1) Obummer gets re elected and by December we've gone back to hail our chief POTUS OBAMA as he turns radically left on social issues sending millions of teabaggers scrambling for cover. Michele Obama finally starts speaking her mind again....
2) Joe Biden or Hillary Clinton become the tie breaking vote in the Senate....
3) Congress begins forming new coalitions with each other and with new corporate welfare agents....
4) Governor Christy is picked by Romney as his veep. That will make each party have "hit man" representation.
5) The Wheeper shuffles over to be replaced by even more obstinate Schmoe Kantor.
6) More and more people will agree that paying taxes is patriotic.
7) More and more exposure will show how Nationwide the GOP seems to be trying to limit access to the ballot box.
8 ) God may just turn out to be a particle if a third test of light reveals the same results that Einstein was only %99.9 right....this little known fact will not expose the far right wing to false campaigning...
9) THE OWS MOVEMENT WILL REASSEMBLE ....instead of creating chaos, they will force Republicans to begin to separate from their urge to continue to rape and mug the entire middle class on behalf of corporations.
10) Bradley Manning will go to prison for a long time and remain America's #1 political prisoner.
11) As the economy begins to rock along, the GOP takes credit for any improvement. The EURO likens itself to TP.
12) Things stabilize in the Middle East as Iran's leader falls victim to a strange death. Syria's A$$ad becomes an even stronger ally to Hezbollah and Lebanon. Afghanistan continues to make American's dopie.... POTUS OBAMA uses his masterful foreign policy strokes to dominate the election. "It's the economy" will not be the main issue...
12) Fish start showing up with three heads near Alaska and Seattle....
Lowest voter turnout for a presidential election in decades.
Breanna Manning's defense not taking the hero or "political prisoner" route:
QuoteUnfortunately, that sort of principled position is far from what his own defense team suggests motivated Manning's alleged perfidy. No, they appear to be pursuing the defense that he was a gay man in a Don't Ask, Don't Tell military, struggling with gender identity issues, who never should have had access to the files in the first place. His attorney focused on Manning's alter ego, Breanna Manning, and quoted an email from Manning where he said his "entire life feel(s) like a bad dream that won't end. I don't know what to do. I don't know what will happen to me. But at this point I feel like I am not here anymore." That characterization suggests he was no hero; not a man standing for principle nor acting in the best interest of the country but, rather, a sad troubled soul worthy of sympathy. It is a defense which appears to concede that he leaked the documents but also abandons any pretense of righteousness in exchange for an apologia for his behavior.
[
Emphasis added].
http://www.mediaite.com/online/bradley-mannings-own-defense-appears-to-concede-hes-no-hero/
Quote from: guido911 on January 02, 2012, 03:23:08 PM
Breanna Manning's defense not taking the hero or "political prisoner" route:
[Emphasis added].
http://www.mediaite.com/online/bradley-mannings-own-defense-appears-to-concede-hes-no-hero/
Did you ever consider his defense team must play the sympathy card because, this time, he wasn't burglarized by the President?
Where are your guesses for the coming year? :D
Quote from: Teatownclown on January 02, 2012, 03:27:44 PM
Did you ever consider his defense team must play the sympathy card because, this time, he wasn't burglarized by the President?
Where are your guesses for the coming year? :D
My guesses are that I will be taking my annual ski trip in mid March and a cruise in May. Don't really care about anything else right now.
Obama wins the Presidency. The Dems lose the Senate and don't retake the House, mostly due to retirements, the large number of Ds vs smaller number of Rs up for reelection, and radically gerrymandered districts across the country. The Congress and the Executive will remained hopelessly deadlocked until 2014 at the earliest.
This will be a mixed blessing. Government will miss opportunity after opportunity to positively affect our recovery, but at the same time the Bush tax cuts will expire on Jan 1 2013 (and unless we're in a recession at that point, Obama will let them expire) -- and that will solve a huge chunk of our budget/deficit problem in one blow.
Obama will lose the election and his supporters will blame Bush for the loss.
Quote from: we vs us on January 02, 2012, 03:50:59 PM
Obama wins the Presidency.
One of the reasons Obama was such a disappointment is that he was responding to the pressures of how he would have to behave to get re-elected.
If he gets a second term, you may likely see a very different man, who this time around wont be so timid to take on the old guard political machine.
Quote from: Conan71 on January 03, 2012, 11:30:27 AM
Obama will lose the election and his supporters will blame Bush for the loss.
Unless the Rs field someone tenable, I don't see that happening. Romney may be the last hope the Rs have. For as well as they have been in mustering forces in the past, this election cycle sofar for them sure has been one giant Charlie Foxtrot.
Quote from: Hoss on January 03, 2012, 01:30:29 PM
Unless the Rs field someone tenable, I don't see that happening. Romney may be the last hope the Rs have. For as well as they have been in mustering forces in the past, this election cycle sofar for them sure has been one giant Charlie Foxtrot.
I fail to see where it's any different than any other Presidential election when there was not a GOP incumbent running since 1980 or so. You never see unity until either it's clear one candidate has crushed all others in the primaries, and at the very latest, the convention. The Democrats were pretty fractured in '08 at the start of the primaries.
At this time last election season, no one thought a community organizer from Chicago with no business experience, no economic experience and very little political experience could ever be president. Hillary was a shoe-in with vast connections, and a solid platform for economic growth. All she faced was a guy with a 2 word mantra that was well spoken and made people faint.
Don't underestimate any candidate no matter how shocking the concept of them winning the presidency is. Hillary underestimated President Obama because he relied on emotional response and cult of personality over substantive plans. When her party saw how successful he was at manipulating the vote with just words, they dropped her like old cabbage.
At this point, any of the candidates (except Ron Paul) are eligible for the nomination and have the opportunity to pull mass appeal from the base, when the time comes. Their biggest challenge is appealing to all of the voters disenchanted, betrayed, and dismayed by president Obama.
Why Mitt Romney Is Winning, and Rick Perry Is Losing
http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2012/01/03/why-mitt-romney-is-winning-and-rick-perry-is-losing.html (http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2012/01/03/why-mitt-romney-is-winning-and-rick-perry-is-losing.html)
Quote from: Gaspar on January 03, 2012, 02:28:13 PM
At this time last election season, no one thought a community organizer from Chicago with no business experience, no economic experience and very little political experience could ever be president. Hillary was a shoe-in with vast connections, and a solid platform for economic growth. All she faced was a guy with a 2 word mantra that was well spoken and made people faint.
Don't underestimate any candidate no matter how shocking the concept of them winning the presidency is. Hillary underestimated President Obama because he relied on emotional response and cult of personality over substantive plans. When her party saw how successful he was at manipulating the vote with just words, they dropped her like old cabbage.
At this point, any of the candidates (except Ron Paul) are eligible for the nomination and have the opportunity to pull mass appeal from the base, when the time comes. Their biggest challenge is appealing to all of the voters disenchanted, betrayed, and dismayed by president Obama.
Romney 2012 /= Obama 2008. Central to Obama's success was his sense of newness and of being outside the system. Even during the general he was still shiny and new, and voters were discovering him a piece at a time. Romney's been running a "national" campaign now for several months and is a known quantity. Hell, he was part of the also-ran's last year. There's much less of a chance that he'll be able to define himself further or improve on the image he's got. This is not to say he can't win the election, but I just don't think it will be on those terms. Whatever Mitt is, he's not a bright young newcomer and he's not perceived as a change agent by anyone (unless the change you mean is "someone who's not Obama").
Quote from: we vs us on January 03, 2012, 03:00:06 PM
Romney 2012 /= Obama 2008. Central to Obama's success was his sense of newness and of being outside the system. Even during the general he was still shiny and new, and voters were discovering him a piece at a time. Romney's been running a "national" campaign now for several months and is a known quantity. Hell, he was part of the also-ran's last year. There's much less of a chance that he'll be able to define himself further or improve on the image he's got. This is not to say he can't win the election, but I just don't think it will be on those terms. Whatever Mitt is, he's not a bright young newcomer and he's not perceived as a change agent by anyone (unless the change you mean is "someone who's not Obama").
The primary thing that Mitt has going for him is decades of turning failing businesses into billion dollar companies. He also has a calm, presidential delivery that by it's very nature puts others on the defensive. If it's economic recovery people are interested in, then he may be an attractive candidate. He has his share of luggage though, and did far better in the private sector than he did as governor over a very liberal state. That could go either way for him, it could indicate his ability to compromise and work within accepted liberal frameworks, or it could position him as too much of a moderate for the Tea Party conservatives.
Perry's predicting:
http://www.politico.com/blogs/burns-haberman/2012/01/sources-perry-starts-buying-sc-television-time-109466.html (http://www.politico.com/blogs/burns-haberman/2012/01/sources-perry-starts-buying-sc-television-time-109466.html)
QuoteRick Perry's campaign, in the past two hours, has started buying TV time in South Carolina, two sources confirm.
The size of the buy was not immediately clear, but the intent was. It's a signal Perry is planning to stay in the race through the state's primary later this month, and that he'll treat Iowa as what one source called "the starting gun," as opposed to the finish line.
While Gov. Nikki Haley is backing Mitt Romney, South Carolina is a state where Perry has had a fairly strong ground game. And given how low the expectations have been set for him, if he secures a close fourth-place finish, he may be able to spin it into a path forward for the rest of the month.
Quote from: Gaspar on January 03, 2012, 03:06:36 PM
The primary thing that Mitt has going for him is decades of turning failing businesses into billion dollar companies. He also has a calm, presidential delivery that by it's very nature puts others on the defensive. If it's economic recovery people are interested in, then he may be an attractive candidate. He has his share of luggage though, and did far better in the private sector than he did as governor over a very liberal state. That could go either way for him, it could indicate his ability to compromise and work within accepted liberal frameworks, or it could position him as too much of a moderate for the Tea Party conservatives.
I don't disagree with that. I think he's got to play to some very different constituencies (running the gamut from the TP up through a confused mishmash of independents) and that will be hard to straddle.
The economy will be the big wildcard for the campaign. I believe that -- regardless of the actual numbers -- if it
feels like we're making progress, then Obama will keep the White House. If it feels like things are either circling the drain or at best as if things are limping along with no change, then Romney (or whoever the GOP person is) will win. But at this point I truly think it's about perception vs. reality. So even if unemployment hasn't changed much, if people think it's about to, then that's a win for O.
Quote from: Gaspar on January 03, 2012, 03:06:36 PM
or it could position him as too much of a moderate for the Tea Party conservatives.
If Mitt ends up with the nomination, the Tea Party is too pissed off at Obama and his policies to stay home and not vote. They will turn out in droves to vote
against Obama no matter who the GOP nominee is. One thing which could screw the pooch for Romney is if Ron Paul goes independent. He might pull a good 10% of the popular vote.
Of course, it's still seven months to the convention and lots can happen in that time. Depending on how Tea Partiers turn out for primary voting, Santorum, Gingrich, Perry, or Bachmann might have a good chance. Huckabee was a complete surprise in the last election. I don't think he was on anyone's radar scope this time four years ago.
Quote from: we vs us on January 03, 2012, 03:44:39 PM
I don't disagree with that. I think he's got to play to some very different constituencies (running the gamut from the TP up through a confused mishmash of independents) and that will be hard to straddle.
The economy will be the big wildcard for the campaign. I believe that -- regardless of the actual numbers -- if it feels like we're making progress, then Obama will keep the White House. If it feels like things are either circling the drain or at best as if things are limping along with no change, then Romney (or whoever the GOP person is) will win. But at this point I truly think it's about perception vs. reality. So even if unemployment hasn't changed much, if people think it's about to, then that's a win for O.
The dangerous thing about unemployment that lingers this long, is that businesses find other ways to be more productive at less cost. This makes it harder for them to justify any additional work force while an atmosphere of uncertainty still exists.
If there is anything that President Obama produced as a product of his presidency that will carry through history as a monument to his policies, it will be the concept of "uncertainty." It will become a historical theme just as "malaise" did for president Carter. I think we will see a lot of that term in the next eight months.
Quote from: Conan71 on January 03, 2012, 03:54:08 PM
If Mitt ends up with the nomination, the Tea Party is too pissed off at Obama and his policies color to stay home and not vote. They will turn out in droves to vote against Obama no matter who the GOP nominee is. One thing which could screw the pooch for Romney is if Ron Paul goes independent. He might pull a good 10% of the popular vote.
Of course, it's still seven months to the convention and lots can happen in that time. Depending on how Tea Partiers turn out for primary voting, Santorum, Gingrich, Perry, or Bachmann might have a good chance. Huckabee was a complete surprise in the last election. I don't think he was on anyone's radar scope this time four years ago.
You can't be serious....
Quote from: Teatownclown on January 03, 2012, 05:09:54 PM
You can't be serious....
I wouldn't clown around on that.
Well this should settle everything:
QuoteMexico's Grand Warlock predicted US President Barack Obama would fail to win re-election and two more Latin American leaders would be diagnosed with cancer, in a traditional New Year's forecast Tuesday.
The Grand Warlock, or "Brujo Mayor" in Spanish, leads a Mexican tradition of "brujeria" or sorcery centered in the southeastern city of Catemaco.
The Grand Warlock, also known as Antonio Vazquez, said that Venezuelan President Hugo Chavez, who claims to have beaten an unspecified cancer, would have a "terrible relapse."
Argentina's President Cristina Kirchner, Brazilian President Dilma Rousseff, former Brazilian leader Luiz Inacio Lula da Silva and Paraguay's Fernando Lugo have been diagnosed with cancer in recent years.
Chavez suggested last month that the spate of cancer among leftist leaders could be a US plot.
Vazquez, who sports a long grey beard, put the cancer cases down to "witchcraft" against Latin American leaders, during a Mexico City news conference giving his 25th annual predictions.
http://www.breitbart.com/article.php?id=CNG.5d4866e77b6f7d7b4a432c8d01267956.9a1&show_article=1
Close the thread now.
Quote from: Conan71 on January 03, 2012, 03:54:08 PM
If Mitt ends up with the nomination, the Tea Party is too pissed off at Obama and his policies to stay home and not vote. They will turn out in droves to vote against Obama no matter who the GOP nominee is. One thing which could screw the pooch for Romney is if Ron Paul goes independent. He might pull a good 10% of the popular vote.
Of course, it's still seven months to the convention and lots can happen in that time. Depending on how Tea Partiers turn out for primary voting, Santorum, Gingrich, Perry, or Bachmann might have a good chance. Huckabee was a complete surprise in the last election. I don't think he was on anyone's radar scope this time four years ago.
If you'd asked me back in 2010, I would've agreed with you completely, re: the Tea Party's utter dedication to Obama's defeat. But the primaries have indicated that the Tea Party has more in mind than simply knocking off O. The endless search for the not-Romney seems to suggest that the TPers are looking for someone who is first and foremost ideologically pure rather than someone who is simply the guy who can unseat Obama. In fact, they're kind of stubbornly avoiding the middle of the road option in favor of pretty much every other possibility out there, no matter how ill-advised.
I think you;re right about, Paul . . . and that's why if he goes 3rd party he'll scuttle Romney completely and put Obama back in the White House.
Quote from: we vs us on January 03, 2012, 09:10:40 PM
If you'd asked me back in 2010, I would've agreed with you completely, re: the Tea Party's utter dedication to Obama's defeat. But the primaries have indicated that the Tea Party has more in mind than simply knocking off O. The endless search for the not-Romney seems to suggest that the TPers are looking for someone who is first and foremost ideologically pure rather than someone who is simply the guy who can unseat Obama. In fact, they're kind of stubbornly avoiding the middle of the road option in favor of pretty much every other possibility out there, no matter how ill-advised.
