[Made in the USA]

(Original post by Good bloke)
Has any incumbent ever had to go head to head with a raving lunatic before?

You think Romney is a raving lunatic? It's comments like this that make me wonder if mommy and daddy know you're using their computer past your bedtime

[Good bloke]

(Original post by Made in the USA)
You think Romney is a raving lunatic? It's comments like this that make me wonder if mommy and daddy know you're using their computer past your bedtime

My parents were dead long before mainframe computers were even in common commercial use, matey, never mind available for dektop use. Anyone who believes, in the 21st century, what Romney believes has at least a tinge of insanity about them.

[heyhey922]

(Original post by Made in the USA)
Romney is currently ahead in florida

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epo...bama-1883.html Polling average is pretty tight with a slight lead to Obama.

I'd put my money on Florida going Obama on election night though.

[Christianlady]

(Original post by Cholley71)
And state your reasons.

Hello Cholley,

I don't know. As far as I know, I'm going to vote for Romney. However, I would really rather vote for Ron Paul.

I don't have anything against President Obama. I do disagree with many things which he does, but I don't consider him to be a bad person or bad president. I do think he is a very interesting and cool person, as well as his beautiful wife!

The reasons why I want to vote "Republican" however is because I am more for limiting government. One of the reasons why the USA is so extremely in debt today is because of all the activities the government is trying to do for people who have become dependent on the government's help. That is not the "American way." The "American way" to live the "American dream" includes hard work, creativity, and individuals making things happen, not depending on the government to feed them.

Peace and God bless you

[Christianlady]

(Original post by EonBlueApocalypse)
I hope so, the thought of a Mormon being the most powerful man in the world makes me shudder.

Hello EonBlueApocalypse,

Well, I do not agree with the Mormon belief, but I do know that there are very good people who are Mormons, same as there are very good people who are Atheists, Muslims, Hindus, Buddhists, Wiccans, Christians, Agnostics, Jewish Orthodox, Unitarian, and the list goes on and on.

There are good people and bad people in every belief, basically.

Peace and God bless you

[NYU2012]

(Original post by Christianlady)
Hello Cholley,

I don't know. As far as I know, I'm going to vote for Romney. However, I would really rather vote for Ron Paul.

I don't have anything against President Obama. I do disagree with many things which he does, but I don't consider him to be a bad person or bad president. I do think he is a very interesting and cool person, as well as his beautiful wife!

The reasons why I want to vote "Republican" however is because I am more for limiting government. One of the reasons why the USA is so extremely in debt today is because of all the activities the government is trying to do for people who have become dependent on the government's help. That is not the "American way." The "American way" to live the "American dream" includes hard work, creativity, and individuals making things happen, not depending on the government to feed them.

Peace and God bless you

You want to 'limit government'... So you want to vote Republican. Do you not see or understand the paradox of voting Republican because you wanted 'limited government'?

Ways the Republican Party wants to limit government:
(1) Spend huge amounts of money on military spending
(2) Regulate women's reproductive rights and restrict their ability to choose what happens to their own bodies
(3) Support of DOMA and federal definitions of marriage, which oversteps the legal bounds of Congress as dictated by the US Consitution.

Oh wait, that's right, these are just three examples of how the Republican party DOESN'T actually stand for limited government - they want to regulate our bodies, our morality and our freedoms. Clearly they are in favor of limited government.

Next time, use an actual argument as to why you want to vote Republican, and don't use one that is clearly false.

[Christianlady]

(Original post by NYU2012)
You want to 'limit government'... So you want to vote Republican. Do you not see or understand the paradox of voting Republican because you wanted 'limited government'?

How does voting Democrat "limit government"?

Ways the Republican Party wants to limit government:
(1) Spend huge amounts of money on military spending

That I don't agree with. However, I don't see Obama being any different. i don't agree with military invasions of other countries - period.

(2) Regulate women's reproductive rights and restrict their ability to choose what happens to their own bodies

I am a woman and you can rest assured that I know how to control my getting pregnant or not without the help of the government, thank you very much. The government doesn't need to buy abortions or birth control for me. (I am against abortion, except for in cases of rape or extreme health issues, by the way.) My husband and I take good care of our heath without any need for the government to pay for healthcare for us. I totally am against the idea that women are so weak that they cannot even pay for their own birth control and must have the government do so for them.

(3) Support of DOMA and federal definitions of marriage, which oversteps the legal bounds of Congress as dictated by the US Consitution.

