Questions for all you Obama supporters

[Justicedog]

So, now that he's been in office awhile, what do you think?

Is he providing the change you wanted?

Is he as open/transparent as you thought he said he would be?

Are you disappointed that he's not doing what you expected/hoped?

Is he getting a fair shake with the media? Is the media not being neutral or questioning enough?

Are you as hopeful now as you were on election night?

Do you think he's trying to do too much all at once? Not enough? He's achieved the perfect balance?

As tone and motives cannot be gleened from messages on message boards and because I wasn't an Obama supporter I'll throw out a bit of my intent with this line of questions. I'm asking out of curiousity, I have opinions or thoughts on some of these questions, but I'm not putting this out there for a "aha, you're wrong" type set up. I'm wondering what your thoughts are. I had talked to an Obama supporter and wondered if he's typical. It was really mainly one question that he'd brought up, but for the sake of a discussion, I added some.

[Tweet]

It's still too early for me to answer some of the questions. I will come back in a bit..up right now with a gassy kid and then going back to bed for a bit.

[JudyJudyJudy]

So, now that he's been in office awhile, what do you think?
Nothing really. I truly don't think about him much. Nothing so good or so bad has jumped out at me that makes me really think that much one way or the other yet.


Is he providing the change you wanted?
Yes. I didn't expect any miracles, so I'm satisfied with the changes he seems to be making. I think the US is gaining a little better reputation with the rest of the world, and that's important to me. I do hope he's able to do something with healthcare, but I realize that he can't do it alone.


Is he as open/transparent as you thought he said he would be?
He's pretty much as I expected. I didn't expect to be able to sit down and have a beer with him. ;)


Are you disappointed that he's not doing what you expected/hoped?
No. Again, I expected no miracles.


Is he getting a fair shake with the media? Is the media not being neutral or questioning enough?
From what I've seen, it seems to be fair.


Are you as hopeful now as you were on election night?
Yes.


Do you think he's trying to do too much all at once? Not enough? He's achieved the perfect balance?
I think he went into a huge mess, and I think he's handling the plate he was given as well as or better than could be expected.

[HammBugga]

I agree with Judy. It is way too soon to be answering these questions. Ask me in 4 years.

[Maret00]

I agree it is to soon. I want change in somethings and I think he as a lot of things he wants to do and can do and hope he will do. But I dont exspect a to see anything done for a least a year. I think in two years I will look back and see if the changes I wanted or hoped for or others hoped for will have happened.

[BoobySnacks]

I was not an Obama supporter, but I do believe in having respect for our elected president and I hoped for the best. I do not know what will come to be, but I still hope for the best. I was raised very conservative and hold a lot of value in that party, but I am on the fence about some aspects, which totally pains my mom in the worst way. Ya can't help how you feel though :) I would like to find a happy medium, in a perfect world of course.

[Maret00]

Yeh, my family is totaly repubician and I am the only Demacrate. My grandma isnt even a citizan and dontaed money to Bush's campain.

I agree with you on respecting our president in office. I didnt like the way Bush was doing things but told people he is are president if you want something else help someone else get elected. I get real bothered by a manager at work who will talk shit about Obama all day when really nothing will happen for him to change what is happening until we elect someone else.

[BeanBabies]

I don't think anything has gotten better or worse.

DH is freading OUT about health care reform, though.

[Maret00]

Why is he freaking out?

[tata]

I mostly agree with Judy with two exceptions. I don't watch the news, so I have no idea whether there have been any "fair shakes." And I'm not sure I ever was an Obama supporter. I did vote for him (like Paw, my first time voting for a winner), but I didn't know who I was going to vote for until I sat in that ballot box.

[BeanBabies]

We left Canada due to socialized medicine so he would really like for it to not occur here, as well.

[JudyJudyJudy]

Socialized medicine and universal healthcare are not the same.

[Suzzzz]

We left Canada due to socialized medicine so he would really like for it to not occur here, as well.

I find myself wondering more about this, was this the one and only reason you left Canada?

[Suzzzz]

Socialized medicine and universal healthcare are not the same.

and what is the main difference? I've never heard the term socialized medicine before.

[JudyJudyJudy]

Socialized medicine means the government is in charge of healthcare. Universal healthcare means that every person has insurance coverage.

[BeanBabies]

Okay, socialized medicine scares him - universal healthcare is not what he is concerned about.

(No, that is not the only reason we left. We really left just for fun, something cool and new to do to be honest. The medicine angle was a super huge bonus and lure.)

[Maret00]

I myself would support universal healthcare. I am really sick of trying to get coverage for my family. My son and I have state health incsuace but my husband hasnt had any in over a year, missed the dead line once then got a better job and he wait time isnt up yet. My mom who lost her job and has dieabeties and mental health issues is having to pay lot of her unemployment just to get her meds. It isnt right. She cant help with bill or because she has to take her meds or she could die from either one.

[RaisingThemLeft]

Yes, I'm happy with the way things are going. I agree with Judy. I didn't expect the economy to do a 180 in a day, or a month, or a year.