I think you;re right about, Paul . . . and that's why if he goes 3rd party he'll scuttle Romney completely and put Obama back in the White House.
Paul could well be this year's Perot. They even seem to share the same crazy gene.
Rick Perry just announced he's heading back to Texas to reassess the campaign.
Santorum should've declared victory before everyone went to sleep. "this is what I look like...for future reference."
Bachman will announce that she is withdrawing at 10am this morning.
This is actually good news for Mitt. If Bachmann and Perry both drop out, that's a significant narrowing of the field. Santorum is unlikely to be competitive in states outside of Iowa (especially not in NH, which is up next), so that means there's a block of Santorum-y votes floating around in the other primary states. Gingrich is all but finished, IMO, so that means that we're going to very quickly get a Romney v. Paul primary battle. And Paul's staying power really is up in the air. He has a lot of pros in his column (dedicated fan base, money, more organization than the rest of them except for Romney) but also some negatives, too (perceived as a loon, as marginal, and his views -- while deeply held - fly in the face of current orthodoxy). Paul isn't necessarily more conservative, he's weirdly conservative, and that may set off the undecided GOPers.
And Huntsman. Poor Huntsman. He never really had a chance.
Wait a week. Huntsman will finish third in New Hampshire and become the comeback kid.
Quote from: guido911 on January 03, 2012, 09:05:55 PM
Well this should settle everything:
http://www.breitbart.com/article.php?id=CNG.5d4866e77b6f7d7b4a432c8d01267956.9a1&show_article=1
Close the thread now.
Thanks for the reminder....I think Breitfart has that gene too.....
Is Huntsman even in NH? I thought he threw that state off....
Kind of a no doy post but...
http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/2012/01/04/source-bachmann-will-acknowledge-the-reality-of-iowa-vote/?hpt=hp_t2 (http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/2012/01/04/source-bachmann-will-acknowledge-the-reality-of-iowa-vote/?hpt=hp_t2)
BREAKING: Source: Bachmann to suspend campaign
Quote(CNN) - Minnesota Rep. Michele Bachmann is suspending her campaign, a GOP source familiar with her plans told CNN Senior Congressional Correspondent Dana Bash on Wednesday.
A Republican source familiar with Bachmann's plans told CNN Chief National Correspondent John King earlier Wednesday Bachmann "will acknowledge the reality of Iowa's vote" a at Wednesday morning press conference.
King's source said, "she deserves the chance to say this in her own words but it is safe to say we don't see a viable way forward," and confirmed that a planned post-Iowa trip to South Carolina "isn't going to happen."
King's source is involved in the campaign's post-Iowa deliberations but insisted on anonymity and on being characterized only as a GOP source familiar with Bachmann's thinking.
Did any one see Gingrich interviewed this weekend by a coupla' donkey ABC "journalists". For anyone who thinks the G man can out debate the prez, they should watch him at work. I don't have the link but it went like this...
ABC-"You've complained that Romney is not being honest about his past political decisions and that if he lies during the campaign that he would obviously lie in the oval office. Are you saying that he is a liar?"
G-man-"Yes".
ABC-"You're saying he is a liar!?"
G-Man- "Yes".
ABC-"Would you support him if he gets the nomination?"
G-Man- "Of course I would. He is better than Obama. Anyone is. He's destroying our country".
ABC- "So, you would support someone for the presidency who you think is a liar and will be a liar in the White House?!"
G-Man- "Well.... blah, blah, blah...
Per Daily Beast FB:
Michele Bachmann is ending her campaign for the presidency, telling supporters this morning, "I have decided to stand aside."
She thinks that was her decision apparently...
Well good. Now she can go back to her full-time job the taxpayers have been paying her for while she was out of the office on a six month ego trip.
Dang good job, running for office. Too bad I've squandered my chances by posting around here!
QuotePOLITICO's Ginger Gibson reports:
Newt Gingrich still won't congratulate Mitt Romney for winning the Iowa caucuses.
At a news conference in Concord, N.H., Gingrich was asked by CBS correspondent Dean Reynolds why he congratulated Rick Santorum but not Romney.
Gingrich stared at the reporter and raised his eyebrows in silence, eventually drawing laughter from some of the reporters.
"Because I know you would be a man of great professionalism, I know that's a rhetorical question. And a good one," Gingrich said.
During his speech in Des Moines last night, Gingrich visibly seethed at mention of Romney, who along with his supporters ran a barrage of attack ads against the former speaker.
Romney said he'd spoken with every GOP rival last night except Gingrich.
So yeah...he'd do great...
My label of "petulant little child" seems to be dead on.
I think highly of Newt as a historian and even a political philosopher, but he's an asswipe as a politician.
Quote from: Townsend on January 04, 2012, 10:43:00 AM
Per Daily Beast FB:
Michele Bachmann is ending her campaign for the presidency, telling supporters this morning, "I have decided to stand aside."
She thinks that was her decision apparently...
I think she is still doing the "Playboy" spread for the November issue.
Quote from: Townsend on January 04, 2012, 10:43:00 AM
Michele Bachmann is ending her campaign for the presidency, telling supporters this morning, "I have decided to stand aside."
She thinks that was her decision apparently...
It's her decision not to continue running for President and using up her time and campaign funds. It would probably be silly for her to continue though.
QuotePredictions for 2012
By Paul Krassner
Politics: The electoral college will be replaced by a system where voters will
choose the polling firm they trust the most. Barack Obama will be re-elected
because his vice-presidential running mate Joe Biden will be replaced by
Hillary Clinton, thereby gaining the women's vote. Failed Republican
campaigners will all take other jobs. Mitt Romney will start smoking a
pipe and portray the character Bob Dobbs in a movie about the cultish
Church of the Subgenius. Newt Gingrich and Herman Cain will launch
the bipartisan Adultery Party in 2016, joined by Democrats John Edwards
and Bill Clinton. Ron Paul will unite with Ru Paul and they'll perform
on Dancing With the Stars. Rick Santorum will be caught in an
airport bathroom stall enjoying a gay encounter. Michelle Bachmann
will launch a lie-detector company. Rick Perry will copyright the word
"Oops." And it will be revealed that Donald Trump was actually born
on Mars; he will have a birth certificate to prove it, along with a
photo of him as a typical Martian baby with a comb-over.
Show Business: Vegetarian converts will include Lady Gaga, who will
wear a dress made entirely of heirloom tomatoes, and Meatloaf will
change his name to Tofuloaf. Kermit the Frog and Miss Piggy will
win Academy Awards for best male and female actors. Angelina Jolie
will legally adopt Brad Pitt. Kim Kardashian will get married and
divorced on the same day. The Tea Party will become a popular
sitcom. Capital-punishment executions will become a top-rated
reality-TV series. The Second Coming of Jesus Christ will occur
live on a three-hour special to be telecast on every single channel
simultaneously, with an offstage voiceover narration by God.
Atheists and agnostics will picket the production, only to be
struck by lightning. Howard Stern will expose himself on America's
Got Talent. The Taliban and al-Quaeda will be the final
competitors on The Biggest Terrorists. Hulu and Netflix will merge as Huflix.
Fashion Trends: Square Hitler-style mustaches will finally become
stylish after decades of ridicule. Botox will become a soft drink that
will get rid of unwanted wrinkles from the inside. Pornography will
be allowed in public libraries, but moaning out loud will definitely
not be permitted. Fetus transplants from poor pregnant girls
to wealthy anti-abortion women will become a controversial new fad.
Arizona, Mississippi and Tennessee will refuse to recognize Leap
Year. Lottery winners will be fingerprinted. Private prisons will be
turned into ashrams. Inspired by Steve Jobs, many industries
will continue his legacy by transforming planned obsolescence into
a virtue. Prescription drugs will become children's names, such
as Ambien and Lipitor. Travel agents will begin arranging guilt
trips for clients who have given up on airplanes. Combination
vibrators and insomnia cures will be invented, trademarked as
Dildoze. Pope Benedict XVI will permit condoms to be marketed
if there are tiny pinhole pricks in the reservoir tips in order to ensure a
fighting chance for spermatozoa to get through. Serial pedophiles, gay
bashers and Internet hackers will form unions.
The Economy: The Department of Energy will release a report concluding
that so-called "clean coal" is, in point of fact, "filthy dirty." The Bank of A
merica will stop doing business with Verizon and switch to Credo. The
largest protest in history will take place by ongoing Occupy-the-Federal-
Reserve-System demonstrations. The recession will evolve into a depression,
which will end quickly as the war on drugs morphs into the legalization
of every single strain of cannabis will be designated as medical marijuana.
Facebook members will be taxed for every friend, Twitter users will be taxed
for every tweet, Monsanto will be taxed for every genetically modified food,
and masturbators will be taxed for every ejaculation. The Supreme Court will
download all corporations into embryos. Several million jobs will be created as
Unemployment Insurance clerks.
International Relations: North Korea's new Beloved Leader will be caught
cheating on his SAT examination, but he will redeem himself when he allows
almost 70 McDonalds restaurants to open all over his dictatorial realm; however,
in keeping with his father's policies, he won't allow them to sell any food.
Saudi-Arabia will outlaw laughter. Iraq will become our 51st state. Afghanistan will
require all men to wear burkas. Iran will develop a nuclear bomb, than drop it by
accident on Libya and Syria. World War III will be fought entirely by drone
planes attempting to destroy each other in the air. Products made in China
will be increasingly pirated by American entrepreneurs. Global warming will
continue to melt icebergs as well as Sarah Palin's cold heart. The world will end on
December 21st, but will begin all over again on December 23rd, just in time
for last-minute Christmas shopping. The most popular gift will be cans of p
epper-spray in a variety of flavors. Pakistan will continue to be bribed by us.
And the Nobel Peace Prize will be secretly awarded to Anonymous.
These predictions for 2012 were originally published in Metro Newspapers.
Paul Krassner publishes the infamous Disneyland Memorial Orgy poster.
His latest book is an expanded and updated edition of his autobiography,
Confessions of a Raving, Unconfined Nut: Misadventures in the Counterculture,
available at paulkrassner.com and as a Kindle e-book.
what
Quote from: we vs us on January 06, 2012, 03:59:13 PM
what ?
Hey, if you don't know who Krassner is, do some research. High humor.... ;D
It's all over. Here's your winner folks.
http://abcnews.go.com/blogs/politics/2012/01/todd-palin-endorses-newt-gingrich/
Todd Palin Endorses Newt Gingrich
Quote from: Townsend on January 09, 2012, 12:17:07 PM
It's all over. Here's your winner folks.
http://abcnews.go.com/blogs/politics/2012/01/todd-palin-endorses-newt-gingrich/
Todd Palin Endorses Newt Gingrich
I won't be convinced until we hear from Levi and Sarah's navel lint.
Quote from: carltonplace on January 09, 2012, 12:41:40 PM
I won't be convinced until we hear from Levi and Sarah's navel lint.
Levi's navel lint died unexpectedly when it was licked out by the merman dwarf in the sideshow next to Levi's at the Montana state fair.
I'm afraid the lint's prediction just won't be available.
Sarah has no navel.
Quote from: Townsend on January 09, 2012, 12:48:28 PM
Levi's navel lint died unexpectedly when it was licked out by the merman dwarf in the sideshow next to Levi's at the Montana state fair.
I'm afraid the lint's prediction just won't be available.
Sarah has no navel.
Kinda like Metatron in 'Dogma'? Wait, what?
New surgings:
http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2012/01/09/election-oracle-gingrich-rises-with-romney-attacks.html
Election Oracle: Newt's Surprise Surge in New Hampshire
QuoteAfter taking a beating in Iowa, Newt Gingrich came out guns blazing on Sunday, aiming his fire squarely at frontrunner Mitt Romney's "pious baloney"—and the Web liked what it heard.
The Daily Beast's Election Oracle shows Gingrich—who just a week ago was at the bottom of the field with a favorability rating of -58—continuing his rise after Sunday morning's Meet the Press debate, with his rating moving up 10 points to 27 on Sunday. Unlike traditional polls, the Election Oracle analyzes views expressed on the Internet—the most extensive and immediate opinion generator ever invented—to determine a daily favorability rating for each candidate from -100 to 100. The Oracle tracks 40,000 news sites, blogs, message boards, Twitter feeds, and other social-media sources to analyze what millions of people are saying about the candidates and hot-button issues.
He will surge until Sheldon Adelson decides Newt is no longer his b!tch.
All this surging reminds me of Santorum.
Look who's running for VP:
http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0112/71336.html (http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0112/71336.html)
Newt Gingrich: I crossed the line
Quote
SPARTANBURG, S.C. — Newt Gingrich signaled Wednesday that he believes his criticism of Mitt Romney's record at Bain Capital is a mistake — and that he's created an impression that he was echoing Democratic rhetoric.
Gingrich conceded the problem when pressed by a Rick Santorum supporter at a book-signing here Wednesday.
"I'm here to implore one thing of you. I think you've missed the target on the way you're addressing Romney's weaknesses. I want to beg you to redirect and go after his obvious disingenuous about his conservatism and lay off the corporatist versus the free market. I think it's nuanced," Dean Glossop, an Army Reservist from Inman, S.C., said.
"I agree with you," Gingrich said. "It's an impossible theme to talk about with Obama in the background. Obama just makes it impossible to talk rationally in that area because he is so deeply into class warfarre that automatically you get an echo effect. ... I agree with you entirely."
Glossop described himself as "delighted" at the response during an interview after Gingrich spoke and said he hopes Gingrich and his allies will not continue to hammer that theme.
"I would certainly hope that they're not going to," he said.
Gingrich:
(http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/a/af/DryToast.jpg/220px-DryToast.jpg)
Just a random pic.
(http://a4.sphotos.ak.fbcdn.net/hphotos-ak-ash4/393354_10150477497548717_10498053716_8795933_971801531_n.jpg)
Sure that wasn't about a plastic surgery gone wrong?
Quote from: guido911 on January 11, 2012, 01:50:12 PM
Just a random pic.
(http://a4.sphotos.ak.fbcdn.net/hphotos-ak-ash4/393354_10150477497548717_10498053716_8795933_971801531_n.jpg)
Quote from: guido911 on January 11, 2012, 01:50:12 PM
Just a random pic.
(http://a4.sphotos.ak.fbcdn.net/hphotos-ak-ash4/393354_10150477497548717_10498053716_8795933_971801531_n.jpg)
Shouldn't it have multiple A's instead of multiple D's?
Quote from: Conan71 on January 11, 2012, 01:51:45 PM
Sure that wasn't about a plastic surgery gone wrong?
Just got that. I'm slow today. Just threw 10 racks of ribs on the smoker, so perhaps the smoke has gone to my head!
Quote from: Gaspar on January 11, 2012, 02:33:23 PM
Just got that. I'm slow today. Just threw 10 racks of ribs on the smoker, so perhaps the smoke has gone to my head!
Wait 45 minutes until 4:20 and try some more....it will help keep your head.
My predictions are looking good....
Mitt will pick a woman running mate....add that to the list.
Quote from: Teatownclown on January 11, 2012, 03:36:57 PM
Wait 45 minutes until 4:20 and try some more....it will help keep your head.
My predictions are looking good....
Mitt will pick a woman running mate....add that to the list.
Pick Hillarity and he'd get 65% or better of the popular vote.
Condi? Nah....
That old gal from Texass....Kay Bailey Hutchison?
Hill will be on the dims package?