The Democrats are trying to overstep the legal bounds of the Constitution in this regard as well. The Constitution is not a dictionary as to the terms of what marriage is, and should not be one either.

Oh wait, that's right, these are just three examples of how the Republican party DOESN'T actually stand for limited government - they want to regulate our bodies, our morality and our freedoms. Clearly they are in favor of limited government.

Next time, use an actual argument as to why you want to vote Republican, and don't use one that is clearly false.

Please do tell how the Democrats plan on limiting government? Does that include killing the jobs of police officers and firemen, since the government is so devoid of funds with all their activities, that they cannot afford to pay for protecting their own citizens???

At least many Republicans know better how to start and run businesses. That is something the USA desperately needs at the moment. We don't need huge, government-run welfare systems that don't even have the money to fund them.

[Swanbow]

Personally I don't see the republican candidate as being able to win the election. Sure, Obama's record hasn't been great and a lot of swing voters will vote republican, but I can't see them getting a big enough swing to ensure victory.

[NYU2012]

(Original post by Christianlady)
How does voting Democrat "limit government"?

I never claimed that it did, I merely pointed out that the Republican party is not actually in favor of limited government,

(Original post by Christianlady)
That I don't agree with. However, I don't see Obama being any different. i don't agree with military invasions of other countries - period.

Then why vote republican? The republican is and has been a huge proponent of large military spending.

The democrat platform however, is not in favor of such large military spending.

(Original post by Christianlady)
I am a woman and you can rest assured that I know how to control my getting pregnant or not without the help of the government, thank you very much. The government doesn't need to buy abortions or birth control for me. (I am against abortion, except for in cases of rape or extreme health issues, by the way.) My husband and I take good care of our heath without any need for the government to pay for healthcare for us. I totally am against the idea that women are so weak that they cannot even pay for their own birth control and must have the government do so for them.

(1) The republican party loves to try to get laws that regulate access to birth control and abortion.
(2) Not everyone can afford abortion or birth control, to deny this is to deny simple fact and be intentionally ignorant

So... Yes, as a woman you should vote for a party where, predominantly, men determine what is best for your reproductive health and rights. The Republican party is notorious for attempting to regulate women's access to abortion, birth control etc. and attempting to regulate women's bodies. Yes, clearly that's an instance of limiting government.

(Original post by Christianlady)
The Democrats are trying to overstep the legal bounds of the Constitution in this regard as well. The Constitution is not a dictionary as to the terms of what marriage is, and should not be one either.

It's a document limiting the power of the federal government - its beyond the power of the federal government to define marriage; that is a State power or a power of the Supreme Court. DOMA is unconstitutional and an overstepping of governmental power, one that the Republican party currently supports.

In fact, the Supreme court ruled that marriage IS a Constitional right - please keep up with your constitutional law, as this has been true for many decades.

[Christianlady]

(Original post by NYU2012)
I never claimed that it did, I merely pointed out that the Republican party is not actually in favor of limited government,

I said that the reason I will vote Republican is because I am for limiting government, and you jumped on me. Now, please tell me how the Democratic party limits government? Thank you.

Then why vote republican? The republican is and has been a huge proponent of large military spending.

I would love for Ron Paul to be the Republican candidate or at least become the Secretary of Defense, because he does have great ideas about not invading other countries. I don't agree with many things going on right now during Obama's presidency. For example, when the soldier went crazy and killed Afghanistan people, I still don't think the survivors have gotten the attention and help they need from the US government. Now, can Romney do better? Maybe. Maybe not, but I am willing to give him a chance. However, I do most definitely wish Ron Paul were the Republican candidate, one reason being for his views on foreign affairs and the military.

The democrat platform however, is not in favor of such large military spending.

I don't see the Democrat platform as having the same ideas as Ron Paul concerning the US's interaction in other countries.

(1) The republican party loves to try to get laws that regulate access to birth control and abortion.
(2) Not everyone can afford abortion or birth control, to deny this is to deny simple fact and be intentionally ignorant

Every woman who is mature enough to have sex should be informed of how to protect herself from getting pregnant if she does not want to be pregnant. It's not rocket science. If I can do it, other women can too. Only in cases of rape or extreme medical issues should abortion even be considered. I am all for cutting funds for Planned Parenthood. Sadly, there are thousands of women today who are dependent on the government to take care of them, instead of exercising their own brains in order to preserve their womb for when they want to have a child. Women can and many do take care of their own birth control desires. They don't need to be coddled by the government rushing in to take an unwanted baby out of their womb every time they don't want it, or have the government pay for condoms. Women work and can pay for their own birth control, or their boyfriends/husbands can.