[paper_]

So, now that he's been in office awhile, what do you think?

Is he providing the change you wanted?


Not quite the change WANTED, but largely the change I expected. The president has little power when it comes to generating legislation (on whole a very good thing), though he does have some say in the direction of emphasis.


Is he as open/transparent as you thought he said he would be?

I'd LOVE to see more transparancy, but on whole he seems to have taken a big step in the right direction.


Are you disappointed that he's not doing what you expected/hoped?

Honestly, I'd have to say he has done a pretty decent job up to this point. I am impressed with his choices of emphasis over time. 1st - economy, 2nd healthcare. I'd love to see equal treatment of individuals by the government (gayrights), and more work on social security, but things have to be prioritized.


Is he getting a fair shake with the media? Is the media not being neutral or questioning enough?

All in all, I'd say from what I see (internet and papers) he seems to get a decent shake.


Are you as hopeful now as you were on election night?

Honestly I'd have to say I am MORE hopeful. He seems to have taken up the reigns pretty well and SO far I really like his approach to foreign policy.


Do you think he's trying to do too much all at once? Not enough? He's achieved the perfect balance?

I'd say that his agenda has seemed to be pretty good so far. The world rarely changes over night, and when it DOES there are usually unintended consequences.


I DO think that his administration is a BIG improvement over the previous one. I can't say how well McCain's would have done. Had I not agreed with O'Bama on more subjects I could have easily seen myself voting for McCain. (Though Palin definitely hurt the ticket for me.)

[JudyJudyJudy]

I should add that I'm not thrilled with his education plan, but I said that before the election.

[_Viva_]

I don't like that he's throwing out the rule of law and paying off his supporters. But I didn't like him to begin with.

[rockmom]

I don't like that he's throwing out the rule of law and paying off his supporters. But I didn't like him to begin with.

I gave him money and canvassed for him. I haven't gotten a check back yet, just a lot of spam in my inbox. I don't think spam is illegal. Could you elaborate?

[_Viva_]

he threw out the rule of law in the GM and Chrysler bankruptcies, giving the bondholders SHIT and giving the UAW a greater percentage, even though the bondholders, per bankruptcy law, should've have the MOST percentage.

It makes the entire financial system dependent on the whim of a president wiling to grease the palms of his supporters, and it's BULLSHIT.

[_Viva_]

He had a CLOSED door meeting with most of the bondholders in the Chrysler crap, all of whom were dependent on him, and they agreed to the crap deal, because they are in bed with Obama, and the only bondholders willing to stand up to him was the State of Indiana, and they got SHIT on.

It's freakin ridiculous.

[Tweet]

Re: union and bondholders, my friend(whose DH works for Chrysler) sent me this and I've had it saved. I thought it was an interesting perspective,personally.

http://www.slate.com/id/2217653/

[rockmom]

Judge Gonzales is the one who ruled against the Indiana pension fund and other secured bond holders. The UAW and the government agreed to take stocks in the reorganized company rather than cash. The dissenting bondholders had signed away their rights long ago anyway to J.P. Morgan Chase, not Obama.

Gonzalez also agreed with arguments from JPMorgan Chase & Co, the agent on Chrysler's senior loans, that the dissenting lenders had already signed away their rights to object by agreeing in loan papers that the administrative agent can act collectively on behalf of all the lenders.

http://www.autonews.com/article/20090601/ANA02/906019996/1057

[JudyJudyJudy]

I haven't been keeping up with this, but what Tweet and rockmom posted makes sense. Viva, based on these articles, I think you're laying the blame in the wrong place simply because you don't like Obama.

[dramamine]

When Obummer will address the potential in medicinal marjuana in a serious tone and move towards legalization for medicinal use, then I'll give a rat's ass about what that tart is doing.

Otherwise, I'll repeat a craptastic redneck bumper sticker I see floating around my southern hellhole:

I'll keep my rights, my guns, and my freedom. You can keep the change.

[Solare]

Aren't you a peach?

[Solare]

IRT socialized medicine...I'm all for some form of Universal Healthcare or even government run medicine. But what I see here in Italy with a government run healthcare scares me. But Italy is also not as rich a nation as Canada or the US. And the government here is corrupt.

[BeanBabies]

When Obummer will address the potential in medicinal marjuana in a serious tone and move towards legalization for medicinal use, then I'll give a rat's ass about what that tart is doing.

Otherwise, I'll repeat a craptastic redneck bumper sticker I see floating around my southern hellhole:

I'll keep my rights, my guns, and my freedom. You can keep the change.
Oh my, this is the funniest thing I've read in ages!!!

Your most important issue is The Pot?


Oh, this makes me very happy. :happy:

[dramamine]

Oh no, my most important issues with him concern a lot of ideas that get you called a conspiracy theorist. It's why I don't mention them online, specifically, with this screen name.

The issues I discuss online about Obummer include his reluctance to dicuss anything to do with pot, his reasons for gun control/gun bans, and what exactly is his plan for the US dollar.

If I open my mouth too much, you'll likely think I'm nuts and therefore negate any intelligent conversation we may have in the future.

