....there are similarities and differences between the two candidates for election, re-election. As my 'constitutionalist' proclivities demand, I show more defference toward the republicRATic candidate; more distain toward the obamacRATic candidate, that's just the way it is.
One similarity is both candidates seem to forget that any and all presidents are--by oath of office--required
"....to the best of my ability, preserve, protect and defend the Constitution of the United States."
It's my opinion that the word 'preserve' in the oath is defined as adhering to the basic rights and demands of the document. Each time a president--of any party--sits to sign a piece of legislation into law, the first phrase that should come to his (or her) mind is:
"Where in the Constitution is this authorized?"
Another similarity is both candidates are--or have, in the past--campaigning as ideological moderates, middle-of-the-roaders. In obama's case--as America's current ruler--how he campaigned in 2008 was certainly indicative of his future governance. Sometime, soon after the swearing-in ceremony, Mr obama took a hard-left turn, swerving--willy-nilly--into national socialism. Mr Romney--in my view--is campaigning as a middle-of-the-roader, not a place the country needs him to be. To fix the national economy, to put many more Americans to work and back to work, the country would fare far better with having a president who will govern from a position farther to the right. He doesn't have to be as far right as I am; just not a moderate!!
If we're to believe Mr Romney's rhetoric and Mr obama's actions, one will have the nation's best interests at heart, the other will have his own narcissistic personal and political gains at heart. Who becomes the victor wholly depends on the numbers that support each, how much they believe of the rhetoric and the actions. We have the Romney record as Governor of Massachusetts as well as the obama record as Ruler of the United States with which to guide our decisions, neither of which is a glowing recommendation for advancement. Rather than take several pages to illustrate the pros and cons of their individual methods of governance, the voter might glean more insight by reviewing each party's 2012 campaign platform.
The obamacRATic's party platform, with the slogan "Moving America Forward," thus:
Rebuilding Middle Class Security
1. Putting Americans Back to Work
2. The Middle Class Bargain
3. Cutting Waste, Reducing the Deficit, Asking All to Pay Their Fair Share
4. Economy Built to Last
America Works When Everyone Plays by the Same Rules
1. Wall Street Reform
2. 21st Century Government: Transparent and Accountable
3. Lobbying Reform and Campaign Finance Reform
1. Strengthening the American Community
2. Protecting Rights and Freedoms
3. Ensuring Safety and Quality of Life
Stronger in the World, Safer and More Secure At Home
1. Responsibly Ending the War in Iraq
2. Disrupting, Dismantling, and Defeating Al-Qaeda
3. Responsibly Ending the War in Afghanistan
4. Preventing the Spread and Use of Nuclear Weapons
5. Countering Emerging Threats
6. Strengthening Alliances, Expanding Partnerships, and Reinvigorating International Institutions
7. Promoting Global Prosperity and Development
8. Maintaining the Strongest Military in the World
9. Advancing Universal Values
The republicRATic's party platform with the slogan "We Believe In America," thus: 1. Restoring the American Dream: Rebuilding the Economy and Creating Jobs
2. We The People: A Restoration of Constitutional Government
3. America’s Natural Resources: Energy, Agriculture and the Environment
4. Reforming Government to Serve the People
5. Renewing American Values to Build Healthy Families, Great Schools and Safe Neighborhoods
6. American Exceptionalism
With that, we--both you and I--have a lot of reading to do; a lot of mental digesting to do!