For women who cannot afford birth control, can they also not afford to buy cigarettes, drugs, alcohol, dresses, and going out to "party"? If women can afford all of the above, they can afford birth control. Sadly, I have seen so many women on food stamps buy alcohol and cigarettes too, with their own money. Instead of depending on the government to feed them, they really need to re-evaluate their priorities and learn how to budget wisely, so they can afford birth control, if that is indeed important to them.

So... Yes, as a woman you should vote for a party where, predominantly, men determine what is best for your reproductive health and rights.

Don't patronize me Mr. There are strong women in both the Republican party and the Democratic party. Strong Republican women WITH men decide that the Government's job is not to feed and pay for the birth control of the masses, enabling dependency.

Have you ever heard of U.S. Rep. Ann Marie Buerkle? I really like her.

The Republican party is notorious for attempting to regulate women's access to abortion, birth control etc. and attempting to regulate women's bodies. Yes, clearly that's an instance of limiting government.

Limiting government means not allowing government to pay for everything people want it to pay for, which does indeed include what the average citizen should be able to pay for by him/herself.

It's a document limiting the power of the federal government - its beyond the power of the federal government to define marriage; that is a State power or a power of the Supreme Court. DOMA is unconstitutional and an overstepping of governmental power, one that the Republican party currently supports.


In fact, the Supreme court ruled that marriage IS a Constitional right - please keep up with your constitutional law, as this has been true for many decades.

One can get married without the government saying one can, you know. Anyone who thinks that marriage = the government says you can say "I do" doesn't know that all marriage is = public commitment/promises made to another in order to start a family/unite existing families You don't have to have the government's permission in order to be married, or to have kids.

Peace and God bless you

[Herr]

It will boil down to the economy, recent statistics don't show a very good picture, most recent one being home repossessions are on the up, essentially their economic recovery has started to tank as it isn't especially sustainable, job losses does seem to be taking a hit.

Perhaps one interesting stat is currently in US, any state with a Republican governor is recording lower unemployment than those with a Democrat one, so it might also play a role.

Finally it would also boil down to Obamacare, plenty of people though they are poor aren't in favour of it, many of the middle classes have finally realized it will mean an increase in taxes for them and not just an increase in tax on the rich to fund it like they originally thought, as a whole Americans don't trust their Federal government with such a thing, while many want some form of affordable healthcare, they would have preferred it if it was done at state or county level rather than at Federal, remember Americans as a whole aren't all that comfortable with the idea of sharing their water or wealth.

[DalePie]

Does it really matter? America is at best a rather hateful country where you can still be hurt/killed or bullied for being black, gay or a women .

Neither candidate will change that much although Obama is obviously better.

Let have a comparison between UK and USA

Democrats = Equivalent to average Tory Party in power
Republican = Equivalent to BNP / UKIP
Socialists = Equivalent to Labour Party... and that's Nu Labour lmao!

People like to believe that the democrats are this force for good. The reality is if they tried winning an election here they would struggle to beat UKIP in the polls. Very right wing ideals . Can you imagine a UK party wanting to completely disband the NHS? In America they are having a "debate" because Obama wants to bring in 15% of an NHS lmao! .

God bless America? No thanks I'd rather sleep safe at night as a gay person in Europe .

[VeniViciVidi]

(Original post by Christianlady)
One can get married without the government saying one can, you know. Anyone who thinks that marriage = the government says you can say "I do" doesn't know that all marriage is = public commitment/promises made to another in order to start a family/unite existing families You don't have to have the government's permission in order to be married, or to have kids.

Peace and God bless you

Is that so? So what about homosexuality? And the fact that the state must recognize the institution in order for the marriage to become 'valid'?

[Christianlady]

(Original post by VeniViciVidi)
Is that so? So what about homosexuality? And the fact that the state must recognize the institution in order for the marriage to become 'valid'?

All a marriage certificate is = piece of paper. Why? Why does one have to have a piece of paper to show one is "married"? That's ridiculous.

I have a marriage certificate signed... it was a pain to get too because my hubby's birth certificate, showing he was born lol, was in Spanish and they couldn't read it. However, does the marriage certificate = I am married? No. It's just a piece of paper. What means I am married is that I promised to be faithful and committed to my husband. I don't need a piece of paper from the government to give me permission to promise love and faithfulness to the man of my choice, now do I? If they didn't give it to me, do you think I would say "Oh forget it Darling." Hell no!!! The government's job is not to dictate who/if I marry.