Also, the reason why pot is a big issue with me is that I have a grandma who would benifit from medical usage. She has chronic pain that seems to have no source and she has trouble eating. She is also a breast cancer survivor and I KNOW for a fact it would have made her chemo treatments a lot more tolerable for those 3 years. I also have many other family member who would benifit from the medicinal usage for digestive disorders and appetite loss. So watching this tart avoid dicussing civilly and logically about something that could ease the pain of at least 15 family members of myself personally... I have nothing positive to say about him or his policies/plans.

[crystal555rose]

I want him to stop borrowing billions of dollars from China to give to the Wallstreet crooks whose greed created a lot of this crisis. I voted for change but that is more of the same.

Take all the money used to "bail out" and "stimulate" the economy and give it to programs that take care of children and seniors. Or better yet, give it to us. Nothing stimulates the economy like Americans with a fistful of cash.

Dr. Oz had the best recommendation on the news when they were talking about universal healthcare. If every able American took a 30 minute walk daily billions would be saved on the treatment and diagnosis of lifestyle related disease.

[madelsmama]

Dramamine, off the main topic a bit, but Marinol is a medicinal marijuana that is widely available by prescription for appetite and digestive-type issues. It's been around for several years.

Might that be an option for your familly?

[maksmom]

IRT socialized medicine...I'm all for some form of Universal Healthcare or even government run medicine. But what I see here in Italy with a government run healthcare scares me. But Italy is also not as rich a nation as Canada or the US. And the government here is corrupt.


I remember some scary stuff about the healthcare system in Italy when we were there 20 years ago. It is sad to hear that it has not improved.
I have several friends from the UK with some awful stories about their healthcare system. In a perfect world everyone would have access to the best medical care out there. But I just do not see how universal health care or socialized medicine will achieve that. It may provide some basic services for everyone, but not the stellar, up-to-date care we all want. They could never tax us enough to provide that.

Every winter the Dr's I work for have a good handfull of Canadians come in for cataract surgery. They claim they just can not get it done up there.

nak

[Justicedog]

I have friends from work who are disappointed with Obama and feel let down that it's too much more of the same - although they're glad it's not Bush or a Rep.

I've admitted to feeling somewhat hopeful election night and innauguration day. I didn't like all that was done previously. I was not an Obama supporter. I guess I had both feelings - hope and fear.

So, now that he's been in office awhile, what do you think?

Fear had won out. I'm fearful of the huge federal government he's putting in place. Internet tsar, consumer credit tsar, continuing federal bailouts, government takeovers of private businesses, borrowing money from other countries are what scare me. I don't like that he feels the need to put the United States down and apologize every time he steps out of the country.

Is he providing the change you wanted?

I'd had hoped that he wasn't the same old politician, but I don't think that has changed. I don't like that many of him picks for high government positions had tax issues. Frankly, that's a moral issue to me and think he could have and should have done much better.

I like that he seems to have gotten more approval from other countries, however, I don't feel it was necessary to put the US down to do so, and, if it was, then I'd prefer not to have that approval.

Is he as open/transparent as you thought he said he would be?

I think he falls short on this. It was one thing I was hoping for with him. On the other hand, I think that some of the stuff, stuff he (or others) had been critical of the Bush Administration for not releasing, he's changed his tune on whether it should be released (white house visitors logs. I think this is pretty much not realizing why it should be priviledged until it was his info.

I think his releasing some top secret memos was solely for political reasons and I think that wrong.

Are you disappointed that he's not doing what you expected/hoped?

Yes. On the things I thought he was going to change that I favored.

Is he getting a fair shake with the media? Is the media not being neutral or questioning enough?

I think the media is sucking up to him. I think the "Inside the White House" special was more of an infomercial, which, would be fine if they'd presented it that way.
Are you as hopeful now as you were on election night?

Do you think he's trying to do too much all at once? Not enough? He's achieved the perfect balance?

I think he's creating a huge Federal Government and that scares me.

I like how he speaks, he sounds good when he talks.

[Indigo]

I think he's doing well, the news is heartening that certain things are changing for the better though I think he has inherited and unholy mess that I have no idea how he is going to sort out.

[RedMamaBear]

Dramamine, off the main topic a bit, but Marinol is a medicinal marijuana that is widely available by prescription for appetite and digestive-type issues. It's been around for several years.

Might that be an option for your familly?

Yeah, except that there are a surprising amount of MD's who refuse to prescribe it to those in need. My mom's doc being one of them. :mad:

[madelsmama]

Yeah, except that there are a surprising amount of MD's who refuse to prescribe it to those in need. My mom's doc being one of them. :mad:


Really. Well, that's disappointing. It's a perfectly good, FDA-approved drug. :(

[dramamine]

Dramamine, off the main topic a bit, but Marinol is a medicinal marijuana that is widely available by prescription for appetite and digestive-type issues. It's been around for several years.

Might that be an option for your familly?

As someone else stated, the MDs around here would rather put you on 12 different pills than the one you really need. So most of my family smokes in fear that their medicine will land them in jail where they can't administer it themselves.