Quote from: Conan71 on January 11, 2012, 03:39:49 PM
Pick Hillarity and he'd get 65% or better of the popular vote.
Now that would be an interesting united ticket.
Now that Perry is out, Romney's offshore tax shelters, and Gingrich being a jackass...will it be Santorum leading the pack until the whole story about his wife and some of his foibles come out?
I didn't see this on another post so forgive me if this is a double post. After a recount in Iowa, the GOP has declared a "tie" with Santorum holding a 34 vote edge over Romney. It was declared a "victory" when Romney had a six (or was it eight) vote advantage.
What's that tell you about the fix being in for Romney. Expect a lot of dirtying up of Santorum by GOP operatives. They don't think he can beat Obama.
Quote from: Conan71 on January 19, 2012, 10:22:52 AM
Expect a lot of dirtying up of Santorum by GOP operatives. They don't think he can beat Obama.
Not a chance in Hell.
After hearing this morning's news, do the conservatives and Republics really want any one of the three likely candidates to be president? Seriously all politics aside. One of these guys has millions in offshore accounts and pays less in taxes than I do. One is the definition of negativity and hypocrisy. One wants to make being gay, unlawful among other things.
Do you think any one of these three guys would make a good president? Are you that unhappy with the current state of affairs that these look like good alternatives?
Quote from: AquaMan on January 19, 2012, 12:30:06 PM
After hearing this morning's news, do the conservatives and Republics really want any one of the three likely candidates to be president? Seriously all politics aside. One of these guys has millions in offshore accounts and pays less in taxes than I do. One is the definition of negativity and hypocrisy. One wants to make being gay, unlawful among other things.
Do you think any one of these three guys would make a good president? Are you that unhappy with the current state of affairs that these look like good alternatives?
I'm going to assume two of them aren't quite as bad as we think.
I'd imagine if you met with one in a quiet room for a drink he'd tell you a lot of it is trying to cater to the nutballs.
The offshore accounts are probably a normal thing for someone with that much money.
The third one appears to be one of the nutballs. I can only go by what I've seen though.
Quote from: Conan71 on January 11, 2012, 01:48:32 PM
Gingrich:
(http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/a/af/DryToast.jpg/220px-DryToast.jpg)
I was looking for a picture in that, maybe a Jesus profile or burned satan-face...
Quote from: AquaMan on January 19, 2012, 12:30:06 PM
After hearing this morning's news, do the conservatives and Republics really want any one of the three likely candidates to be president? Seriously all politics aside. One of these guys has millions in offshore accounts and pays less in taxes than I do. One is the definition of negativity and hypocrisy. One wants to make being gay, unlawful among other things.
Do you think any one of these three guys would make a good president? Are you that unhappy with the current state of affairs that these look like good alternatives?
Taxes - as we have beat to death here...Romney admits to it. Gingrich is very likely doing it and not admitting it. To you - and many others - that 15% is the problem. To "The Disciples" it is the solution.
Gingrich claims 31% and Obama claims 33%.
It wasn't that long ago - just a few decades that it
was unlawful to be gay. They just want to go back to the America of their childhoods. Like that Owasso guy with his John Birch Society/Ku Klux Klan buddies...
Quote from: AquaMan on January 19, 2012, 12:30:06 PM
After hearing this morning's news, do the conservatives and Republics really want any one of the three likely candidates to be president? Seriously all politics aside. One of these guys has millions in offshore accounts and pays less in taxes than I do. One is the definition of negativity and hypocrisy. One wants to make being gay, unlawful among other things.
Do you think any one of these three guys would make a good president? Are you that unhappy with the current state of affairs that these look like good alternatives?
Ross Perot anyone ?
Oops. Quick edit: Bob Dole would vote for Bob Dole if Bob Dole was running.
It doesn't escape me that Ross Perot was the best futurist of the group. That sucking sound is more like a tornado now.
Whoever gets it best keep an eye on the running mate.
If newt chooses Palin, hooooo boy...
http://content.usatoday.com/communities/ondeadline/post/2012/01/brazilian-politician-kills-running-mate-to-take-her-seat/1 (http://content.usatoday.com/communities/ondeadline/post/2012/01/brazilian-politician-kills-running-mate-to-take-her-seat/1)
Brazilian politician kills running mate to take her seat
QuoteA former Brazilian politician has been sentenced to 103 years in prison for killing his running mate so that he could take her place in congress.
Talvana de Albuquerque was sentenced in the state of Alagoas after a jury on Monday found he had ordered four aides to kill congresswoman Ceci Cunha in 1998 so that he, as her stand-in deputy, could take her seat in the lower house Chamber of Deputies.
Albuquerque was also found guilty of ordering the murder of Cunha's husband and two of her relatives, the Associated Press reports.
His aides were sentenced to jail terms ranging from 75 to 105 years.
Newt Gingrich wanted 'open marriage,' ex-wife says
http://www.cnn.com/2012/01/19/politics/gingrich-wife/index.html (http://www.cnn.com/2012/01/19/politics/gingrich-wife/index.html)
Quote(CNN) -- Newt Gingrich offered his second wife a choice of an open marriage or a divorce when he revealed to her he was having an affair with the woman he later made his third wife, Marianne Gingrich said in interviews with ABC News and the Washington Post.
A day after he told his wife about his affair with Callista Bisek in May 1999, the former House speaker delivered a speech titled "The Demise of American Culture" to a group of Republican women in Pennsylvania, The Washington Post reported Thursday.
"How could he ask me for a divorce on Monday and within 48 hours give a speech on family values and talk about how people treat people?" Marianne Gingrich said in her interview with the Post.
Quote from: AquaMan on January 19, 2012, 01:39:15 PM
It doesn't escape me that Ross Perot was the best futurist of the group. That sucking sound is more like a tornado now.
How could there have been any question it would come at the cost of American jobs? They laughed at Perot and called him crazy, but who better to know how you create jobs and retain them than someone who has actually had something to do with the creation of tens of thousands of jobs.
Quote from: Townsend on January 19, 2012, 02:19:31 PM
Newt Gingrich wanted 'open marriage,' ex-wife says
http://www.cnn.com/2012/01/19/politics/gingrich-wife/index.html (http://www.cnn.com/2012/01/19/politics/gingrich-wife/index.html)
Don't worry about posting the character issues. I predict at some point in the next month or so he has a spectacular and very public melt-down that will remind everyone what a petulant little child he is.
Quote from: Conan71 on January 19, 2012, 02:59:42 PM
Don't worry about posting the character issues. I predict at some point in the next month or so he has a spectacular and very public melt-down that will remind everyone what a petulant little child he is.
Throwing feces at the press?
Quote from: Townsend on January 19, 2012, 03:01:21 PM
Throwing feces at the press?
Yes, flinging poo like a howler monkey and urinating on himself like Keef Olberdoosh.
He probably wears his new gals bra and panties. Give it a couple of weeks.
Quote from: Townsend on January 19, 2012, 02:19:31 PM
Newt Gingrich wanted 'open marriage,' ex-wife says
This just connects the dots with what is already known about him. He was going after Billy Bob for his open marriage situation out of jealousy. He wanted the same kind of life and open marriage that Bill and Hillary have enjoyed all these years, and since he couldn't have it, he lashed out. That is one of the worst kind of lies. And putting out a Contract on America at the same time. Well, ya gotta admit, he's go nerve.
So since Inhofe backed Perry and Perry is now backing Newt is Inhofe backing Newt?
Quote from: Townsend on January 20, 2012, 10:44:30 AM
So since Inhofe backed Perry and Perry is now backing Newt is Inhofe backing Newt?
"I pose a conundrum to you; a riddle if you will....."
Quote from: Townsend on January 20, 2012, 10:44:30 AM
So since Inhofe backed Perry and Perry is now backing Newt is Inhofe backing Newt?
That's just too gross to picture.
Quote from: Conan71 on January 20, 2012, 11:05:53 AM
That's just too gross to picture.
MUST RESIST PHOTOSHOP. . .MUST RESIST PHOTOSHOP.
Chuck Norris has officially endorsed Newt.
All of the other candidates have suddenly gone missing.
http://www.wnd.com/2012/01/gops-biggest-celebrity-makes-his-endorsement/
Chuck is very cool in the movies! Always great to have a 'tongue-in-cheek' B or C grade martial arts film to watch on a Saturday night with a pitcher of whiskey sours!
Mental giant he is not. It's a shame The Disciples of The Script just can't seem to get actual facts right....
Gloves off: Romney savages Gingrich
QuoteTampa, Florida (CNN) - Mitt Romney offered a stark warning to fellow Republicans that nominating Newt Gingrich could end in a series of surprises that could torpedo the party's hopes to re-take the White House in the fall.
Calling the former House speaker "highly erratic," Romney cautioned they could see "an October surprise a day from Newt Gingrich," if he were to become the GOP nominee.
http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/2012/01/23/gloves-off-romney-savages-gingrich/ (http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/2012/01/23/gloves-off-romney-savages-gingrich/)
All of Newt's Opponents Live in Fantasy Worlds
http://www.thedailybeast.com/cheats/2012/01/25/all-of-newt-s-opponents-live-in-fantasy-worlds.html?utm_source=dlvr.it&utm_medium=twitter (http://www.thedailybeast.com/cheats/2012/01/25/all-of-newt-s-opponents-live-in-fantasy-worlds.html?utm_source=dlvr.it&utm_medium=twitter)
QuoteAttention campaign followers: Newt Gingrich has a new comeback. The presidential hopeful has apparently grown quite fond of responding to something he doesn't like by accusing the person saying it of living in an alternate universe and possessing strange "fantasies." Earlier today Gingrich dismissed Nancy Pelosi's charge that the former speaker will never be president, arguing that Pelosi "lives in a San Francisco environment of very strange fantasies." Now he's lashed out at opponent Mitt Romney's self-deportation proposal for illegal immigrants calling it an "Obama-level fantasy." Of course, Mitt Romney's ideas are not based in reality, Gingrich explains, because he lives "in a world of Swiss bank accounts and Cayman Island accounts and automatic $20 million-a-year income with no work."
It's official:
Fidel Castro: GOP race is 'idiocy, ignorance'
http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0112/71955.html (http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0112/71955.html)
Quote
The Republican presidential race is "the greatest competition of idiocy and ignorance that has ever been," former Cuban president Fidel Castro wrote in an opinion piece on Wednesday.
Castro made his comments in his latest column of "reflections" on a Cuban government website, attacking the Republican candidates two days after their debate in Florida.
"The selection of a Republican candidate for the presidency of this globalized and expansive empire is – and I mean this seriously – the greatest competition of idiocy and ignorance that has ever been," he wrote, according to The Associated Press.
During the debate, Romney responded to a question of how he would react to a 3 a.m. announcement of Castro's death by referencing the Jan. 19 death of Cuban prisoner Wilman Villar.
"We just had, with Wilman Villar, his life was just lost in a hunger strike fighting for democracy," Romney said.
Castro wrote that Villar was a common criminal and not a political dissident, the AP reported.
Castro did not reference the comments that Romney and Newt Gingrich made about what they would do if he died, the AP wrote. Romney said he would "thank heavens" Castro had "returned to his maker," while Gingrich said, "I don't think Fidel's going to meet his maker. I think he's going to go to the other place."
The former Cuban president wrote he was too busy to spend any additional time evaluating the Republican field.
Read more: http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0112/71955.html#ixzz1kUslH2aN
CREW Requests Gingrich Investigation Records
http://www.thedailybeast.com/cheats/2012/01/25/crew-requests-gingrich-investigation-records.html?utm_source=dlvr.it&utm_medium=twitter (http://www.thedailybeast.com/cheats/2012/01/25/crew-requests-gingrich-investigation-records.html?utm_source=dlvr.it&utm_medium=twitter)
QuoteMaybe we won't have to wait until Newt Gingrich gets the GOP nomination to find out what Nancy Pelosi knows. Pelosi has taunted that she "knows something" about Gingrich from her involvement with his ethics investigation that leads her to believe he will never become president. The House minority leader has insisted that if Gingrich becomes the Republican to challenge Obama in 2012, this information—whatever it is—will become public and surely kill his campaign. Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington (CREW), a watchdog group, doesn't want to let things get that far before finding out. CREW has filed an FOIA request for the documents and plans to discover just what presumably juicy gossip Pelosi is withholding.
Bob Dole!
Bob Dole: Gingrich Is Dangerous for the GOP
http://www.thedailybeast.com/cheats/2012/01/26/bob-dole-says-newt-will-ruin-gops-chances-of-winning-presidency.html?utm_source=dlvr.it&utm_medium=twitter (http://www.thedailybeast.com/cheats/2012/01/26/bob-dole-says-newt-will-ruin-gops-chances-of-winning-presidency.html?utm_source=dlvr.it&utm_medium=twitter)
QuoteBob Dole can't resist criticizing Newt Gingrich any longer. The former senator and vice presidential nominee wrote a statement—published by National Review—arguing that "if Gingrich is the nominee it will have an adverse impact on Republican candidates running for county, state, and federal offices." Dole insists that anyone who actually served with the former speaker in Congress knows this to be true and that's why they haven't endorsed him. "Gingrich had a new idea every minute and most of them were off the wall," Dole recalls, suggesting that Democrats are hoping for a Newt nomination because they know it "could result in a landslide victory for Obama and a crushing defeat from the courthouse to the White House."
Bob Dole!
Quote from: Townsend on January 25, 2012, 02:45:43 PM
CREW Requests Gingrich Investigation Records
http://www.thedailybeast.com/cheats/2012/01/25/crew-requests-gingrich-investigation-records.html?utm_source=dlvr.it&utm_medium=twitter (http://www.thedailybeast.com/cheats/2012/01/25/crew-requests-gingrich-investigation-records.html?utm_source=dlvr.it&utm_medium=twitter)
"That's good news for John McCain!!"
Anyone remember that phrase from 2008?
I didn't watch this last debate. For anyone who did; did Romney really mop the floor with Gingrich that bad?
Quote from: Townsend on January 27, 2012, 10:46:14 AM
I didn't watch this last debate. For anyone who did; did Romney really mop the floor with Gingrich that bad?
I saw snippets on CBS news this morning. Newt's toupee makes a great mop!
Quote from: AquaMan on January 26, 2012, 06:18:11 PM
"That's good news for John McCain!!"
Anyone remember that phrase from 2008?
Apparently not. I followed Nate Silver during that election on his 538 blog. He is great with interpreting polls and correctly weighting them. As the election progressed every time something happened in the world McCain's robot followers would flood the comments sections all over the internet with this line in hopes of sparking a flame for McCain. It got to where everyone from both sides started their comments with the phrase even when he was dismally failing.
He now is carried by the NY Times. He currently predicted before this debate that Romney is gaining momentum again and he sees a close race with Mitt prevailing. His take was Gingrich was too passive and it cost him.
Here's the link http://fivethirtyeight.blogs.nytimes.com/author/nate-silver/
According to Slate, Gingrich has two taints.
QuoteNewt Gingrich has as much of this insider taint as he does personal taint.
http://www.slate.com/articles/news_and_politics/politics/2012/01/florida_primary_battle_gingrich_and_romney_are_both_insiders_so_why_is_gingrich_able_to_portray_himself_as_an_outsider_.html?wpisrc=twitter_socialflow (http://www.slate.com/articles/news_and_politics/politics/2012/01/florida_primary_battle_gingrich_and_romney_are_both_insiders_so_why_is_gingrich_able_to_portray_himself_as_an_outsider_.html?wpisrc=twitter_socialflow)
So now that it's most likely Mitt Romney as the GOP candidate, will he be moderate or will he move towards the crazy?