Now, there are people all over the world who get married without "registering".

How the government got to be a "registering certificate-giver" I don't know. However, I don't see the reason for government to even be involved with people getting married. It seems to be a good business however, especially for divorce lawyers who tend to make a lot of money in getting people "unregistered" with a certificate of divorce.

Why is it so complicated? Marriage really shouldn't be an issue that the government sticks its nose into... it's not between the government and the people anyways. It's between the couple.

Homosexual or heterosexual, what does it matter? If 2 men or 2 women promise to love each other and be faithful to each other, what business is that of the government? What business is it of the government if a man and woman promise to love each other and be faithful to each other too?

Sometimes people need to look "outside of the box" and see, is there really even a need to be registered? As for tax breaks, the whole tax system needs to be re-evaluated. I think single mothers should get more tax breaks than married people, because many single mothers do not have help from the father(s) of her child(ren). However, that's another topic.

[Christianlady]

(Original post by Herr)
It will boil down to the economy, recent statistics don't show a very good picture, most recent one being home repossessions are on the up, essentially their economic recovery has started to tank as it isn't especially sustainable, job losses does seem to be taking a hit.

Perhaps one interesting stat is currently in US, any state with a Republican governor is recording lower unemployment than those with a Democrat one, so it might also play a role.

Finally it would also boil down to Obamacare, plenty of people though they are poor aren't in favour of it, many of the middle classes have finally realized it will mean an increase in taxes for them and not just an increase in tax on the rich to fund it like they originally thought, as a whole Americans don't trust their Federal government with such a thing, while many want some form of affordable healthcare, they would have preferred it if it was done at state or county level rather than at Federal, remember Americans as a whole aren't all that comfortable with the idea of sharing their water or wealth.

Hello Herr,

I think the Obamacare in idea is nice... having healthcare insurance is nice. However, the insurance is so expensive because doctors/hospitals/pharmacies are allowed to charge an arm and a leg here and there are so many sue-happy people/lawyers. Instead of forcing businesses to provide healthcare, I think it would be better to reasonably limit the fees charged.

As for Obamacare, that will hurt many small businesses, who already are struggling. They can't afford Obamacare.

To me, it seems like it will be a very close year. If Obama wins, I won't get angry. However if he wins another term, I do hope he and his administrative team change how they react to Republicans. If Romney wins, I hope he works with Democrats instead of alienating them.

Peace and God bless you

[EonBlueApocalypse]

(Original post by Christianlady)
Hello EonBlueApocalypse,

Well, I do not agree with the Mormon belief, but I do know that there are very good people who are Mormons, same as there are very good people who are Atheists, Muslims, Hindus, Buddhists, Wiccans, Christians, Agnostics, Jewish Orthodox, Unitarian, and the list goes on and on.

There are good people and bad people in every belief, basically.

Peace and God bless you

Yes, I'm sure Mitt Romney is a very nice person, however, I would feel uneasy knowing that the most powerful person in my country believed complete nonsense. I mean gold tablets? It's a bar below Scientology in term of ridiculousness. You have to look at these things and think if a person makes decisions to believe in such obvious falsehoods how is this person meant to make legitimate decisions on behalf of an entire country.

[Christianlady]

(Original post by EonBlueApocalypse)
Yes, I'm sure Mitt Romney is a very nice person, however, I would feel uneasy knowing that the most powerful person in my country believed complete nonsense. I mean gold tablets? It's a bar below Scientology in term of ridiculousness. You have to look at these things and think if a person makes decisions to believe in such obvious falsehoods how is this person meant to make legitimate decisions on behalf of an entire country.

I have no idea if he is a nice person or not. However, my main concern is if issues will continue to worsen under President Obama, or not. I do however believe that President Obama came in a horrible time for ANYONE to be the American President. I don't think all that is going on is his fault at all. Actually, I do consider former President Bush to have inadvertently hurt the USA by attacking Afghanistan and Iraq. As for President Obama's contribution to the USA's needs, I guess my view is quite negative in not trusting that things will get better if he continues to be president, which is why I am looking elsewhere.

Again, I personally prefer Ron Paul.

About a person's personal belief, George Washington believed in God, which many people nowadays think is ridiculous. He was an awesome president, except for the huge issues of how the newborn government treated the Native Americans and the tragedy of allowing slavery. However, sadly most European immigrants to the "New World" in his time were similar in not having an issue with how they treated the Native Americans and Africans, so...