I knew of Marinol due to Montel Williams being on it and thusly had asked my various family members to inquire their GPs. None of them believe there were medicinal uses for pot and scoffed at Marinol... yet nothing any of those quacks perscribed helped my family. It just treated symptoms and not the problems.

That is very much what I see Obummer doing. Treating symptoms and not problems.

[JudyJudyJudy]

So since Obama, who went into office with a country in economic and healthcare crises, hasn't managed to single-handedly make pot legal within a 5-month period, he's a piece of shit? Since apparently there is already a legal drug that could be used, then perhaps doctors, rather than Obama, should be your target.

[rockmom]

So, now that he's been in office awhile, what do you think? He seems to be doing a fairly reasonable job.

Is he providing the change you wanted? I read his blueprint during the campaign and voted for him based on what it contained. I never agreed with all of it, but liked the vast majority of it. He is following it reasonably closely so I have no real complaints.

Is he as open/transparent as you thought he said he would be? More or less.

Are you disappointed that he's not doing what you expected/hoped? No. He's doing more or less what I expected.

Is he getting a fair shake with the media? Is the media not being neutral or questioning enough? I think that there is a lot of positive fluff coverage. The more serious coverage is also more critical, but fair.

Are you as hopeful now as you were on election night? I am.

Do you think he's trying to do too much all at once? Not enough? He's achieved the perfect balance? I don't think there is such a thing as a perfect balance. It seems that there is a constant re-evaluation of priorities going on within the administration as events occur. I am heartened by that. It also seems that the administration has hit the ground running and is making good use of time.

[QuiltyConscience]

"Obummer" isn't handing out the weed?

Of all the complaints I've heard, that is a new one. And I have heard a lot of complaints.

Dramamine, why do all your family members go to quacks? That seems like a bad idea.

[Tweet]

oh,oh,oh...that is cracking me up far too much!!! OBummer wants to take yer guns and not let you smoke any poot!

Seriously,though, you're getting upset with the wrong dude. Besides, if you move to OR or Ca,you and your fam can most definitely try to get a medical mary j card. I have a few friens that are legal and one that is legal to grow, too.

[dramamine]

If you guys want to pay for the move to a medical use friendly state, I know I won't say no.

I'm quite aware that them seeing a quack isn't a great idea, but it seems that nearly all of their doctors would much rather treat symptoms instead of the issues. A cousin of mine is on seven different meds and most are combatting the symptoms of the first one she was put on. My step-dad had a nerve problem in his face and his doctor sent him to a dental surgeon to remove the teeth that were "causing the problem". The dental surgeon wasn't covered under SD's insurance and it's wasn't the teeth, it was a partially severed nerve in his neck... which required brain surgery that was covered, leaving SD with 8 missing teeth, a med bill of disgusting size, and the prospect of having to pay for his own replacement teeth. To me, this is quackery, not a doctor practicing properly. They know how to fix people and the order to attempt to do so. Quite a few here just don't seem to care. And I'm trying not to be biased about it. I'm looking at what my family has gone through and various friends and family friends have had to deal with in this area.

It's nice of you gals to put words in my mouth. Since you can clearly read, I would not have expected your sarcasm, but merely possible questions about why my opinion is the way it is.

I didn't say he was a piece of shit, but I'm inclined to agree with that statement. I don't approve of anything he's done so far. His policies are anti-Constitutional as is he. For the tiny voting history he's got, he's hardly voted in the unpopular direction.

I also didn't say I was upset that he's attempting to take my guns away or that I'm unable to smoke pot. I can freely do either, currently. His gun control policies would make anything but single shot, bolt action, and anything more than 6 bullets illegal. That would be all of our gun collection. I'll ask a question to see if you know the answer. Why is it that we have an Amendment that is dedicated soley to gun ownership?

To clarify, I didn't say I was upset because **I** couldn't smoke pot. If needed to, I might be pretty cranky, but it surely wouldn't keep me from doing what made me feel better. I'm upset that Obummer and the mainstream media make a pretty sad case in favor of medicinal use. He won't acknowledge that it has a medicinal use and the media keeps spouting outdated bullshit the DEA hacked up in the 30s. None of the mainstream media outlets breathes a positive word about medicinal use. They will make fluff pieces about grow opertations being busted or about the grow operations themselves (I think CNN had one, but it could have been MSNBC), but they always add how much the grow operations projected profit amount is (which is *really* off by large amounts) and never an interview with the grower. A lot, not a majority, of growers grow for the medical outlets and will admit to it. I will also admit that there are a lot who grow for profit. Those growers aren't really appreciated or respected in the marijuana community.

Basically, I wish Obummer and the media would stop shitting on the *POSSIBILITY* that it has viable medicinal uses. Maybe not in the smokable form, but in other forms. They just will not cop to that. THAT is what I'm upset about. Iran has quite a few studies on how THC is nidentical to a substance found already present in all of our brains and that it's used in our metobolic systems. They scientifically found out why stoners get the munchies... and used that to effectively make an oral and nasal spray that can stimulate appetite and relieve pain. But the FDA and DEA won't hear any of it... thus it won't make it into a positive light into the mainstream media.