To get Oklahoma, he needs the crazy. I don't think he cares if he gets Oklahoma though.
Quote from: Townsend on February 01, 2012, 09:31:22 AM
So now that it's most likely Mitt Romney as the GOP candidate, will he be moderate or will he move towards the crazy?
To get Oklahoma, he needs the crazy. I don't think he cares if he gets Oklahoma though.
Momentum has vacillated with this primary. Romney only has 70 delegates out of, what, 550? Too early to crown him even though I believe he will be the one.
One thing Gingrich has nailed, Romney is a moderate guy who knows his future in a general election depends on being....not too far right. He's perfectly willing to play as many roles as necessary to get elected and has proven that in the past.
Grich on the other hand is a moderate guy who doesn't care about the leanings of the general population. He is running as "the" real conservative and is egotistical enough to believe he will move the population to the right like his new found idol, Reagan did.
I'm a daisy if he does.
Quote from: AquaMan on February 01, 2012, 09:46:45 AM
Momentum has vacillated with this primary. Romney only has 70 delegates out of, what, 550? Too early to crown him even though I believe he will be the one.
One thing Gingrich has nailed, Romney is a moderate guy who knows his future in a general election depends on being....not too far right. He's perfectly willing to play as many roles as necessary to get elected and has proven that in the past.
Grich on the other hand is a moderate guy who doesn't care about the leanings of the general population. He is running as "the" real conservative and is egotistical enough to believe he will move the population to the right like his new found idol, Reagan did.
I'm a daisy if he does.
It's still pretty early, but I don't believe there will be a brokered primary. I think Romney will win the remaining states fairly easily with a few exceptions. The larger states like California, Ohio, Texas, Illinois, Michigan, New York, etc. are his to lose. Gingrich might get some of the smaller delegate states like Alaska. I suspect by the time the Oklahoma primary rolls around, we will end up voting for whomever has the most momentum.
I believe the larger percent of the GOP is perfectly okay with a moderate candidate, I also predict the November election will come down to whomever is able to better convince the electorate they can get them back to work. The President has a four year track record to go on which is not favorable at this point. Granted, I think most educated Americans figured it might take a couple of years to reverse the tide of the recession. Romney will have to point to his successes as a governor and business man at putting people to work. I've still not examined u/e numbers while he was governor of Massachusetts.
The harsh reality is that whomever ends up in the White House is going to be faced with a jobs climate which is continuing to suffer from free trade agreements and a lingering hang-over from the recession. Most companies have managed to get by with fewer employees and less inventory. I really don't see that changing any time soon. Customers for industrial equipment have gotten used to longer lead times and much tighter credit terms.
Romney's still the man. For awhile I thought the Rogues Gallery would stay intact through much more of the primary season but I think that even the Not-Romney choice is going to fall off sooner rather than later. Why? Money (http://www.nytimes.com/2012/02/01/us/politics/campaign-finance-reports-show-super-pac-donors.html?_r=1&pagewanted=all%3Fsrc%3Dtp&smid=fb-share). Romney has blown his nearest competitor out of the water in terms of fundraising. And while Romney's base at this point is relatively narrow, Gingrich's is razor thin (consisting almost exclusively of a single casino magnate and his family). That means Gingrich's well will run dry quickest, while Romney can go back again and again, as well as broadening the base.
On a related note: holy crap, SuperPACs are going to be the death of the Republic.
Quote from: we vs us on February 01, 2012, 11:08:10 AM
On a related note: holy crap, SuperPACs are going to be the death of the Republic.
Agreed.
Curious if Sheldon Adelson will help fund Romney or not and what his angle is with Gingrich.
Per NBC tweet;
QuoteDonald Trump will make a major announcement tomorrow pertaining to the Presidential race
My belly button sucked even deeper into my torso in anticipation. I heard a "thwip" sound from it.
Quote from: Townsend on February 01, 2012, 05:02:21 PM
Per NBC tweet;
My belly button sucked even deeper into my torso in anticipation. I heard a "thwip" sound from it.
He's a putz, and he's fixing to lose a ton of money while getting a major smackdown on his ego. The only valid independent who could hurt the race would be Paul.
Trump is no Perot.
Quote from: Conan71 on February 01, 2012, 10:05:27 PM
He's a putz, and he's fixing to lose a ton of money while getting a major smackdown on his ego. The only valid independent who could hurt the race would be Paul.
Trump is no Perot.
I don't think he'll do much more than superficial damage to the proceedings, but at some point the circus atmosphere has to hurt the GOP with independents. And just as Romney was starting to project a little bit of inevitability after Florida!
Quote from: we vs us on February 01, 2012, 10:09:59 PM
I don't think he'll do much more than superficial damage to the proceedings, but at some point the circus atmosphere has to hurt the GOP with independents. And just as Romney was starting to project a little bit of inevitability after Florida!
Most people, other than those who live in reality TV land detest Trump. He's an a**hole for detracting from the election even in any small way at this crucial juncture in American history.
Quote from: Conan71 on February 01, 2012, 10:13:13 PM
Most people, other than those who live in reality TV land detest Trump. He's an a**hole for detracting from the election even in any small way at this crucial juncture in American history.
The sad part is that more people than either you or I would like live in reality TV land.
Quote from: Conan71 on February 01, 2012, 10:13:13 PM
Most people, other than those who live in reality TV land detest Trump. He's an a**hole for detracting from the election even in any small way at this crucial juncture in American history.
The phrase 'look at me, look at me' comes to mind when I think of him.
Or an AW, as I'd call him.
Quote from: Hoss on February 01, 2012, 10:41:38 PM
Or an AW, as I'd call him.
Happy to oblige
(http://i243.photobucket.com/albums/ff67/trikkirikki/asswipe.jpg)
That's not exactly the AW I had in mind, but it will do.
Sent from my Atrix4G with fat fingers
Donald Trump Set To Endorse Mitt Romney In Las Vegas
http://abcnews.go.com/blogs/politics/2012/02/donald-trump-set-to-endorse-mitt-romney-in-las-vegas/ (http://abcnews.go.com/blogs/politics/2012/02/donald-trump-set-to-endorse-mitt-romney-in-las-vegas/)
That's all the crazy we need.
Oklahoma will vote Romney. "He's almost Christian which is Christian enough for us."
That's funny, I thought I'd heard on the radio this morning he's a Gingrich man. WSJ says it's so:
http://online.wsj.com/article/AP8d8dc45520984cbdae117c37ff4ff315.html
Maybe he's doubling down in Vegas
Quote from: Conan71 on February 02, 2012, 10:05:47 AM
That's funny, I thought I'd heard on the radio this morning he's a Gingrich man. WSJ says it's so:
http://online.wsj.com/article/AP8d8dc45520984cbdae117c37ff4ff315.html
Maybe he's doubling down in Vegas
He knows, as we all do, that Gingrich is so unlikable that Romney will take it. He just wants to be on the winning side of politics as far as he can go without endorsing Obama.
I wonder if Gingrich will have his security detail stomp on the Donald's insteps if he doesn't get the endorsement.
More I think about it, Gingrich reminds me of Baby Huey with a bad temper.
Quote from: Conan71 on February 02, 2012, 10:12:10 AM
I wonder if Gingrich will have his security detail stomp on the Donald's insteps if he doesn't get the endorsement.
More I think about it, Gingrich reminds me of Baby Huey with a bad temper.
Threadwinner. Awesome.
Always has his thumb on the self-destruct button
(http://www.toonopedia.com/babyhuey.jpg)
Here's a prediction for you: Ron Paul is finally forced to confront his previously expressed racism when it comes out that he has been working closely with white power groups like Stormfront.
Not much of a prediction at this point, though.
Edited to add: Thanks anonymoose for shining light where it was not previously shining (http://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?q=cache:_16zupSeYEQJ:american3rdposition.com/+&cd=2&hl=en&ct=clnk&gl=us).
Per CNN tweet:
QuoteWe're minutes away from Donald Trump's endorsement of Mitt Romney
Those cats at CNN need to take a look in the mirror and ask themselves if they can still have some self respect.
http://www.usnews.com/news/blogs/washington-whispers/2012/02/02/dnc-turns-trumps-romney-endorsement-into-a-curse?s_cid=rss:washington-whispers:dnc-turns-trumps-romney-endorsement-into-a-curse (http://www.usnews.com/news/blogs/washington-whispers/2012/02/02/dnc-turns-trumps-romney-endorsement-into-a-curse?s_cid=rss:washington-whispers:dnc-turns-trumps-romney-endorsement-into-a-curse)
DNC Turns Trump's Romney Endorsement Into a Curse
QuoteThe Democratic National Committee wasted no time in turning Donald Trump's endorsement of Mitt Romney into a curse for the GOP frontrunner.
In a low-budget ad, the DNC shows many criticisms Trump made of Romney over the past year, including a comment Trump made to the Washington Post criticizing the former Massachusetts governor for having a history of "eliminating jobs rather than creating them," and another comment Trump made that Romney "doesn't have a chance at the nomination." [See a collection of political cartoons on the 2012 GOP hopefuls.]
What do Romney and Trump have in common? "They both like firing people," the DNC says.
It's followed by various clips of Trump delivering his signature 'You're Fired' line on his television show "The Apprentice" and a comment Romney made while campaigning in New Hampshire regarding private insurance companies.
"I want individuals to have their own insurance," he said. "That means the insurance company will have an incentive to keep you healthy. It also means if you don't like what they do, you can fire them. I like being able to fire people who provide services to me."
Sure makes the Gingrich camp look stupid. I wonder if Newt is throwing a hissy fit in his suite at the Wynn right now?
Quote from: Conan71 on February 02, 2012, 02:53:28 PM
Sure makes the Gingrich camp look stupid. I wonder if Newt is throwing a hissy fit in his suite at the Wynn right now?
He's stomping toes like nobody's business.
"Hey toady, the fat woman's knee wants to stomp on your feet."
BREAKING: Newt Gingrich has de-friended Donald Trump on Facebook. Sources say he has also torn up all of their pictures together and thrown all of his presents in the trash.
Quote from: Gaspar on February 02, 2012, 03:14:38 PM
BREAKING: Newt Gingrich has de-friended Donald Trump on Facebook. Sources say he has also torn up all of their pictures together and thrown all of his presents in the trash.
I'm ripping that one off for a FB status
Quote from: Townsend on February 02, 2012, 02:44:57 PM
http://www.usnews.com/news/blogs/washington-whispers/2012/02/02/dnc-turns-trumps-romney-endorsement-into-a-curse?s_cid=rss:washington-whispers:dnc-turns-trumps-romney-endorsement-into-a-curse (http://www.usnews.com/news/blogs/washington-whispers/2012/02/02/dnc-turns-trumps-romney-endorsement-into-a-curse?s_cid=rss:washington-whispers:dnc-turns-trumps-romney-endorsement-into-a-curse)
DNC Turns Trump's Romney Endorsement Into a Curse
Run DNC! Let's elect a "less cumbersome" government!
(http://demotivators.despair.com/tshirts/thedestructortshirt.gif)
(http://www.usnews.com/usnews/php/galleries/image.php/450/8/8.jpg)
Flavor of the weak. He won three popularity contests which don't award any delegates. What is the point of caucuses like that which don't award delegates in the first place? Seems like a total waste of time.
I keep edging closer to removing that (R) after my last name, how about you Townsend?
Quote from: Conan71 on February 10, 2012, 02:40:33 PM
Flavor of the weak. He won three popularity contests which don't award any delegates. What is the point of caucuses like that which don't award delegates in the first place? Seems like a total waste of time.
I keep edging closer to removing that (R) after my last name, how about you Townsend?
It's on mute.
I understand they didn't want to bring out any big guns in a mid-term but damn. Get a good strong social moderate or they're going to keep having people listen to Trump and Palin.
Democrats are more fun.
I heard a comedian once say, "I am a conservative because I want to keep my money, but I am a liberal because I want to spend it on drugs and whores."
Quote from: RecycleMichael on February 10, 2012, 05:57:31 PM
I heard a comedian once say, "I am a conservative because I want to keep my money, but I am a liberal because I want to spend it on drugs and whores."
"It has been said that politics is the second oldest profession. I have learned that it bears a striking resemblance to the first."
Reagan.
It's the confusion of the Democrat party - chaos is always more interesting.
Americans Increasingly Uneasy When Politicians Talk Religion
Well that could be good news.
http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/religion/god-in-america/americans-increasingly-uneasy-when-politicians-talk-religion/ (http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/religion/god-in-america/americans-increasingly-uneasy-when-politicians-talk-religion/)
QuoteA growing number of Americans are uneasy with the amount of religious talk they're hearing from politicians, according to a new poll released by the Pew Research Center yesterday.
Thirty-eight percent of respondents said that there has been too much expression of religious faith and prayer from political leaders — the highest number since Pew began asking the question in 2001. Thirty percent of respondents said there is too little.
The numbers have nearly reversed since Pew last asked the question two years ago, when 37 percent said there was too little religious expression by politicians, while 29 percent said there was too much.
The poll was taken in early March, in the midst of the furor over a federal mandate that insurance companies provide free birth control. A number of religious groups, most prominently the Catholic Conference of Bishops, argued that the move was tantamount to an assault on religious freedom.
Of course, there's nothing new about the debate over the appropriate role of religion in politics and public life, as FRONTLINE and AMERICAN EXPERIENCE explored two years ago, in our joint series God in America. Since the days when the Puritan "city on a hill" beckoned on the horizon of the New World, religious faith and belief have forged America's ideals, molded its identity and shaped its sense of mission at home and abroad — but not without controversy.
The series — which you can watch in full here — examines how religious dissidents helped shape the American concept of religious liberty and the controversial evolution of that ideal in the nation's courts and political arena; how religious freedom and waves of new immigrants and religious revivals fueled competition in the religious marketplace; how movements for social reform — from abolition to civil rights — galvanized men and women to put their faith into political action; and how religious faith influenced conflicts from the American Revolution to the Cold War.
In the absence of real ideas or solutions, it's always been man's nature to turn to religion. We must be out of ideas again.
Quote from: Conan71 on March 23, 2012, 10:57:52 AM
In the absence of real ideas or solutions, it's always been man's nature to turn to religion. We must be out of ideas again.
Have been for a long time.
And I submit making the US into a theocracy is no idea at all.
Quote from: heironymouspasparagus on March 23, 2012, 12:40:36 PM
Have been for a long time.
And I submit making the US into a theocracy is no idea at all.
Boy, that's no smile. The people who think that is a good idea scare me.
Quote from: Conan71 on March 23, 2012, 12:41:32 PM
Boy, that's no smile. The people who think that is a good idea scare me.
Me, too!
Quote from: Conan71 on March 23, 2012, 12:41:32 PM
Boy, that's no smile. The people who think that is a good idea scare me.
Thankfully, I think that's something that the vast majority of us TNFers agree with.
Quote from: nathanm on March 23, 2012, 03:46:16 PM
Thankfully, I think that's something that the vast majority of us TNFers agree with.
unfortunately I think that is something that the vast majority of Oklahomans disagree with
Quote from: custosnox on March 24, 2012, 11:37:22 AM
unfortunately I think that is something that the vast majority of Oklahomans disagree with
I think you are correct there. One has to be very careful in making remarks regarding the separation of church and state at the workplace. There are lots of people who think they are doing God's work to thin out the herd of secular humanism by any means possible. I faced that 25 years ago when I mentioned to a group of co-workers that I didn't think outward displays of religion had any reason to be a part of our sales force workplace. When pressed I also admitted that I thought religion and government should be separated as well. A day later I was in front of my supervisor answering why I had been accused of discrimination against a female on my staff based on her religion and sex. Of course it went nowhere but she was willing to try. I didn't know anything about her faith and had little interest in her sex.
