to turn the economy around. His foreign policy in the Middle East is unravelling before our very eyes.

Obama leads from behind continually because he dithers, flounders, and is indecisive. Even a no brainer like ordering the raid on Osama bin Laden - Obama cancelled the raid 3 times. And who's advice did Obama take? It was an unelected civilian advisor - Valerie Jarrett. Not a military expert from the Pentagon. On the 4th planned raid (May 2, 2011), it ended up being a go - after it was delayed and nearly cancelled by Obama a 4th time.

So - the singular event that Obama and his people point to, the raid on Osama bin Laden, to prove he is a "great" leading president - is actually an eye opening "peek behind the curtain" to an indecisive leader.

Look at the disaster that came out of the Osama bin Laden raid - the crashing of a a secret stealth Blackhawk. We had secret stealth technology in those Blackhawks. One crashed during the mission. The tail section was left behind and allowed to fall into the hads of the Pakistani's and Chinese. Our secret stealth technology is now in the hands of the Chinese.

A decisive leader would have destroyed that Blackhawk tail section on the ground and never allowed it to fall into our enemies hands. It was a disastrous decision.

Obama did it again when a secret C.I.A. stealth drone crashed deep in Iran in 2011. This exposed a super secret intelligence gathering program. It was so secret, U.S. officials refused to discuss it.

What was Obama's decision to protect this extremely secret, sensitive and valuable drone? Recover it? Destroy it? No, leave it. The Iranians recovered it and now have our state of the art drone technology. Obama could have destroyed it on the ground - a no braider. Instead, he dithers, and does nothing.

I'm serious.

So, the fact - and it is a fact, that Obama is a divisive, race baiting liar - that does not bother you? I am referring to his Hampton Univ. speech.

I decline to debate. I do not think the President is a racist any more than I think Gov. Romney engages in class warfare with his 47 percent comments. Peace out

[Ddawg]

I don't want to debate. I want to be a student of truth. I did not say Obama is a racist.

Read my statement - I said Obama is a "race baiter." Have you watched Obama's 2007 speech @ Hampton Univ.? It is a dishonest, race baiting speech.

Race baiting: Inflammatory speech that incites one race of people against another, to communicate and use racially charged language to anger.

Watch his speech. There is no way Obama should be president of the United States.

Here is a link to an evaluation of that speech by an African American - Thomas Sowell. Read his assessment of Obama's speech.

http://townhall.com/columnists/thomasso ... y_in_chief" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

2007 Obama speech at Hampton Univ., 36 min, un-edited.

http://nation.foxnews.com/barack-obama/ ... obama-tape" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

[scott715]

Let me ask a question. Does the NAACP and other organizations claim racism when someone makes a politically incorrect statement and stir the pot to justify thier existance and to raise more money? Will racism effectively ever end or will these groups prevent us from getting there? let me say that racism will never 100% be eliminated, but I think these groups actually create racism issues. Obama's speach is an example.

[nuk13]

Here are some of my reasons. Not necessarily in this order.

1. Biden.

2. $5.5 trillion deficit spending and pretending taxing the "rich" will pay for things.

3. Don Quixote wind mills instead of drilling for real energy or building nuclear plants. He also vetoed the pipeline.

4. Obama care.

5. This is related to 2 and 3. Spending billions on Solendra and other favored companies in an effort to take energy in a dead end direction. That is corporate welfare.

6. An ever increasing number of regulations on the producers of the goods that feed us, house us, clothe us and the above mentioned energy people.

[BoiseBYU]

I don't want to debate. I want to be a student of truth. I did not say Obama is a racist.

Read my statement - I said Obama is a "race baiter." Have you watched Obama's 2007 speech @ Hampton Univ.? It is a dishonest, race baiting speech.

Race baiting: Inflammatory speech that incites one race of people against another, to communicate and use racially charged language to anger.

Watch his speech. There is no way Obama should be president of the United States.