It's these particular avoidances that piss me off, so please, don't put any more words in my mouth and stop the uninformed and baseless accusation of what I am thinking or feeling. I don't and won't do it to you; afford me the same respect. I'm sorry I don't like your canidate and cared to voice my opinion. Voicing my opinion is not trolling, is not flaming, and doesn't warrant the sarcasm and passive aggresive attitudes you've given me. I've respected your opinion; I ask you do the same.

[tata]

I don't like the sound of "huge federal government." You make me feel like I'm not paying enough attention. I'm prolly not.

I will say that this guy inherited a LOT of HUGE fuckin' problems. Regardless of who followed Dubya, it would have (and will) take a steady, slow pace to correct a lot of our political, economic, medical and social issues.

[dramamine]

I don't like the sound of "huge federal government." You make me feel like I'm not paying enough attention. I'm prolly not.

Sadly, enough people don't pay attention. It's how we got into this mess of economic turmoil and how we've let it persist. I'm just glad you realize that we have an enormous Federal government that's not in check.

I will say that this guy inherited a LOT of HUGE fuckin' problems. Regardless of who followed Dubya, it would have (and will) take a steady, slow pace to correct a lot of our political, economic, medical and social issues.

I agree with all of this. Even if Obummer gets two terms (which is entirely too possible), I don't think he can recover what's been lost. He could possibly set us on the right path by dissolving the Federal Reserve, but he would never do that. So, we'll see what heppens. I personally forsee a President in 12 years or so barely being able to get up back in the black, maybe even 16. This is a rough road we're on.

[QuiltyConscience]

If you guys want to pay for the move to a medical use friendly state, I know I won't say no.

I'm quite aware that them seeing a quack isn't a great idea, but it seems that nearly all of their doctors would much rather treat symptoms instead of the issues. A cousin of mine is on seven different meds and most are combatting the symptoms of the first one she was put on. My step-dad had a nerve problem in his face and his doctor sent him to a dental surgeon to remove the teeth that were "causing the problem". The dental surgeon wasn't covered under SD's insurance and it's wasn't the teeth, it was a partially severed nerve in his neck... which required brain surgery that was covered, leaving SD with 8 missing teeth, a med bill of disgusting size, and the prospect of having to pay for his own replacement teeth. To me, this is quackery, not a doctor practicing properly. They know how to fix people and the order to attempt to do so. Quite a few here just don't seem to care. And I'm trying not to be biased about it. I'm looking at what my family has gone through and various friends and family friends have had to deal with in this area.

It's nice of you gals to put words in my mouth. Since you can clearly read, I would not have expected your sarcasm, but merely possible questions about why my opinion is the way it is.

I didn't say he was a piece of shit, but I'm inclined to agree with that statement. I don't approve of anything he's done so far. His policies are anti-Constitutional as is he. For the tiny voting history he's got, he's hardly voted in the unpopular direction.

I also didn't say I was upset that he's attempting to take my guns away or that I'm unable to smoke pot. I can freely do either, currently. His gun control policies would make anything but single shot, bolt action, and anything more than 6 bullets illegal. That would be all of our gun collection. I'll ask a question to see if you know the answer. Why is it that we have an Amendment that is dedicated soley to gun ownership?

To clarify, I didn't say I was upset because **I** couldn't smoke pot. If needed to, I might be pretty cranky, but it surely wouldn't keep me from doing what made me feel better. I'm upset that Obummer and the mainstream media make a pretty sad case in favor of medicinal use. He won't acknowledge that it has a medicinal use and the media keeps spouting outdated bullshit the DEA hacked up in the 30s. None of the mainstream media outlets breathes a positive word about medicinal use. They will make fluff pieces about grow opertations being busted or about the grow operations themselves (I think CNN had one, but it could have been MSNBC), but they always add how much the grow operations projected profit amount is (which is *really* off by large amounts) and never an interview with the grower. A lot, not a majority, of growers grow for the medical outlets and will admit to it. I will also admit that there are a lot who grow for profit. Those growers aren't really appreciated or respected in the marijuana community.

Basically, I wish Obummer and the media would stop shitting on the *POSSIBILITY* that it has viable medicinal uses. Maybe not in the smokable form, but in other forms. They just will not cop to that. THAT is what I'm upset about. Iran has quite a few studies on how THC is nidentical to a substance found already present in all of our brains and that it's used in our metobolic systems. They scientifically found out why stoners get the munchies... and used that to effectively make an oral and nasal spray that can stimulate appetite and relieve pain. But the FDA and DEA won't hear any of it... thus it won't make it into a positive light into the mainstream media.

It's these particular avoidances that piss me off, so please, don't put any more words in my mouth and stop the uninformed and baseless accusation of what I am thinking or feeling. I don't and won't do it to you; afford me the same respect. I'm sorry I don't like your canidate and cared to voice my opinion. Voicing my opinion is not trolling, is not flaming, and doesn't warrant the sarcasm and passive aggresive attitudes you've given me. I've respected your opinion; I ask you do the same.