It was an awakening to me.
Quote from: AquaMan on March 24, 2012, 01:10:52 PM
I think you are correct there. One has to be very careful in making remarks regarding the separation of church and state at the workplace. There are lots of people who think they are doing God's work to thin out the herd of secular humanism by any means possible. I faced that 25 years ago when I mentioned to a group of co-workers that I didn't think outward displays of religion had any reason to be a part of our sales force workplace. When pressed I also admitted that I thought religion and government should be separated as well. A day later I was in front of my supervisor answering why I had been accused of discrimination against a female on my staff based on her religion and sex. Of course it went nowhere but she was willing to try. I didn't know anything about her faith and had little interest in her sex.
It was an awakening to me.
Another reason why I would not really want to move back to OK for a job.
Newt Gingrich loses his print reporters
http://www.politico.com/blogs/media/2012/03/newt-gingrich-loses-his-print-reporters-118712.html (http://www.politico.com/blogs/media/2012/03/newt-gingrich-loses-his-print-reporters-118712.html)
QuoteNewt Gingrich has lost his last embedded print reporters, reporters on the trail confirm.
The last two print reporters covering Gingrich full-time on the trail -- from POLITICO and the Atlanta Journal Constitution -- pulled out on Friday. The Associated Press pulled its embed after Tuesday's Illinois primary.
These and other print outlets will continue to cover Gingrich on occasion, but the sustained traveling press has been reduced to the television networks.
On the bright side, he's still fairing better than Ron Paul.
Obama on hot mic: 'After my election, I have more flexibility'
Per local fox tweet GHW Bush is endorsing Romney.
Quote from: Townsend on March 28, 2012, 12:18:34 PM
Per local fox tweet GHW Bush is endorsing Romney.
Provda is not.
http://english.pravda.ru/opinion/columnists/28-03-2012/120921-mitt_romney-0/
Per an NPR report this morning. Romney is "mopping up". Santorum apparently said he'd be happy to be the VP.
Think he'll be the new Palin?
Quote from: Townsend on March 30, 2012, 10:50:13 AM
Per an NPR report this morning. Romney is "mopping up". Santorum apparently said he'd be happy to be the VP.
Think he'll be the new Palin?
Nah, he's not near as hot as Palin.
Romney would be making a grave mistake picking Santorum for Veep.
He doesn't need Santorum to woo the far right and Tea Partyists. They will vote against Obama regardless who the opponent is, unless it were a Democrat/Democrat race. He would also lose quite a few moderate votes and undecided IND's who have a problem with Santorum's vision for a theocracy.
History repeats itself as in the D' convention of 1948 when Truman walked out on the stage and told the delegates he was their candidate for president.
So it will be in the D' caucus meeting as the sitting president will have a 2nd term.
(http://media.npr.org/assets/img/2012/04/10/bagley_4-10_12r_custom.jpg?t=1334081614&s=4)
Quote from: Conan71 on March 30, 2012, 11:36:21 AM
He doesn't need Santorum to woo the far right and Tea Partyists. They will vote against Obama regardless who the opponent is, unless it were a Democrat/Democrat race. He would also lose quite a few moderate votes and undecided IND's who have a problem with Santorum's vision for a theocracy.
If he doesn't kowtow to the far right and he loses, it may split the Republican party.
Quote from: nathanm on April 11, 2012, 03:32:56 PM
If he doesn't kowtow to the far right and he loses, it may split the Republican party.
I'm not sure I see that as a bad thing.
Quote from: Conan71 on April 11, 2012, 03:35:11 PM
I'm not sure I see that as a bad thing.
I'm not sure why I see that as a bad thing, now that you mention it. ;)
Quote from: nathanm on April 11, 2012, 03:54:41 PM
I'm not sure why I see that as a bad thing, now that you mention it. ;)
It must be allergies.
Quote from: Red Arrow on April 11, 2012, 06:01:07 PM
It must be allergies.
Don't get me started on another pseudoephedrine rant.
Quote from: Conan71 on March 30, 2012, 11:36:21 AM
Nah, he's not near as hot as Palin.
Geez, Conan,....no, no, no! I missed this the first time around! Tina Fey, hot! Palin, NOT!
Mental bleach moment...
Quote from: nathanm on April 11, 2012, 03:54:41 PM
I'm not sure why I see that as a bad thing, now that you mention it. ;)
The internal pressures on the Republicans seems to be building to take back the party from the reactionary extremist hijackers - the Right Wing American Al-Quaeda - RWAA. It's about time. Actually, way past time. Let this usurpers go start their own lunatic fringe party, since that is what they want/are. This could be good. (Plus, we got a really good new FLA - four letter acronym!)
Who's willing to put money on this?
Fallin's name floated for vice president on Romney ticket.
http://www.tulsaworld.com/news/article.aspx?subjectid=262&articleid=20120418_262_0_GovMar725609 (http://www.tulsaworld.com/news/article.aspx?subjectid=262&articleid=20120418_262_0_GovMar725609)
QuoteGov. Mary Fallin would make a great vice presidential candidate for Republican presidential frontrunner Mitt Romney, the head of the Oklahoma Republican Party said Wednesday.
Fallin's name was floated as a possible vice president candidate on ABC's "Good Morning America" Wednesday morning.
"I think she'd make a fantastic vice presidential pick," said Oklahoma Republican Party Chairman Matt Pinnell.
Oklahoma's strong economy and Fallin's strong leadership as governor make her a good candidate for the position, Pinnell said.
On Wednesday, Jonathan Karl, senior political correspondent for ABC News, floated Fallin's name as an outside contender to be Romney's vice presidential nominee.
Karl listed Ohio Sen. Rob Portman, Florida Sen. Marco Rubio, and former Florida Gov. Jeb Bush as the top contenders and said the "second tier" includes New Jersey Gov. Chris Christie, Indiana Gov. Mitch Daniels and Virginia Gov. Bob McDonnell.
With Romney seeking to overcome a "gender gap" in female support, Karl listed four possible female candidates including Fallin, New Hampshire Sen. Kelly Ayotte, South Carolina Gov. Nikki Haley and New Mexico Gov. Susana Martinez.
Oklahoma Auditor and Inspector Gary Jones, a co-chairman of the Romney campaign in Oklahoma, pointed out that Fallin's Washington experience also makes her a good potential vice presidential candidate.
Before she was elected governor, Fallin represented Oklahoma's 5th Congressional District 2006-10.
Read more from this Tulsa World article at http://www.tulsaworld.com/news/article.aspx?subjectid=262&articleid=20120418_262_0_GovMar725609
She'd a been a perfect veep for Newt.....a head in lap gal. :D
Quote from: Teatownclown on April 18, 2012, 01:12:36 PM
She'd a been a perfect veep for Newt.....a head in lap gal. :D
I'm throwing a yellow card for implanting that image on my brain.
(http://images.thetruthaboutcars.com/2011/08/Yellow-card.jpg)
Quote from: Townsend on April 18, 2012, 01:07:31 PM
Who's willing to put money on this?
Fallin's name floated for vice president on Romney ticket.
http://www.tulsaworld.com/news/article.aspx?subjectid=262&articleid=20120418_262_0_GovMar725609 (http://www.tulsaworld.com/news/article.aspx?subjectid=262&articleid=20120418_262_0_GovMar725609)
I'm surprised she'd be vetted past the OHP allegations...
Quote from: Hoss on April 18, 2012, 02:11:36 PM
I'm surprised she'd be vetted past the OHP allegations...
Palin got through.
AP tweet:
BREAKING: AP sources: Gingrich to suspend presidential bid Tuesday, exit GOP race to pave way for Romney
Quote from: Townsend on April 25, 2012, 10:44:33 AM
AP tweet:
BREAKING: AP sources: Gingrich to suspend presidential bid Tuesday, exit GOP race to pave way for Romney
And how far in debt?
Quote from: Conan71 on April 25, 2012, 10:50:16 AM
And how far in debt?
His wife is in "meetings" with the Secret Service as we speak.
The $50 dollar pic with didn't work ?
The GOP VP pick is going to be Rubio. At this point, I'd put money on it.
Quote from: we vs us on April 26, 2012, 09:01:18 AM
The GOP VP pick is going to be Rubio. At this point, I'd put money on it.
Yeah, but you are no longer here so we can collect on it ;)
How's life in Kentucky, Wev?
Quote from: Conan71 on April 26, 2012, 09:24:19 AM
Yeah, but you are no longer here so we can collect on it ;)
How's life in Kentucky, Wev?
Rats! I've been outed!
Good so far, though there's no one to argue politics with here. Or at least, no one I know ;)
I thought I felt a diminution in the force recently. Now I know. The collective IQ of Oklahoma just dropped (continued dropping) while Kentucky shows gains.
Quote from: AquaMan on April 26, 2012, 10:08:46 AM
I thought I felt a diminution in the force recently. Now I know. The collective IQ of Oklahoma just dropped (continued dropping) while Kentucky shows gains.
"You are now entering Kentucky.
Set your clock back 60 years."
Quote from: Conan71 on April 26, 2012, 10:34:12 AM
"You are now entering Kentucky.
Set your clock back 60 years."
I'd have to argue that since he's coming from Oklahoma.
Quote from: we vs us on April 26, 2012, 09:01:18 AM
The GOP VP pick is going to be Rubio. At this point, I'd put money on it.
That would be great....you can see my Rubio placement in the teleprompter thread....how come you guys are so one sided you can't even see the irony in Markies idiocy? Rubio should have just written it on his hand like snooki Palin does. There, problem solved.
"I left the last page of my speech...does anybody have a copy of my speech?" Marco "late to the party" Rubio
He can't rate.
Good news. Ol' what's-er-face is speaking for Romney.
Bachmann: Romney will have an 'open ear' to conservatives
http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/2012/04/26/bachmann-romney-will-have-an-open-ear-to-conservatives/ (http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/2012/04/26/bachmann-romney-will-have-an-open-ear-to-conservatives/)
QuoteWashington (CNN) - Minnesota Rep. Michele Bachmann has yet to formally endorse Mitt Romney's presidential bid, but she said Thursday that it's only a matter of time.
"I haven't come out with an endorsement, but I have said that I want my voice to be a voice of unity and that's my goal," Bachmann said during an afternoon appearance on Mike Huckabee's radio show. "It appears that our nominee is Mitt Romney and I will get behind that nominee."
For several months last year during her presidential bid, Bachmann was the standard-bearer for the grassroots wing of the Republican Party that was skeptical of Romney and his establishment leanings, if not completely opposed.
But Bachmann said the choice between Romney and President Barack Obama is a no-brainer for conservatives.
"I will pull in and help to unify our party," Bachmann said. "This is it. We have got to come together. Because this is the year when we make Barack Obama a one-term president."
Bachmann expressed confidence that conservatives, including tea party activists and Evangelical Christians, will have an ally in the Oval Office if Romney wins in November.
"We will see an open ear from Mitt Romney," Bachmann said. "So far, he has proved to be a person who listens. That's what we need, a nominee who listens."
Is it me or does it seem as though there's a considerable drop in election news lately?
I understand it's down to two in the ring but I'd've thought Romney's folks would be doing anything they could to keep him in the cycle.
I've seen more about Gingrich over the last few days.
Quote from: Townsend on May 02, 2012, 02:04:46 PM
Is it me or does it seem as though there's a considerable drop in election news lately?
I understand it's down to two in the ring but I'd've thought Romney's folks would be doing anything they could to keep him in the cycle.
I've seen more about Gingrich over the last few days.
There's really not much to report until we get closer to the conventions. We can expect three months of:
"Mitt Romney hurled barbs at President Obama today during a stump speech in Pocatello, Idaho"
"President Obama defended his record on private sector jobs today during a campaign stop in Detroit."
And so it goes.
Quote from: Conan71 on May 02, 2012, 02:09:33 PM
There's really not much to report until we get closer to the conventions. We can expect three months of:
"Mitt Romney hurled barbs at President Obama today during a stump speech in Pocatello, Idaho"
"President Obama defended his record on private sector jobs today during a campaign stop in Detroit."
And so it goes.
Need a good presidential slap fight.
(https://encrypted-tbn2.google.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcSZ8E2IuwVlP_NJCm9N7q3az59fQLFX_9TkUnDzjnURdjeKJjvj)
TWO MEN ENTER. ONE MAN LEAVES.
What a small World we live in. He's in Afghanistan one day and Detroit the next.
I wonder if he can tell the differance ?
Quote from: DolfanBob on May 02, 2012, 02:15:06 PM
What a small World we live in. He's in Afghanistan one day and Detroit the next.
I wonder if he can tell the differance ?
Sound stages like the moon landing and Reykjavik.
Quote from: DolfanBob on May 02, 2012, 02:15:06 PM
What a small World we live in. He's in Afghanistan one day and Detroit the next.
I wonder if he can tell the differance ?
Doubtful. Hard to tell the difference in these photos.
(http://www.detroityes.com/images/indexMain_hudsonwallfall.jpg)
(http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3067/3297970742_b8f5148317.jpg)
(http://sitemaker.umich.edu/pgcgrantawards/files/13_detroit_04.jpg)
(http://cdn.theatlanticcities.com/img/upload/2012/01/11/CapitalGatewayBefore.jpg)
Quote from: DolfanBob on May 02, 2012, 02:15:06 PM
What a small World we live in. He's in Afghanistan one day and Detroit the next.
I wonder if he can tell the differance ?
Actually, they just figured. . .while he was campaigning in Afghanistan they could also fake a campaign stop in "Detroit." All they had to do was change the camera angle a little and throw up a GM sign.
Quote from: Gaspar on May 02, 2012, 02:35:20 PM
Actually, they just figured. . .while he was campaigning in Afghanistan they could also fake a campaign stop in "Detroit." All they had to do was change the camera angle a little and throw up a GM sign.
They, of course, were forced to take some UAW reps with them.
Quote from: Townsend on May 02, 2012, 02:37:24 PM
They, of course, were forced to take some UAW reps with them.
Oh no, not the "they" again.
Quote from: Conan71 on May 02, 2012, 02:40:40 PM
Oh no, not the "they" again.
Rat bastards are everywhere. Look in your soup.
You know that you can buy a house in Detroit for 300 Dollars ?
Well except for that little problem of not being able to live in it.
Quote from: DolfanBob on May 02, 2012, 03:31:15 PM
You know that you can buy a house in Detroit for 300 Dollars ?
Well except for that little problem of not being able to live in it.
The city will actually give you a house for free if you have the funds to make it habitable and pay the property tax. That's what 50 years of neglect for the school system and bad school policy focusing on punishment gets you. I've been talking with some folks who shared some very inspiring stories about turning whole neighborhoods around simply by taking the abuse and punishment out of elementary school and instead supporting the kids like they should be supported at home, but aren't. Within a few years gang violence was on the wane because the gangs weren't getting new recruits. Freakin' amazing.
One of these days I'm going to see if anybody has done studies on these schools to figure out precisely what it was that made the difference.
Obama about to get "swiftboated"?
Quote"We're looking to [put together] a coalition, to field SEALs and operators that want to come out publicly," executive director of Veterans for a Strong America, Joel Arends, tells BuzzFeed. "I've had a lot of discussions with former SEALs and current SEALs. I've been talking to operators in the community. There is palatable discontent."
Arends, a 35-year old Iraq war veteran who has spent the last six years in conservative activist circles, started the group last fall during the Republican primaries.