Here is a link to an evaluation of that speech by an African American - Thomas Sowell. Read his assessment of Obama's speech.

http://townhall.com/columnists/thomasso ... y_in_chief" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

2007 Obama speech at Hampton Univ., 36 min, un-edited.

http://nation.foxnews.com/barack-obama/ ... vers-stunn" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false; ing-new-obama-tape

Merriam Webster defines race baiting as the making of verbal attacks against members of a racial group. A common definition of a racist is a person who hates or dislikes those who belong to a different race. The way I see it calling someone a race baiter is calling someone a racist. I have not observed in his four years as President that Mr. Obama is a racist. Further, as I said, I give about as much weight to his 2007 speech as I do Mr. Romney's 2012 47 percent talk to some high rolling donors.

[Schmoe]

I don't want to debate. I want to be a student of truth. I did not say Obama is a racist.

Read my statement - I said Obama is a "race baiter." Have you watched Obama's 2007 speech @ Hampton Univ.? It is a dishonest, race baiting speech.

Race baiting: Inflammatory speech that incites one race of people against another, to communicate and use racially charged language to anger.

Watch his speech. There is no way Obama should be president of the United States.

Here is a link to an evaluation of that speech by an African American - Thomas Sowell. Read his assessment of Obama's speech.

http://townhall.com/columnists/thomasso ... y_in_chief" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

2007 Obama speech at Hampton Univ., 36 min, un-edited.

http://nation.foxnews.com/barack-obama/ ... vers-stunn" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false; ing-new-obama-tape

Merriam Webster defines race baiting as the making of verbal attacks against members of a racial group. A common definition of a racist is a person who hates or dislikes those who belong to a different race. The way I see it calling someone a race baiter is calling someone a racist. I have not observed in his four years as President that Mr. Obama is a racist. Further, as I said, I give about as much weight to his 2007 speech as I do Mr. Romney's 2012 47 percent talk to some high rolling donors.

Inciting a particular race of people to anger and action against another race for your own personal/political gain does not mean that you dislike one of the races or that you're racist, it just makes you egotistical and a terrible person. We've seen Obama get involved in very local stories because of race (Trevon Martin, Cambridge Police), there's no denying that.

Also, our language is a living language and is therefore always evolving. Can you tell what Merriam Webster defines "noms" as?

[BoiseBYU]

I don't want to debate. I want to be a student of truth. I did not say Obama is a racist.

Read my statement - I said Obama is a "race baiter." Have you watched Obama's 2007 speech @ Hampton Univ.? It is a dishonest, race baiting speech.

Race baiting: Inflammatory speech that incites one race of people against another, to communicate and use racially charged language to anger.

Watch his speech. There is no way Obama should be president of the United States.

Here is a link to an evaluation of that speech by an African American - Thomas Sowell. Read his assessment of Obama's speech.

http://townhall.com/columnists/thomasso ... y_in_chief" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

2007 Obama speech at Hampton Univ., 36 min, un-edited.

http://nation.foxnews.com/barack-obama/ ... vers-stunn" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false; ing-new-obama-tape

Merriam Webster defines race baiting as the making of verbal attacks against members of a racial group. A common definition of a racist is a person who hates or dislikes those who belong to a different race. The way I see it calling someone a race baiter is calling someone a racist. I have not observed in his four years as President that Mr. Obama is a racist. Further, as I said, I give about as much weight to his 2007 speech as I do Mr. Romney's 2012 47 percent talk to some high rolling donors.

Inciting a particular race of people to anger and action against another race for your own personal/political gain does not mean that you dislike one of the races or that you're racist, it just makes you egotistical and a terrible person. We've seen Obama get involved in very local stories because of race (Trevon Martin, Cambridge Police), there's no denying that.

Also, our language is a living language and is therefore always evolving. Can you tell what Merriam Webster defines "noms" as?

I think in some senses of the word and usage you are right. I think in other instances I am correct too and at least for me in many instances calling someone a race baiter is to label them racist. But I think there are instances where you are correct too. As for "noms" I don't have a clue what it means and can't find it in the dictionary. I seem to recall that you are the English teacher so maybe you know?