You are interesting, I hope you stick around.

FWIW, Obama isn't "my" candidate. I didn't vote for him. Or McCain for that matter. I didn't like either choice much, so I voted Libertarian.

Although I do support legalizing it ( beyond medical use, even ) and taxing the hell out of it; I really don't feel that particular issue is even in the top ten of things that need to be dealt with with ATM. I would be rather annoyed if Obama spent much time on it. Healthcare, the economy, Iraq, and North Korea seem to be more pressing matters.

[dramamine]

You are interesting, I hope you stick around.

Trust me, I'm not easy to get rid of. ;) You can ask my grandma!

FWIW, Obama isn't "my" candidate. I didn't vote for him. Or McCain for that matter. I didn't like either choice much, so I voted Libertarian.

Ron Paul?

Although I do support legalizing it ( beyond medical use, even ) and taxing the hell out of it; I really don't feel that particular issue is even in the top ten of things that need to be dealt with with ATM. I would be rather annoyed if Obama spent much time on it. Healthcare, the economy, Iraq, and North Korea seem to be more pressing matters.

I agree, it's not my most important issue, but when he opened up his website to the public to ask whatever questions they wanted, he didn't seem to really want to when all of the top questions were regarding his hazy (no pun intended, I swear) stance on legaization.

I also agree that I would be really rubbed raw if he spent a great deal of time discussing legaization at this current moment. While I personally think North Korea is bluffing and we need to gtfo of Iraq and let them handle their own country, I appreciate the fact that he is catering to the masses by addressing those issues. But talking about what he should be doing is all a matter of opinion, educated or not.

[HammBugga]

Hello again Janie.

[JudyJudyJudy]

If you guys want to pay for the move to a medical use friendly state, I know I won't say no.

I'm quite aware that them seeing a quack isn't a great idea, but it seems that nearly all of their doctors would much rather treat symptoms instead of the issues. A cousin of mine is on seven different meds and most are combatting the symptoms of the first one she was put on. My step-dad had a nerve problem in his face and his doctor sent him to a dental surgeon to remove the teeth that were "causing the problem". The dental surgeon wasn't covered under SD's insurance and it's wasn't the teeth, it was a partially severed nerve in his neck... which required brain surgery that was covered, leaving SD with 8 missing teeth, a med bill of disgusting size, and the prospect of having to pay for his own replacement teeth. To me, this is quackery, not a doctor practicing properly. They know how to fix people and the order to attempt to do so. Quite a few here just don't seem to care. And I'm trying not to be biased about it. I'm looking at what my family has gone through and various friends and family friends have had to deal with in this area.
I agree with you on this. However, I still think you're placing the blame on Obama unfairly. The issue is that the government is in bed with the pharmaceutical companies (and the chemical companies, and the list goes on). Some doctors are actually getting paid by the pharmaceutical companies to push their drugs, and the others who are not believe the ones who are pushing the drugs, especially since the drugs are pushed in medical schools (medical schools get a lot of funding from pharmaceutical companies). I'm very anti–pharmaceutical companies myself, and I think they have entirely too much power. However, the bullshit argument is that this is "capitalism." If Obama tries to take away the power of the pharmaceutical companies, then he'll be further accused of being socialist.


I'll ask a question to see if you know the answer. Why is it that we have an Amendment that is dedicated soley to gun ownership?
Personally, I'm pro-gun with a few restrictions. However, to answer your question, the issue was having the right to be able to stand up to the government if necessary. We see how well that turned out during the Civil War. ;)

[Tweet]

If you guys want to pay for the move to a medical use friendly state, I know I won't say no.

I'm quite aware that them seeing a quack isn't a great idea, but it seems that nearly all of their doctors would much rather treat symptoms instead of the issues. A cousin of mine is on seven different meds and most are combatting the symptoms of the first one she was put on. My step-dad had a nerve problem in his face and his doctor sent him to a dental surgeon to remove the teeth that were "causing the problem". The dental surgeon wasn't covered under SD's insurance and it's wasn't the teeth, it was a partially severed nerve in his neck... which required brain surgery that was covered, leaving SD with 8 missing teeth, a med bill of disgusting size, and the prospect of having to pay for his own replacement teeth. To me, this is quackery, not a doctor practicing properly. They know how to fix people and the order to attempt to do so. Quite a few here just don't seem to care. And I'm trying not to be biased about it. I'm looking at what my family has gone through and various friends and family friends have had to deal with in this area.

It's nice of you gals to put words in my mouth. Since you can clearly read, I would not have expected your sarcasm, but merely possible questions about why my opinion is the way it is.

I didn't say he was a piece of shit, but I'm inclined to agree with that statement. I don't approve of anything he's done so far. His policies are anti-Constitutional as is he. For the tiny voting history he's got, he's hardly voted in the unpopular direction.

I also didn't say I was upset that he's attempting to take my guns away or that I'm unable to smoke pot. I can freely do either, currently. His gun control policies would make anything but single shot, bolt action, and anything more than 6 bullets illegal. That would be all of our gun collection. I'll ask a question to see if you know the answer. Why is it that we have an Amendment that is dedicated soley to gun ownership?