The group has already done events with former Republican presidential contenders Rick Perry, Newt Gingrich and Michelle Bachmann. "The Romney campaign didn't return our calls," says Arends, adding, "we'd be more than willing to sit down [with the governor.]"
Previously, Arends worked as a field director for Americans for Prosperity and Veterans for Freedom, two other conservative political organizations.
http://www.buzzfeed.com/mhastings/conservative-activist-more-navy-seals-to-attack-o
In case you want to watch the ad:
While I am sure it must irk the members of Seal Team 6, they are not the ones who ordered the raid. Only the Commander In Chief can order such a mission.
It's funny to watch conservatives get their panties in a bunch over this. They sure took the bait as I am sure the White House planned to open this debate.
If they were smart, they would quickly acknowledged POTUS OBAMA made a gutsy call and move on. By over reacting, they have simply kept the story in the news and exposed Romney as a flip-floper (It's not worth spending billions to get one man'. 'I would not violate the sovereignty of our ally', yada, yada, yada).
But good luck if they think criticizing President Obama over the Bin Ladan raid will buy them any votes in November.
Irk the SEAL Team? Why should they be irked? After all, ordering the SEAL Team into battle is far more dangerous than actually on the ground risking your life...
Quote from: guido911 on May 03, 2012, 09:02:02 PM
Irk the SEAL Team? Why should they be irked? After all, ordering the SEAL Team into battle is far more dangerous than actually on the ground risking your life...
Here we go. ::)
Quote from: guido911 on May 03, 2012, 06:52:33 PM
Obama about to get "swiftboated"?
All the lies worked before, so why wouldn't it work again?
But of course, the reality IS that he DID give the order to have something done after less than 3 years that Bush didn't give the order to do for 7 years. Pesky little things like facts just gum up the works so bad....
Quote from: heironymouspasparagus on May 07, 2012, 07:51:03 PM
All the lies worked before, so why wouldn't it work again?
But of course, the reality IS that he DID give the order to have something done after less than 3 years that Bush didn't give the order to do for 7 years. Pesky little things like facts just gum up the works so bad....
Bush didn't give the order to kill bin Laden? Care to cite to that pesky fact? Because all I remember was the "Wild West/Cowboy" bed wetting over this clip:
Now, you mentioned "lies". Where is the lie in this passage, which I think what the upcoming "swiftboating" will focus?
QuoteMr. Obama also took advantage of a news conference to trumpet his personal role and imply that his Republican opponent, who in 2008 expressed reservations about the wisdom of sending troops into Pakistan, would have allowed bin Laden to live. "I said that I'd go after bin Laden if we had a clear shot at him, and I did"' said Obama. "If there are others who have said one thing and now suggest they'd do something else, then I'd go ahead and let them explain it."
Ryan Zinke, who spent 23 years as a SEAL and led a SEAL Team 6 assault unit, is now a Republican state senator in Montana. He noted, "The decision was a no-brainer. I applaud him for making it, but I would not overly pat myself on the back for making the right call. I think every president would have done the same. He is justified in saying it was his decision but the preparation, the sacrifice – it was a broader team effort. The President and his administration are positioning him as a war president using the SEALs as ammunition. It was predictable."
But it isn't just his political opponents criticizing the president this time. Arianna Huffington, an vocal liberal who heads the left-leaning Huffington Post website, soundly condemned the ad. She told CBS: 'We should celebrate the fact that they did such a great job. It's one thing to have an NBC special from the Situation Room... all that to me is perfectly legitimate, but to turn it into a campaign ad is one of the most despicable things you can do."
One serving SEAL Team member said: "Obama wasn't in the field, at risk, carrying a gun. As president, at every turn, he should be thanking the guys who put their lives on the line to do this. He does so in his official speeches because his speechwriters are smart. But the more he tries to take the credit for it, the more the ground operators are saying, 'Come on, man!' It really didn't matter who was president. At the end of the day, they were going to go."
http://www.offthegridnews.com/2012/05/01/navy-seals-angry-at-obamas-use-of-their-efforts-for-political-gain/
Romney's badassedness finally documented:
http://www.buzzfeed.com/andrewkaczynski/mitt-romney-was-arrest-for-disorderly-conduct-in-1
At least he didn't rape and murder a young girl in 1990. ;)
Quote from: guido911 on May 07, 2012, 08:12:17 PM
Bush didn't give the order to kill bin Laden? Care to cite to that pesky fact?
Now, you mentioned "lies". Where is the lie in this passage, which I think what the upcoming "swiftboating" will focus?
Because it didn't happen. You can't honestly believe that the entire US military, including the SEALS are so incompetent that they couldn't accomplish that mission if so directed? It took how long to ferret out Saddam Hussein? Come on guido, you know how "back room dealings" work - you're a lawyer, for crying out loud! You do remember that pesky little fact of the hundreds of millions of dollars or so that the Bin Laden family has paid to members of the Bush family over the years for consulting?
Notice the glittering generalities he talks about in that clip. ...end the war... poster says dead or alive...people looking for him....
Why would he not just go ahead and take that one little extra step and say, "get him". Vested interest maybe?
Lies - that was the "stock-in-trade" of the Swift Boat veterans. You remember them...
Quote from: heironymouspasparagus on May 07, 2012, 09:09:03 PM
Come on guido, you know how "back room dealings" work - you're a lawyer, for crying out loud! You do remember that pesky little fact of the hundreds of millions of dollars or so that the Bin Laden family has paid to members of the Bush family over the years for consulting?
You had me going there. Good one.
Ha! Any president would have done it. But only one did.
You would think by listening to some Seals that leadership is unnecessary. That a good orchestra doesn't need a director. Well, good luck with that.
The swiftboat philosophy has been in concert with the Republican philosophy since Gingrich. Find their strength and turn it into a deficit even if you have to lie and misrepresent to do so. Unfortunately they can't lie fast enough or loud enough because the populace is wising up to the tactic.
Quote from: guido911 on May 07, 2012, 10:40:53 PM
You had me going there. Good one.
And how hard it was to shut down the Bush family bank in WWII that was financing the Nazi's... took until 1943 for Roosevelt to get it to happen.
You sound skeptical - just like that Iranian leader - Amadinnerjacket - denying the holocaust ever happened...you are probably a denier of the Bush brother who cleaned up in the Savings and Loan collapse, too.
I guess you really are much younger than I thought. Or a strong believer in and user of blinders.
If you could follow all the contortions of BCCI - well, that wouldn't fit The Script very well - but the connections to Daddy Bush, Manuel Noriega, Bin Ladens, and a cast of thousands... would all make sense to you and give you a sense of history obviously missing, or being ignored.
Why is she staying? GoWAN-GIT
http://news.yahoo.com/blogs/ticket/michele-bachmann-becomes-swiss-citizen-054706406.html (http://news.yahoo.com/blogs/ticket/michele-bachmann-becomes-swiss-citizen-054706406.html)
Michele Bachmann becomes a Swiss citizen
And we follow up with a Bachmann "DOH".
When she Flip Flops...she goes balls to the wall.
Michele Bachmann renounces Swiss citizenship
Quote
Rep. Michele Bachmann (R-Minn) asked the Swiss government Thursday to withdraw her Swiss citizenship, saying she wanted to make it clear that she was a proud U.S. citizen.
"Today I sent a letter to the Swiss Consulate requesting withdrawal of my dual Swiss citizenship, which was conferred upon me by operation of Swiss law when I married my husband in 1978," said Bachmann in a statement.
"I took this action because I want to make it perfectly clear: I was born in America and I am a proud American citizen. I am, and always have been, 100 percent committed to our United States Constitution and the United States of America. As the daughter of an Air Force veteran, stepdaughter of an Army veteran and sister of a Navy veteran, I am proud of my allegiance to the greatest nation the world has ever known," she added.
POLITICO first reported on Tuesday she was granted Swiss citizenship on March 19
Read more: http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0512/76175.html#ixzz1uV1ga4N7
Quote from: Townsend on May 10, 2012, 03:09:41 PM
And we follow up with a Bachmann "DOH".
When she Flip Flops...she goes balls to the wall.
Michele Bachmann renounces Swiss citizenship
Wondering if some Swiss bank accounts were drained just prior.
I just don't believe her. Send the drones over, she's hiding something. Shouldn't she be producing that marriage certificate and her birth certificate as well?
Quote from: AquaMan on May 10, 2012, 06:12:05 PM
I just don't believe her. Send the drones over, she's hiding something. Shouldn't she be producing that marriage certificate and her birth certificate as well?
Shouldn't she be put on a "no fly" since she's from a country known to harbor terrorists?
Quote from: Townsend on May 11, 2012, 10:00:25 AM
Shouldn't she be put on a "no fly" since she's from a country known to harbor terrorists?
And of course this coming from a person who thought the media should do a 'penetrating' investigation to see if members of Congress were "Anti-American".
FAIL.
Apparently it's the little things that will decide this election:
http://slatest.slate.com/posts/2012/06/07/romney_s_regan_typo_spelling_error_is_the_latest_in_a_series_for_the_campaign.html (http://slatest.slate.com/posts/2012/06/07/romney_s_regan_typo_spelling_error_is_the_latest_in_a_series_for_the_campaign.html)
Romney Team's Latest Spelling Mistake: Ronald Reagan
QuoteFirst "Amercia," then "sneak-peak," and now "Ronald Regan." No wonder the Romney campaign is searching for a copywriter. (Required skill: "Ability to edit and proof own work.")
Buzzfeed spotted the latest spelling error from the Romney team on Wednesday after taking a look at a slideshow the campaign's pollsters put together for bundlers, and the rest of the Web appears to have taken notice. (The Gipper's last name is spelled Reagan.) Among the international outlets currently running the story: Britain's Telegraph, Canada's Star and Ireland's Independent.
The typo was in a chart showing the approval ratings of incumbent presidents in the May before their re-election attempt. "Ronald Regan" was noted as having a 53 percent approval rating. (For the record, Obama's was 47 percent, according to the chart).
The mistake is the fourth recent spelling error of note for the campaign, and given how often Reagan was name-dropped during the primary season, this one probably stings a good deal more than the campaign's more innocuous typos:"offical" and "sneak-peak." The "Amercia" slip, however, was on a smartphone app that couldn't be easily corrected, so it probably remains the campaign's most embarrassing (and we offer that analysis from our seats in a glass house, where we know a thing or two about typo regret).
Don't hug the President. It could have dire consequences.
http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-503544_162-57467834-503544/restaurant-owner-dies-shortly-after-meeting-obama/ (http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-503544_162-57467834-503544/restaurant-owner-dies-shortly-after-meeting-obama/)
Restaurant owner dies shortly after meeting Obama
QuoteJosephine "Ann" Harris, the owner of "Ann's Place" restaurant in Akron, Ohio, died of an apparent heart attack hours after meeting President Obama this morning, the Akron Beacon Journal reported.
Harris, 70, hugged the president when he visited her restaurant this morning as part of his "Betting on America" bus tour through Ohio and Pennsylvania. She was photographed alongside the president during his visit, as you can see below. (Harris is in the center.)
Harris' sister Frankie Adkins told the newspaper that Harris "loved Obama." Adkins said the visit would have been a "highlight" for Harris, who had reportedly been "ecstatic" about the president's visit when she spoke to a reporter Friday morning.
The Beacon Journal has two photographs of Harris from the time of Mr. Obama's visit here. Mr. Obama stopped into the restaurant and had breakfast with three Goodyear Tire employees around 8:30 a.m.; Harris was reportedly pronounced dead at 11:18 a.m.
A campaign official tells CBS News that the White House will comment soon on Harris' death.
(http://i.i.com.com/cnwk.1d/i/tim/2012/07/06/obama_twitter.jpg)
Quote from: Townsend on July 06, 2012, 03:49:47 PM
Don't hug the President. It could have dire consequences.
http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-503544_162-57467834-503544/restaurant-owner-dies-shortly-after-meeting-obama/ (http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-503544_162-57467834-503544/restaurant-owner-dies-shortly-after-meeting-obama/)
Restaurant owner dies shortly after meeting Obama
(http://i.i.com.com/cnwk.1d/i/tim/2012/07/06/obama_twitter.jpg)
She didn't have access to healthcare. Obamacare was too late to cure her malady.
Quote from: Townsend on July 06, 2012, 03:49:47 PM
Don't hug the President. It could have dire consequences.
http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-503544_162-57467834-503544/restaurant-owner-dies-shortly-after-meeting-obama/ (http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-503544_162-57467834-503544/restaurant-owner-dies-shortly-after-meeting-obama/)
Restaurant owner dies shortly after meeting Obama
(http://i.i.com.com/cnwk.1d/i/tim/2012/07/06/obama_twitter.jpg)
I'm sure it was Bush's fault.
And I thought this was something:
Crying over Obamacare:
(http://thegatewaypundit.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/07/stephanie-miller-e1341542081876.jpg)
Was there more to it?
http://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2012/07/sobbing-ohio-woman-thanks-obama-for-obamatax/
Can anyone else lay claim to the term "Self Destruct" any better than MO representative Todd Akin?
Quote from: Townsend on August 20, 2012, 11:47:29 AM
Can anyone else lay claim to the term "Self Destruct" any better than MO representative Todd Akin?
Go easy on him. Obvioulsly, the "they" implanted a stupidity chip in him.
Quote from: Conan71 on August 20, 2012, 12:03:19 PM
Go easy on him. Obvioulsly, the "they" implanted a stupidity chip in him.
I think "they" put in two of them.
Quote from: Townsend on August 20, 2012, 12:21:04 PM
I think "they" put in two of them.
It may possibly be an entire series of chips. How else do you try and walk it back...twice...and then your own party starts asking you to step aside from the race?
I forget...is this the guy who swims naked in public areas?? Or the one who thinks raped women can't get pregnant??
Quote from: AquaMan on August 20, 2012, 12:55:15 PM
I forget...is this the guy who swims naked in public areas?? Or the one who thinks raped women can't get pregnant??
That.
One word. Flouride.
Apparently Akin's on the House Science and Technology Committee. That seems to be working out.
Claire McCaskill should borrow a line from the Sullivan campaign:
"That Todd Akin, he's got the stupid in him!"
Quote from: Conan71 on August 20, 2012, 02:41:15 PM
Claire McCaskill should borrow a line from the Sullivan campaign:
"That Todd Akin, he's got the stupid in him!"
Niiice!
Akin is ahead in the polls (before the comment). SurveyUSA polling from a week ago had him up 51 to 40 and Rasmussen from the same period had him up 47 to 43.
Can one stupid comment cost him the election?
New polling data should come out in a week...
Quote from: RecycleMichael on August 20, 2012, 02:55:13 PM
Akin is ahead in the polls (before the comment). SurveyUSA polling from a week ago had him up 51 to 40 and Rasmussen from the same period had him up 47 to 43.
Can one stupid comment cost him the election?
He's got his party backing away from him. Yes.
Quote from: Townsend on August 20, 2012, 03:02:14 PM
He's got his party backing away from him. Yes.
No, they aren't backing away, they are treating him like kryptonite.
Quote from: Conan71 on August 20, 2012, 03:05:54 PM
No, they aren't backing away, they are treating him like kryptonite.
Smeared in poo.
Quote from: RecycleMichael on August 20, 2012, 02:55:13 PM
Akin is ahead in the polls (before the comment). SurveyUSA polling from a week ago had him up 51 to 40 and Rasmussen from the same period had him up 47 to 43.
Can one stupid comment cost him the election?
New polling data should come out in a week...