I don't judge a president by his (hopefully someday her) personal beliefs, but rather I am interested in how they do in leadership and their ideas in how to help the country's people, as well as people in other countries.

[EAM1995]

Obama.

And I very much hope that he does, I detest everything the Republican Party stands for, need I remind anyone about the 8 years the USA suffered under George W Bush? (Not to mention how he stole the second election through vote rigging in Florida...). I would die before I voted Republican if I were American.

[NYU2012]

(Original post by Christianlady)
I said that the reason I will vote Republican is because I am for limiting government, and you jumped on me. Now, please tell me how the Democratic party limits government? Thank you.

Critical reading skills, I assume you have them? Use them.

I never claimed the Democratic party was for smaller government. I merely said that the your statement "I want to vote Republican because of small government" was incorrect.

(Original post by Christianlady)
I don't see the Democrat platform as having the same ideas as Ron Paul concerning the US's interaction in other countries.

Neither does the Republican Party. Your point?

(Original post by Christianlady)
Every woman who is mature enough to have sex should be informed of how to protect herself from getting pregnant if she does not want to be pregnant. It's not rocket science. If I can do it, other women can too.

Do you want a cookie? Maybe a gold star?

Have you ever actually studied politics? Maybe actually read any of the literature on women's reproductive rights? No, of course not.

Not every woman IS knowledgable about birth control; not all of them know how to obtain it; how it works; which forms are best to use; etc.

(Original post by Christianlady)
Only in cases of rape or extreme medical issues should abortion even be considered.

Yes, you're clearly for 'small goverment'. The point of small government is obviously to force you to remain pregnant if you don't want to be.

(Original post by Christianlady)
I am all for cutting funds for Planned Parenthood. Sadly, there are thousands of women today who are dependent on the government to take care of them, instead of exercising their own brains in order to preserve their womb for when they want to have a child.

Get off your "I'm so much better than all these other women" high horse. You're arrogant and ignorant. It's quite sad.

Maybe someone's condom broke. Maybe they were busy and forgot to take the pill. Maybe their hormonal balance was such that even with the pill, they got pregnant. etc. etc. etc.

(Original post by Christianlady)
Women can and many do take care of their own birth control desires.

You have wonderful observation skills?

(Original post by Christianlady)
They don't need to be coddled by the government rushing in to take an unwanted baby out of their womb every time they don't want it, or have the government pay for condoms. Women work and can pay for their own birth control, or their boyfriends/husbands can.

You're not very educated on reproductive rights literature, are you?

Did you know that most people who seek government aid for reproductive issues are young people with low SES?

Did you know that studies have been done that have found when education about reproduction, as well as funding for reproductive services has been cut, the cost to the State has actually INCREASED? No, of course you didn't know that because you've never actually read anything related to the subject and you're merely making uninformed, ignorant statements, am I correct?

Why did costs increase? Because now there are a bunch of unwanted children running around, whose mothers are on welfare because they cannot afford to support themselves and a child; or they end up in State custody because their parents did not want them.

(Original post by Christianlady)
For women who cannot afford birth control, can they also not afford to buy cigarettes, drugs, alcohol, dresses, and going out to "party"? If women can afford all of the above, they can afford birth control.

Yes, let's stereotype these people! Of course stereotypes are correct!

(Original post by Christianlady)
Sadly, I have seen so many women on food stamps buy alcohol and cigarettes too, with their own money. Instead of depending on the government to feed them, they really need to re-evaluate their priorities and learn how to budget wisely, so they can afford birth control, if that is indeed important to them.

Maybe they should. But that doesn't mean that you shouldn't provide them with it. Refer to my above point about how not funding such programs actually leads to MORE expenses for the State.

(Original post by Christianlady)
Don't patronize me Mr. There are strong women in both the Republican party and the Democratic party. Strong Republican women WITH men decide that the Government's job is not to feed and pay for the birth control of the masses, enabling dependency.

No, the majority of Congress is by far made up of men. It is predominantly men who make decisions as to how you should be able to regulate your own body and your reproduction.

(Original post by Christianlady)
Limiting government means not allowing government to pay for everything people want it to pay for, which does indeed include what the average citizen should be able to pay for by him/herself.

Limiting government also means not prohibiting marriages between members of the same sex (right to individual freedom), especially when doing as such is unconstitutional. It also means allowing people to decide whether or not they want to have a baby.