To clarify, I didn't say I was upset because **I** couldn't smoke pot. If needed to, I might be pretty cranky, but it surely wouldn't keep me from doing what made me feel better. I'm upset that Obummer and the mainstream media make a pretty sad case in favor of medicinal use. He won't acknowledge that it has a medicinal use and the media keeps spouting outdated bullshit the DEA hacked up in the 30s. None of the mainstream media outlets breathes a positive word about medicinal use. They will make fluff pieces about grow opertations being busted or about the grow operations themselves (I think CNN had one, but it could have been MSNBC), but they always add how much the grow operations projected profit amount is (which is *really* off by large amounts) and never an interview with the grower. A lot, not a majority, of growers grow for the medical outlets and will admit to it. I will also admit that there are a lot who grow for profit. Those growers aren't really appreciated or respected in the marijuana community.

Basically, I wish Obummer and the media would stop shitting on the *POSSIBILITY* that it has viable medicinal uses. Maybe not in the smokable form, but in other forms. They just will not cop to that. THAT is what I'm upset about. Iran has quite a few studies on how THC is nidentical to a substance found already present in all of our brains and that it's used in our metobolic systems. They scientifically found out why stoners get the munchies... and used that to effectively make an oral and nasal spray that can stimulate appetite and relieve pain. But the FDA and DEA won't hear any of it... thus it won't make it into a positive light into the mainstream media.

It's these particular avoidances that piss me off, so please, don't put any more words in my mouth and stop the uninformed and baseless accusation of what I am thinking or feeling. I don't and won't do it to you; afford me the same respect. I'm sorry I don't like your canidate and cared to voice my opinion. Voicing my opinion is not trolling, is not flaming, and doesn't warrant the sarcasm and passive aggresive attitudes you've given me. I've respected your opinion; I ask you do the same.


Well, to start with, you and I agree disagree in a huge way about the meaning and intention of the 2nd amendment. I don't care to debate it because I've yet to see anyone change their mind on this particular subject. Suffice it to say that I think our forefathers had a completely different meaning than what most people think. shrug.

I'm sorry your sensibilities were so offended by sarcastic hyperbole and I'm even more sorry that it wasn't taken that way. I'll make a mental note that you don't like it. However, it's hard for me to be respectful and have a meaningful conversation with someone who's going to be antagonistic by constantly referring to the POTUS as "OBummer".Fwiw, I don't think it's very respectful to the rest of us so I will have to disagree that you'll return the respect. It's just hard to take it seriously. Sort of like if I would have constantly called Bush "Bushit" when discussing the issues. Frankly, it doesn't do much for the argument and I personally just start tuning out. Again,shrug.

[Justicedog]

I agree with the name calling with the president's name. I don't support support that kind of disrespect. I thought it rather disgusting when folks used the other meaning of Bush with respect to the previous president.

Regardless of what one may think of the person, I think the office should be respected and I think it serves no purpose to repeatedly call someone a name when debating. (Perhaps a one time thing may be witty and get a chuckle.)

[Meredith]

I have to agree, JD. I was pretty put off by reading "Obummer" over and over.

[dramamine]

I don't intend to take you seriously. We're on the internet discussing politics. It's nice to be able to have a non-serious debate over opinions on a forum where I share some common activities. If you want this to be a meaningful conversation, then you're in the wrong place. You carry those on in private or IRL, preferably both. The internet is a hate machine that just hasn't attacked you yet. While it does have oodles of useful information about nearly everything, there are always those who use it for nefarious purposes. So when I use the internet, I make sure I never take anything seriously or meaningful. When you do, you get butthurt.

The PotUS has yet to prove he's legal to be in said position and asking for proof of citizenship means you're either 1) a conspiracy theorist, 2) plain old nut job, or 3) a terrorist. When it's proven that he can hold that title, I'll respect his position. Until then, he's a fraud and deserves to be called on it.

Sure, name calling isn't exactly respectful to him. And why should I respect a liar and a fraud? Just recently, he was talking about how a family relation (uncle) from the US helped liberate Auschwitz and his life's difficulties... which is friggin' hilarious because Auschwitz fell to the Red/Soviet Army. The US had nothing to do with all three Auschwitz camps. Nice going there, Chief.

Crap like this will keep me from repsecting him. O**** is what I can do to accomodate your opinion of him without name calling. Not giving him a name at all works just as well, IMO. I apologize that my opinion offended your opinion. From here out, I'll conduct myself a bit better and refrain from using a name to refer to him.

And I guess I need to clarify my words a touch more. When I said "don't put any more words in my mouth and stop the uninformed and baseless accusation of what I am thinking or feeling. I don't and won't do it to you; afford me the same respect." I though it said what it said. Don't speak for me because you are not me; I don't/won't speak for you so please respect that.