Howard Dean would like to respond to this... "Yeeeeeaaaaahhhhhhh!!!!!!"
Quote from: JCnOwasso on August 20, 2012, 03:16:07 PM
Howard Dean would like to respond to this... "Yeeeeeaaaaahhhhhhh!!!!!!"
In an NPR interview he said he was attempting to say "booyah".
Didn't seem to work out too well for him.
He was bitter.
Quote from: RecycleMichael on August 20, 2012, 02:55:13 PM
Akin is ahead in the polls (before the comment). SurveyUSA polling from a week ago had him up 51 to 40 and Rasmussen from the same period had him up 47 to 43.
Can one stupid comment cost him the election?
New polling data should come out in a week...
One can only hope...
Missouri has just GOT to be so proud!!!
Quote from: RecycleMichael on August 20, 2012, 02:55:13 PM
Can one stupid comment cost him the election?
Looking to the past to answer this question, Nate Silver found that it generally costs about 10% when a politician says something so dramatically idiotic. Given that adjustment, I would say it there's a darn good chance it will indeed cost him the election, and a fair to middling chance it'll cost the Republicans control of the Senate.
Quote from: nathanm on August 20, 2012, 11:41:35 PM
Looking to the past to answer this question, Nate Silver found that it generally costs about 10% when a politician says something so dramatically idiotic. Given that adjustment, I would say it there's a darn good chance it will indeed cost him the election, and a fair to middling chance it'll cost the Republicans control of the Senate.
But on second thought....we keep electing Inhofe. And Keating was elected twice, in spite of his specific expressed desire to kill teachers... so, I guess we got no room to talk...
Quote from: heironymouspasparagus on August 20, 2012, 11:52:13 PM
But on second thought....we keep electing Inhofe. And Keating was elected twice, in spite of his specific expressed desire to kill teachers... so, I guess we got no room to talk...
As long as you want to bring that up...again, I'll bring up (again) that it's a shame that the Democrats cannot put up anyone better for election. (Or they would have been elected.)
Anyone else sending Sen. McCaskill a check today?
All I can say about Akin (or whatever his name is) is that there are certain things in every profession you can't do and expect to keep your job/get the job. Talking so far out of your arse as this guy did is one of them. I don't think the guy was evil or anything, just uninformed (or incorrectly informed according to him) and probably not ready for the big time yet. The pressure on these guys is enormous. Obviously even the most skilled have some pretty major gaffes from time to time, although this was pretty bad.
Quote from: erfalf on August 21, 2012, 09:13:57 AM
All I can say about Akin (or whatever his name is) is that there are certain things in every profession you can't do and expect to keep your job/get the job. Talking so far out of your arse as this guy did is one of them. I don't think the guy was evil or anything, just uninformed (or incorrectly informed according to him) and probably not ready for the big time yet. The pressure on these guys is enormous. Obviously even the most skilled have some pretty major gaffes from time to time, although this was pretty bad.
"Pretty bad"? He nuked himself and there's collateral damage spreading over his party.
But yeah, you're right. He stepped in it. Danced in it. Skinny dipped in it...
He's about to go on Huckabee to give his "final answer".
Who's got action?
He's staying in.
OK, so now that that's happening...what's next?
You think McCaskill is about to become famous?
I read something last night that said his answer is in line with far-right anti-abortion views. Their ideology trumps reasoning, but it goes something like this: A woman can't conceive if she's "legitimately" raped, as in it's a genuine sexual assault. If she becomes pregnant, it wasn't really a rape so she must have consented. And the child produced as a result shouldn't be aborted as a consequence of a sex act between consenting adults.
I gotta go wash my hands after typing that.
Quote from: Red Arrow on August 21, 2012, 07:42:51 AM
As long as you want to bring that up...again, I'll bring up (again) that it's a shame that the Democrats cannot put up anyone better for election. (Or they would have been elected.)
I agree.
And then they did, if election is the only criteria - Obama. Meh....
Quote from: Ed W on August 21, 2012, 03:57:42 PM
I read something last night that said his answer is in line with far-right anti-abortion views. Their ideology trumps reasoning, but it goes something like this: A woman can't conceive if she's "legitimately" raped, as in it's a genuine sexual assault. If she becomes pregnant, it wasn't really a rape so she must have consented. And the child produced as a result shouldn't be aborted as a consequence of a sex act between consenting adults.
I gotta go wash my hands after typing that.
Heard the same thing on NPR. Creepy as hell.
Quote from: erfalf on August 21, 2012, 09:13:57 AM
All I can say about Akin (or whatever his name is) is that there are certain things in every profession you can't do and expect to keep your job/get the job. Talking so far out of your arse as this guy did is one of them. I don't think the guy was evil or anything, just uninformed (or incorrectly informed according to him) and probably not ready for the big time yet. The pressure on these guys is enormous. Obviously even the most skilled have some pretty major gaffes from time to time, although this was pretty bad.
He is just as informed as any of the other Luddites who say that the earth is 6,000 years old. From around 1400 AD.
This is so much more than uninformed. This is negligently ignorant. This is a Sarah Palin thing - only worse.
The pressure is enormous?? What a rationalization and excuse....
Quote from: Townsend on August 21, 2012, 04:16:09 PM
Heard the same thing on NPR. Creepy as hell.
It's less the creepiness that gets to me than the deliberate choice to ignore reality.
Quote from: heironymouspasparagus on August 21, 2012, 04:13:06 PM
I agree.
And then they did, if election is the only criteria - Obama. Meh....
If election is the only criteria as you say, then there should be no complaints about Inhofe.....
Quote from: Red Arrow on August 21, 2012, 08:01:06 PM
If election is the only criteria as you say, then there should be no complaints about Inhofe.....
Inhofe's a lousy pilot, Red. That alone should be enough to bar him from office. Just sayin'.
Quote from: Ed W on August 21, 2012, 08:27:16 PM
Inhofe's a lousy pilot, Red. That alone should be enough to bar him from office. Just sayin'.
He's not a lousy pilot, he just thought X marked the spot! :o
Quote from: Ed W on August 21, 2012, 08:27:16 PM
Inhofe's a lousy pilot, Red. That alone should be enough to bar him from office. Just sayin'.
In some regards, he is excellent. Successfully landing a plane that lost it's propeller was not too shabby. The power out part is part of every pilot's training. The missing component and subsequent change in weight and balance could be more tricky. He's had a few other incidents (excluding landing at an airport with a closed runway) that would indicate flying skills above the quality of lousy. He has enough flying time that if he were truly lousy, you wouldn't be complaining about him still being a Senator. I might even forgive him for ground looping the Stearman years ago since it has those tendencies being a taildragger with relatively tall and narrow main gear.
Quote from: Red Arrow on August 21, 2012, 09:10:26 PM
In some regards, he is excellent. Successfully landing a plane that lost it's propeller was not too shabby. The power out part is part of every pilot's training. The missing component and subsequent change in weight and balance could be more tricky. He's had a few other incidents (excluding landing at an airport with a closed runway) that would indicate flying skills above the quality of lousy. He has enough flying time that if he were truly lousy, you wouldn't be complaining about him still being a Senator. I might even forgive him for ground looping the Stearman years ago since it has those tendencies being a taildragger with relatively tall and narrow main gear.
If it would have been you or me at that airport in Texas doing what he did, our paper would have been pulled. I admit some of his skills *were* good in the past, but the incident in Texas, then his subsequent evasion of the consequences a normal pilot would have received after that incident is what really left me sour on his current ability as a pilot. Let's not forget he's in his late 70s now.
Quote from: Hoss on August 21, 2012, 09:20:13 PM
If it would have been you or me at that airport in Texas doing what he did, our paper would have been pulled. I admit some of his skills *were* good in the past, but the incident in Texas, then his subsequent evasion of the consequences a normal pilot would have received after that incident is what really left me sour on his current ability as a pilot. Let's not forget he's in his late 70s now.
Some good came of it though. I saw Inhofe's bill to require access to FAA records to a pilot accused of an infraction was passed by Congress and Pres. Obama signed it.
Also, a few weeks ago I was out flying about and flew over Shawnee. I had checked the NOTAMS on an area check and didn't notice any runway closures. There was a big X at the south end of the runway but not at the north. Thinking of Inhofe's situation, I flew on by and rechecked the NOTAMs when I got home. It turns out that only the south portion of the runway was closed and I could have landed on the north part. There was construction equipment on the south part of the runway which I could have easily flown over in the Cessna but would I have been arrested if I did? The point is that it is not too hard to miss some details on the NOTAMs.
Quote from: Red Arrow on August 21, 2012, 09:36:25 PM
Some good came of it though. I saw Inhofe's bill to require access to FAA records to a pilot accused of an infraction was passed by Congress and Pres. Obama signed it.
Also, a few weeks ago I was out flying about and flew over Shawnee. I had checked the NOTAMS on an area check and didn't notice any runway closures. There was a big X at the south end of the runway but not at the north. Thinking of Inhofe's situation, I flew on by and rechecked the NOTAMs when I got home. It turns out that only the south portion of the runway was closed and I could have landed on the north part. There was construction equipment on the south part of the runway which I could have easily flown over in the Cessna but would I have been arrested if I did? The point is that it is not too hard to miss some details on the NOTAMs.
Even if Shawnee is non-controlled, isn't there still an FSS frequency you can call to verify while in flight? In absence of the NOTAMs? Or would you have to call the center (in your case that should be Fort Worth).
Quote from: Hoss on August 21, 2012, 09:45:13 PM
Even if Shawnee is non-controlled, isn't there still an FSS frequency you can call to verify while in flight? In absence of the NOTAMs? Or would you have to call the center (in your case that should be Fort Worth).
How often would you call FSS? Every 10 minutes? More often?
If a school zone speed limit starts after you enter the zone (the lights were not flashing when you entered the zone) you are still responsible to be only going the school speed limit. At least I have heard that.
Quote from: Red Arrow on August 21, 2012, 08:01:06 PM
If election is the only criteria as you say, then there should be no complaints about Inhofe.....
But since it is not the only criteria, there are plenty of complaints about Inhofe.
Quote from: Red Arrow on August 21, 2012, 09:48:53 PM
How often would you call FSS? Every 10 minutes? More often?
If a school zone speed limit starts after you enter the zone (the lights were not flashing when you entered the zone) you are still responsible to be only going the school speed limit. At least I have heard that.
Wow, what's up your rear these days? If you see something that you don't have a NOTAM on and need clarification, wouldn't you, as a responsible pilot, be remiss in NOT calling them?
I was simply asking a question because it's been over 8 years since I've been flying and one of the things I had heard was that many of the FSS stations (specifically the one in MLC) would be shutting down. I didn't know if it had happened or not. I actually took the tour in 2003 with my pilot friend when we flew down to MLC one day.
Sheesh. Lighten up Francis.
Quote from: heironymouspasparagus on August 21, 2012, 10:14:08 PM
But since it is not the only criteria, there are plenty of complaints about Inhofe.
And complaints about Obama.
Quote from: Hoss on August 21, 2012, 10:22:12 PM
I was simply asking a question because it's been over 8 years since I've been flying and one of the things I had heard was that many of the FSS stations (specifically the one in MLC) would be shutting down.
That was not the tone I read in your previous post, particularly regarding the posts before that. Yes, you can call FSS. There are often remote FSS facilities at VORs. Well, you can call on the radio unless you are flying something without a radio. My plane has one but there are still a bunch of puddle jumpers out in the country that don't. I know of several that operate out of RVS with just a handheld radio. A transponder is not
required at RVS but they do like it a lot more if you have one. I was getting the impression that you thought everyone should have a full Garmin glass cockpit.
The frequency of calling FSS and the school speed zone example were intended to show that just saying someone should know something can be taken to an extreme. Maybe you would have been less offended if I wrote "How often should
someone..." I was not singling you (as in you personally, Hoss) out.
You can lighten up too.
Quote from: Red Arrow on August 21, 2012, 10:40:07 PM
That was not the tone I read in your previous post, particularly regarding the posts before that. Yes, you can call FSS. There are often remote FSS facilities at VORs. Well, you can call on the radio unless you are flying something without a radio. My plane has one but there are still a bunch of puddle jumpers out in the country that don't. I know of several that operate out of RVS with just a handheld radio. A transponder is not required at RVS but they do like it a lot more if you have one. I was getting the impression that you thought everyone should have a full Garmin glass cockpit.
The frequency of calling FSS and the school speed zone example were intended to show that just saying someone should know something can be taken to an extreme. Maybe you would have been less offended if I wrote "How often should someone..." I was not singling you (as in you personally, Hoss) out.
You can lighten up too.
My apologies then.
I will admit sometimes that NOTAMS (as printed) can be a little like reading your physician's handwriting on a prescription. I get on airnav.com to see if I can decipher them sometimes. It's an art and frustrating at that...
Quote from: Red Arrow on August 21, 2012, 10:26:54 PM
And complaints about Obama.
Absolutely! Haven't you seen my complaints about Blobama?? Come on...if we are gonna have a discussion, you gotta read the posts. My complaints for him are NOT from the body of lies and BS the RWRE spew ad nauseum. And while I don't like Obama much, I don't like the lies on the extreme right, either. (Goes to my extreme moderate tendencies and inclinations.)
The fundamental liberties he wants to interfere with are my big bit$h with him. In particular, the 2nd Amendment. Way before his 2008 campaign, he made plenty of comments about gun ownership as being something to be interfered with in this country. Just because he has been quiet recently does not mean he has abandoned the quest - he is waiting for the opportune time. His associations with the groups dedicated to the removal of firearms in this country are at the very least indicators of an internal inclination.
I have very similar complaints about Baby Bush for his actions specifically related to the "Lack of Patriotism Act". He and the Congress were complicit in this 'grab' of personal liberties. They are all guilty as far as I am concerned. Also, why I go on so much about voting out incumbents pretty much no matter what.
Quote from: heironymouspasparagus on August 21, 2012, 10:48:06 PM
Absolutely! Haven't you seen my complaints about Blobama?? Come on...if we are gonna have a discussion, you gotta read the posts. My complaints for him are NOT from the body of lies and BS the RWRE spew ad nauseum. And while I don't like Obama much, I don't like the lies on the extreme right, either. (Goes to my extreme moderate tendencies and inclinations.)
The fundamental liberties he wants to interfere with are my big bit$h with him. In particular, the 2nd Amendment. Way before his 2008 campaign, he made plenty of comments about gun ownership as being something to be interfered with in this country. Just because he has been quiet recently does not mean he has abandoned the quest - he is waiting for the opportune time. His associations with the groups dedicated to the removal of firearms in this country are at the very least indicators of an internal inclination.
I have very similar complaints about Baby Bush for his actions specifically related to the "Lack of Patriotism Act". He and the Congress were complicit in this 'grab' of personal liberties. They are all guilty as far as I am concerned. Also, why I go on so much about voting out incumbents pretty much no matter what.
Gun ownership is about the only thing I remember you posting in disagreement with the left. Your constant harping about the RWRE is your personality as I perceive it from your posts. I have some major disagreements with Obama's method of obtaining what sometimes are reasonable goals when only examined at the highest level and the simplest definition. For example, I think pretty much everyone thinks the rich should pay more tax than the poor. Beyond that it all goes to he!!.
Quote from: Hoss on August 21, 2012, 10:42:30 PM
I will admit sometimes that NOTAMS (as printed) can be a little like reading your physician's handwriting on a prescription. I get on airnav.com to see if I can decipher them sometimes. It's an art and frustrating at that...
