Intellectual dishonesty

[BryanForbes]

Hopefully I'm not out of line posting this, but the intellectual dishonesty of supporters of both parties is appalling to me:

[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Skw-0jv9kts[/youtube]

As you watch, remember that Romney has not said he would revert any of these intrusions on our rights that Obama either expanded or put into place.

 

[carbinemike]

You're certainly not out of line posting that. It's actually pretty sad how little people know about BHO and what he has done in the last 4 years when he had to worry about reelection. On the other hand, a lot of people worry which Romney we'll get. There are other threads where people, me included, question if Romney may only be the lesser of two evils. I hope Romney wins and proves that wrong. I don't know if it's possible to ge to the point where Romney and Obama are without being so beholden to their party and special interest groups that the can effectively function and do what's right. Time will tell.

 

[BryanForbes]

You're certainly not out of line posting that. It's actually pretty sad how little people know about BHO and what he has done in the last 4 years when he had to worry about reelection. On the other hand, a lot of people worry which Romney we'll get. There are other threads where people, me included, question if Romney may only be the lesser of two evils. I hope Romney wins and proves that wrong. I don't know if it's possible to ge to the point where Romney and Obama are without being so beholden to their party and special interest groups that the can effectively function and do what's right. Time will tell.

I blame the media, the Commission on Presidential Debates, and the two major parties for people not knowing about what has happened in the last 12 years. The media has said nothing about drone strikes, Obama's kill list, the NDAA, or anything else. And they certainly didn't ask any questions about it at the staged debates (all questions were given to the candidates before hand). Romney could have come out swinging with a campaign ad telling how our liberties had been infringed upon under Obama, but didn't. I'd dare to say he'd be winning by a landslide if he would do that. The fact that he hasn't tells me he'll do similar things as president.

As a Republican/Libertarian, I'm not sure which situation I'd rather see. On one hand, if Romney wins we get rid of Obama, but then the Republican leadership will see that as validation and won't listen to the liberty movement. It also means a potential 8 years of Bush 2.0 and I don't think our economy can take that. On the other hand, if Obama wins he gets more "flexibility" (his words), but we only have to put up with him for 4 more years. After that, he's gone. That would also be two consecutive elections that the Republicans have ignored the liberty movement, put up a moderate, and lost. They might start listening or people may ignore them and move to a more liberty-leaning party.

I can't vote for Obama because I don't agree with him on much of anything. Since the debates showed that Romney agrees with Obama on things like our foreign interventions and his role as president; and after his treatment of the Tea Party and liberty movement at the RNC, I can't hold my nose and vote for him either. I can no longer put aside my principles and vote for the lesser of two evils: I'll be voting Gary Johnson.

 

[carbinemike]

It also means a potential 8 years of Bush 2.0

I'm not sure that Romney would be a Bush 2.0 for all things. As you noted, Romney and McCain are moderates and the Bush base never liked either one for that reason.

I can't hold my nose and vote for him either.

Very well put.