When decyphering what you meant by your comment, it is common for those who disagree with my opinions to be completely serious with their wording. As the internet doesn't allow emotion to be conveyed very well, your sarcastic hyperbole fit into the 'serious disagreement' category in the way it reads in comparison with my opinion. I attempt to reread what's said a few times to see if I'm missing the context or intentions behind the comment, and in this case I felt that it was a sarcastic remark intended to insult and/or provoke reaction.

oh,oh,oh...that is cracking me up far too much!!!

I read sarcasim as well as mockery. That my opinion is so far from your own that it's funny to you. So much so, you have to type out your onomatopoeia for laughter. Then you procede to inform everyone that it's cracking you up, and not just cracking you up, but too much. Thus I read that as mockery.

OBummer wants to take yer guns and not let you smoke any poot!

Words in my mouth, not what I said. I said "The issues I discuss online about Obummer include his reluctance to dicuss anything to do with pot, his reasons for gun control/gun bans, and what exactly is his plan for the US dollar.". Control and bans, not forcable gun confiscation or the request/demand to turn guns in. Also, I did not say I was upset/miffed/angry/etc. about his avoidance of pot discussion because I couldn't smoke pot. As it was revealed after assumptions were made, it was for my family.

And to be honest, I never heard "Bushit" before. All I had hear was Dubya and that was bad enough for me. I'll pass that along to the anti-Bush crowd I know.

[JudyJudyJudy]

The PotUS has yet to prove he's legal to be in said position
You have got to be fucking kidding me.

[QuiltyConscience]

The PotUS has yet to prove he's legal to be in said position and asking for proof of citizenship means you're either 1) a conspiracy theorist, 2) plain old nut job, or 3) a terrorist. When it's proven that he can hold that title, I'll respect his position. Until then, he's a fraud and deserves to be called on it.


I'll pick 2. Plain old nut job.

Seriously, the birth certificate thing?

[JudyJudyJudy]

I agree, Quilty.

[QuiltyConscience]

I fully admit to mockery. But it's the Internets, so don't take it seriously and stuff.

[QuiltyConscience]

The one person in the world who had the most to gain in descrediting Obama would have been Hillary Clinton.

I really dislike her a lot, but I give her full credit that if there had been something hinky with Obama's eligibility as president, she would have had the motive, and plenty of means to uncover such.

[singin_mama]

You are interesting, I hope you stick around.

FWIW, Obama isn't "my" candidate. I didn't vote for him. Or McCain for that matter. I didn't like either choice much, so I voted Libertarian.

Although I do support legalizing it ( beyond medical use, even ) and taxing the hell out of it; I really don't feel that particular issue is even in the top ten of things that need to be dealt with with ATM. I would be rather annoyed if Obama spent much time on it. Healthcare, the economy, Iraq, and North Korea seem to be more pressing matters.

Yeah! for voting Libertarian, I did too. I did vacillate toward the end and almost voted for Chuck Baldwin (only because Ron Paul endorsed him), but just couldn't bring myself to vote for the Constitution Party.

The dealers don't really want it legalized, for the very reason that it would be taxed and the cost would go up dramatically.
I think this (http://www.takimag.com/article/reefer_madness1/) is the article that discusses that.

The one person in the world who had the most to gain in descrediting Obama would have been Hillary Clinton.

I really dislike her a lot, but I give her full credit that if there had been something hinky with Obama's eligibility as president, she would have had the motive, and plenty of means to uncover such.

Hillary is a party person. She made a deal, a good political move, IMO.

[dramamine]

You have got to be fucking kidding me.

No, I'm not. You find me proof that's legit, I'll change my tone, but I've been looking for it since he fumbled the inauguration speech... which is another thing all together.

But it's okay if you choose to ignore his illegitimacy. Millions have done it, so it's the cool and popular thing.

[tata]

You have got to be fucking kidding me.


This is pretty much how I feel.

[RaisingThemLeft]

http://www.snopes.com/politics/obama/birthcertificate.asp Gee, that didn't take long.

[JudyJudyJudy]

LMAO, RTL.

Besides all of that, it wouldn't have mattered if Obama had been born on the moon; since his mother was a US citizen, he was automatically a natural-born citizen when he was born.

[Meredith]

LMAO, RTL.

Besides all of that, it wouldn't have mattered if Obama had been born on the moon; since his mother was a US citizen, he was automatically a natural-born citizen when he was born.

That's what I was thinking. Doesn't "natural born" by definition mean that at least one of his parents is American?

[JudyJudyJudy]

That's what I was thinking. Doesn't "natural born" by definition mean that at least one of his parents is American?
The expression has never been adequately defined. However, since a person can be a natural-born citizen or a naturalized citizen, then most people agree that that would mean that a person who is a citizen because either of his parents is/was a citizen would have to be "natural-born" since he is not "naturalized." (My use of "automatically" in my previous statement wasn't exactly accurate.)

[QuiltyConscience]

LMAO, RTL.

Besides all of that, it wouldn't have mattered if Obama had been born on the moon; since his mother was a US citizen, he was automatically a natural-born citizen when he was born.

If you could somehow link the fake moon landing with Obama's birth, and add in a connection to area 51, that would be ever so much fun.