(Original post by Christianlady)
One can get married without the government saying one can, you know. Anyone who thinks that marriage = the government says you can say "I do" doesn't know that all marriage is = public commitment/promises made to another in order to start a family/unite existing families You don't have to have the government's permission in order to be married, or to have kids.

Are you actually this completely ignorant and uneducated? Because if you are, then you are truly a prime example of what an uneducated American looks like.

There are over 2,000 rights and privileges associated with that "piece of paper" that you seem think means nothing -- including but not limited to things such as oh, I don't know, the right to visit your spouse when they are hospitalized; right to make medical decisions for a spouse; right to open a joint bank account; etc. etc. etc.

Why don't you actually educate yourself on these topics and read the available literature, because all you've done is successfully demonstrate that you have no understanding of American politics, political theory, or other relevant subject matter.

[RandZul'Zorander]

(Original post by Christianlady)
Hello Cholley,

I don't know. As far as I know, I'm going to vote for Romney. However, I would really rather vote for Ron Paul.

I don't have anything against President Obama. I do disagree with many things which he does, but I don't consider him to be a bad person or bad president. I do think he is a very interesting and cool person, as well as his beautiful wife!

So...You don't have anything against Obama, and I have even read later on in the thread that you don't even necessarily blame him for the state of our country...yet you still won't vote for him to give him more time to help our country? You do understand that by electing a new president we will essentially be starting over, especially since its going to be Romney who would be elected.

The reasons why I want to vote "Republican" however is because I am more for limiting government. One of the reasons why the USA is so extremely in debt today is because of all the activities the government is trying to do for people who have become dependent on the government's help. That is not the "American way." The "American way" to live the "American dream" includes hard work, creativity, and individuals making things happen, not depending on the government to feed them.

But your reason isn't a valid reason as the Republicans aren't actually for limited government. They want a big government, just as much as Democrats, only where it suits them. Rather than providing help for people who need it, they would rather tell people how to live their lives. They say government should stay out of the people's business yet most of their social policies push for involvement in people's lives. They are extremely hypocritical. And their 'limited government' isn't really limited economically either. They pour loads of money towards the military, and then cut taxes, and expect the deficit to go away. They refuse to raise taxes which means the government will have no income, but they want to cut programs that actually help people who need it but refuse to cut spending to the military. Actually if I remember correctly they want to increase the military budget. Which is just insane.

(Original post by Christianlady)
How does voting Democrat "limit government"?

Voting democrat doesn't have to. However your provided reason for voting republican is just invalid. So...you either need to come up with a new reason for voting republican or find someone else to vote for. Nobody said it should be a Democrat.

That I don't agree with. However, I don't see Obama being any different. i don't agree with military invasions of other countries - period.

I am almost positive that Obama and the Democrats plan to reduce the military budget. Obama also is not out starting 3 wars. He has started pulling us out of them.

I am a woman and you can rest assured that I know how to control my getting pregnant or not without the help of the government, thank you very much. The government doesn't need to buy abortions or birth control for me. (I am against abortion, except for in cases of rape or extreme health issues, by the way.) My husband and I take good care of our heath without any need for the government to pay for healthcare for us. I totally am against the idea that women are so weak that they cannot even pay for their own birth control and must have the government do so for them.

While that may be the case for you, what about less fortunate women? To deny that there are women who cannot afford such luxuries is to be ignorant and ill-informed. The programs aren't for people such as yourself who can afford such items, but for those who can't.

The Democrats are trying to overstep the legal bounds of the Constitution in this regard as well. The Constitution is not a dictionary as to the terms of what marriage is, and should not be one either.

The constitution is the law of the land, and defines many things. It has been determined that marriage is a constitutional right. I don't remember what it falls under exactly but you can read up on the court decisions if you are really that interested.

Please do tell how the Democrats plan on limiting government? Does that include killing the jobs of police officers and firemen, since the government is so devoid of funds with all their activities, that they cannot afford to pay for protecting their own citizens???

The democrats don't have to be for limiting government. BUT they are not for killing the police and firemen jobs, rather the republicans are because they want to take away the funding for such things. So...that was a bad point to bring up.

At least many Republicans know better how to start and run businesses. That is something the USA desperately needs at the moment. We don't need huge, government-run welfare systems that don't even have the money to fund them.

What makes you think that? Why would you think that Republicans somehow know better than Democrats about how to start or run a business? If there are some statistics or evidence to back that claim up I would love to see it. Because as far as I was aware...ability to succeed through business is not limited to one party