Have you ever tried to read a patent to make sure you are not violating it? It can be about like that. If all else fails call 800WxBrief for a personal briefing. I usually get someone out of DFW area but sometimes from other places. Some are familiar with the Tulsa area. Some are not. I think you need a medical to get a password to log on to DUATS.
Which tab are you using to get NOTAMS on Airnav? I didn't see them.
Quote from: Red Arrow on August 21, 2012, 11:02:00 PM
Have you ever tried to read a patent to make sure you are not violating it? It can be about like that. If all else fails call 800WxBrief for a personal briefing. I usually get someone out of DFW area but sometimes from other places. Some are familiar with the Tulsa area. Some are not. I think you need a medical to get a password to log on to DUATS.
Yes, you do need a medical. I no longer have one. My friend I think let his expire as he's no longer current. He was well off enough though that he had a pretty spiffy software package that could parse the data from DUATS and he could file flight plans via that software as well, although he always called FSS to verify they had it before we started the preflight inspection. Can't remember the name of the software offhand. I remember he was thrilled to use it when he finally got his instrument paper and he filed a full IFR flight plan from RVS to AMA and actually felt like it was worth it because for about 8 minutes we were 'in the soup'. So weird to be flying at altitudes that didn't end with '500'. :D
Quote from: Red Arrow on August 21, 2012, 11:02:00 PM
Which tab are you using to get NOTAMS on Airnav? I didn't see them.
Some of the general airport infos are bad enough. However I do see that you can get them here: https://pilotweb.nas.faa.gov/PilotWeb/
PIREPS can be nearly as bad when they're coded.
Quote from: Hoss on August 21, 2012, 11:06:32 PM
So weird to be flying at altitudes that didn't end with '500'. :D
You can avoid that by staying below 3000' AGL. I usually do unless I'm actually going somewhere.
My longest low level flight was in the early 80s with my dad going to Santa Fe, NM to pick up a plane for someone else. The headwinds up high were, shall we say brisk. I don't remember being above about 1500 AGL. Coming back a day later the winds were still there so up to 10,000 MSL we (now a flight of two) went. Of course that wasn't really all that high until we got over eastern NM and the TX panhandle. We stopped at Amarillo for the evening. There was a pretty good cross wind on the ground. AMA approach asked if we wanted to go to the other airport but we said no. As we got to the FBO, some ground personnel came out to hang on to the wing struts. I was glad to be in a tricycle gear plane that day.
Quote from: Red Arrow on August 21, 2012, 10:54:29 PM
Gun ownership is about the only thing I remember you posting in disagreement with the left. Your constant harping about the RWRE is your personality as I perceive it from your posts. I have some major disagreements with Obama's method of obtaining what sometimes are reasonable goals when only examined at the highest level and the simplest definition. For example, I think pretty much everyone thinks the rich should pay more tax than the poor. Beyond that it all goes to he!!.
I have explained about my apparent bias against the RWRE in the past - I reiterate...in recent times (last 30 years or so) they extremist right has been more effective at advancing their radical agenda. And it is done with a tapestry of lies, misdirection, and distortions. It has more adversely affected our personal freedoms (Patriot Act, etc) Continuous warfare for flimsy excuses and massive lies.
Throughout the late 60's and all the 70's, I have a friend who is LWRE (left wing reactionary extremist) who I had similar discussions with. From an apparent 'opposite' side. He was just as wrong as the RWRE is today. And even at the height of the heyday of left wing "hippie" types, they were never as effective as the RWRE has been. And for the most part, they just stated their beliefs/convictions/etc without lying about their rationalization. They were wrong, but they didn't try to lie about it to cover the reality of their wrongness.
I believe in a balanced budget except under exceptional conditions (like current economic times or warfare). And I keep wondering what happened to all the "balanced budget amendment" talk - another RWRE lie saying they supported such a thing.
Miscellaneous thoughts;
I believe in people working to get paid. Welfare as a safety net does not bother me all the much. Sitting around for that money does. If someone gets welfare, put them to work doing something. There are an unlimited number of opportunities to do some work to benefit the city/county/state/fed in exchange for that money. Anything from sweeping streets, to picking up trash along the highways, putting books in order at the library, painting the Civic Center, <insert a wide variety of things here>. No work - no money. These tasks can be scaled to the physical abilities of the people involved. Could even structure these things as career training opportunities. I could even see volunteer work for Salvation Army, Food Bank, John 3:16 or something like that as 'qualified' welfare work. Almost anything that gives some benefit to the society providing the money. Seems like I remember the art deco museum TheArtist has is a non-profit...his place could use some janitorial work, painting, etc, I suspect.
Quote from: heironymouspasparagus on August 21, 2012, 11:56:53 PM
I have explained about my apparent bias against the RWRE in the past - I reiterate...in recent times (last 30 years or so) they extremist right has been more effective at advancing their radical agenda. And it is done with a tapestry of lies, misdirection, and distortions. It has more adversely affected our personal freedoms (Patriot Act, etc) Continuous warfare for flimsy excuses and massive lies.
My evaluation of the last 30 years and conservative agendas is not as negative as yours. I won't claim everything has been peachy keen.
The Romney/Ryan team is sending naked pics of Prince Harry to all the news outlets talking about Akin.
I'm going to have to disagree with the "Akin = every Republican" thing I'm seeing.
Quote from: Townsend on August 22, 2012, 01:18:06 PM
I'm going to have to disagree with the "Akin = every Republican" thing I'm seeing.
It's more like Akin = every moron. Stupidity doesn't know political boundaries.
Quote from: Conan71 on August 22, 2012, 02:03:58 PM
It's more like Akin = every moron. Stupidity doesn't know political boundaries.
Completely agree. I always find the "studies" that try to equate stupidity with Republicans pretty comical. All I can say is that I hope things like this aren't getting public funding. Nothing spells progress like calling people that don't agree with you stupid in newer fancier ways.
Quote from: erfalf on August 22, 2012, 02:39:39 PM
Completely agree. I always find the "studies" that try to equate stupidity with Republicans pretty comical. All I can say is that I hope things like this aren't getting public funding. Nothing spells progress like calling people that don't agree with you stupid in newer fancier ways.
Actually, life is far better if you surround yourself with people who disagree with you. Not only do you get to experience new perspectives, but you also learn about the wisdom, intelligence and pathology behind those perspectives. Nothing makes me happier then when someone successfully makes me change my mind.
Quote from: Gaspar on August 22, 2012, 03:01:58 PM
Actually, life is far better if you surround yourself with people who disagree with you. Not only do you get to experience new perspectives, but you also learn about the wisdom, intelligence and pathology behind those perspectives. Nothing makes me happier then when someone successfully makes me change my mind.
(https://sphotos-a.xx.fbcdn.net/hphotos-ash3/558704_452227858145087_1310793646_n.jpg)
Quote from: Teatownclown on August 22, 2012, 04:06:13 PM
(https://sphotos-a.xx.fbcdn.net/hphotos-ash3/558704_452227858145087_1310793646_n.jpg)
I think that is definitely something that everyone here can agree on, Akin is an idiot!
As brain-dead as McCaskill is, she deserves to destroy him!
Quote from: Townsend on August 22, 2012, 01:18:06 PM
I'm going to have to disagree with the "Akin = every Republican" thing I'm seeing.
Akin isn't every Republican, but he is representative of a fair whack of the group of Republicans who rode the wave into the House in the 2010 elections. And Paul Ryan, who has said similarly troglodytish things, just not in front of as many cameras or quite so unabashedly stupid. This is what happens when you mix that certain brand of evangelical Christianity with that certain brand of Republicanism.
IIRC, the Republican platform this year is calling for a life begins at conception amendment with no exception for rape and incest. Presuming the plank doesn't get voted down at the convention, which I don't see as terribly likely unless the soil from this Akin thing manages to find its way onto other candidates in the next week.
What people don't realize is Akin won the primary with strong democratic backing in order to give Claire a fighting chance in the general election.
You may find similar setups across the country....BrideofStein?
Quote from: Teatownclown on August 22, 2012, 04:51:45 PM
What people don't realize is Akin won the primary with strong democratic backing in order to give Claire a fighting chance in the general election.
I've seen it asserted among the leftie types that all three Republican primary candidates hold pretty much the same views, it's just that Akin is dumb enough to share.
Quote from: Teatownclown on August 22, 2012, 04:51:45 PM
What people don't realize is Akin won the primary with strong democratic backing in order to give Claire a fighting chance in the general election.
You may find similar setups across the country....BrideofStein?
He was ushered in from nowhere by a very strong and powerful group of evangelical organizations in Missouri. Though he claims to support the Tea Party, he was not the Tea Party candidate, Sarah Steelman was. Once he was nominated, most of the Tea Party supporters threw their support behind him because he represented the only means to defeat McCaskill.
Missouri has a very strong Evangelical Christian base, so don't be surprised if he wins. Once that happens, because the Republican party won't clam him. He will be an independent, but will vote Republican and represent a pox on Senate. He should blend in just fine with the rest of the diseased minds there.
GOP Grassroots Furious at Romney Over Akin, Abortion Rape Exceptionhttp://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2012/08/23/gop-grassroots-furious-at-romney-over-akin-abortion-rape-exception.html (http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2012/08/23/gop-grassroots-furious-at-romney-over-akin-abortion-rape-exception.html)
QuoteJennifer Mason, the communications director of Personhood USA and wife of the group's cofounder Keith Mason, is very disappointed with the way Mitt Romney and Paul Ryan have responded to the Todd Akin flap. She's particularly incensed by the campaign's insistence that a Romney-Ryan administration wouldn't try to ban abortion for rape victims. "Romney and Ryan have turned their backs on the Republican Party platform in cases of rape," she says. "That's a huge problem."
Even since Akin introduced the phrase "legitimate rape" into the political lexicon, Republican leaders have been scrambling to distance themselves from him. Romney called on him to drop out of the race, and both the National Republican Senatorial Committee and American Crossroads, Karl Rove's super PAC, have said they won't support him financially. But the rush to reject Akin is infuriating the anti-abortion movement, which sees it as a further sign of Romney's weak commitment to social conservatism. "For goodness's sake, the guy won't defend a chicken sandwich, let alone his own Senate candidate," says conservative radio host Steve Deace, who recently co-wrote a book, We Won't Get Fooled Again: Where the Christian Right Went Wrong and How to Make America Right Again, arguing that social conservatives have been shafted by the GOP.
Akin is hoping he can capitalize on grassroots anger with Republican leadership. On Wednesday an appeal on his fundraising page for his Missouri Senate bid said: "Join us as we fight back against the party bosses. Help us raise $24,000 in 24 hours!" By late afternoon he'd exceeded that by several thousand dollars. A few minutes later the site set a new goal—$100,000 by midnight. On Thursday morning Akin announced that they beat it, with thousands of people donating.
To outsiders, the anti-abortion movement's disaffection with the Republican Party might seem odd. After all, in Ryan, Romney has chosen a running mate with a 100 percent lifetime voting record from the National Right to Life Committee—slightly better, as it happens, than Akin, who only scored 90 percent during one of his terms in Congress. As Mason mentioned, the 2012 GOP platform once again calls for prohibiting abortion without exception. Besides, aside from the American Family Association's ever-inflammatory Bryan Fischer, few in the anti-abortion movement are interested in defending Akin's ridiculous assertions about female reproductive biology.
Yet if there's one thing that pro-choice and anti-abortion activists agree on, it's that the Akin uproar isn't just about his suggestion that trauma prevents pregnancy. It's also about his desire to ban abortion even for rape victims. Many Republicans, including Ryan, share that position. But the Romney campaign, knowing how unpopular it is, badly wants to deflect attention from that fact, which is why there's such a concerted effort to shove Akin aside. Anti-abortion activists note, correctly, that while Republican leaders pander to them, they would prefer to do so without publicity. If Romney is embarrassed by Akin, it's partly because he's embarrassed by his own party's far-right base.
"We expect liberals to lie, spin, and twist, but why should conservatives wage a propaganda attack against a man holding the very position of the National Right to Life on rape-related abortion?" writes Joel McDurmon, the director of research at American Vision, a group devoted to creating "an America that recognizes the sovereignty of God over all of life." His answer: "Politicians like Akin, who represent the clear contrast and strong conservatism desired by the tea party, are a real threat to the old Northeastern establishment Republicans like Romney. And thus that establishment savages him—violently and in unison. Call it a political gang rape—a legitimate one."
There was a time when anti-abortion activists bowed to political expediency and enthusiastically backed candidates like George W. Bush, who supported rape exemptions to anti-abortion laws. But the rise of the Personhood movement, which seeks to legally define fertilized eggs as full human beings, has pushed the older, more incremental approach aside. At the same time, the advent of the Tea Party has convinced many conservative voters that they don't have to compromise; hence the string of Senate primaries, including Akin's, where far-right insurgents defeated more establishment candidates. In this new climate anything less than anti-abortion absolutism is unacceptable.
"The Romney-Ryan ticket putting out a statement on Monday that said, 'Hey, if you're raped, you can kill your kid if you want,' that went over like a fart in church," says Deace. Mason sees such a stance as worse in some ways than rejecting the idea of personhood altogether. "If you say that every child in the womb is a person, but it's OK to kill babies conceived in rape, that's a horrible position to take," she says. "It's almost worse than denying the personhood of those children. You're just denying their right to live."
It remains to be seen if anti-abortion donors can offset all the Republican money Akin is losing. Several major anti-abortion organizations are rallying around him, including the Family Research Council and the Susan B. Anthony List, as well as state-level groups like Missouri Right to Life, which said in a statement that it "supports Congressman Akin's defense of the life of an innocent unborn child conceived by rape." What this means in dollar terms, though, is unclear. A hundred thousand dollars in one day is a lot of money, but he'll need more than that to run a successful Senate campaign.
Mason, for one, wants to see him get it. "If he truly is a 100 percent pro-life candidate with no exceptions, with that stellar voting record we're looking for, I would hope that the pro-life and pro-family groups would fill the gap," she says.
Anyone else listen to the Diane Rehm show this morning about the GOP?
A caller from Broken Arrow made it in there with the GOP rep responding with "Wow, that's a strange way to look at it. I'm not sure what's going on in Broken Arrow, Oklahoma but..."and then my mind refused to listen any further apparently because a gentleman in Broken Arrow, Oklahoma just shocked a hard core GOP'r.
Anyone catch it?
You can listen here....I think this is the one you are talking about.
http://thedianerehmshow.org/
Quote from: heironymouspasparagus on August 23, 2012, 02:24:32 PM
You can listen here....I think this is the one you are talking about.
http://thedianerehmshow.org/
That's the one. Thanks
The railroad story was good btw.
And of course now the Romney campaign is directing reporters NOT to ask questions about abortion or Todd Akin.
This is really becoming entertaining.
Sent from my Galaxy Nexus
Quote from: Townsend on August 23, 2012, 02:27:38 PM
That's the one. Thanks
The railroad story was good btw.
The Broken Arrow call starts at 3356 if you want to cut to it. I cannot fathom why she has David Keene, president of the NRA, as a regular guest. He is easy to turn off. Says the same stuff every time I hear him on there.
The Broken Arrow guy is that rare specimen from that city....a moderate Republican.
Quote from: AquaMan on August 23, 2012, 07:54:38 PM
The Broken Arrow call starts at 3356 if you want to cut to it. I cannot fathom why she has David Keene, president of the NRA, as a regular guest. He is easy to turn off. Says the same stuff every time I hear him on there.
The Broken Arrow guy is that rare specimen from that city....a moderate Republican.
Because NPR actually DOES make an effort - and it is pretty successful - to BE fair and balanced! As opposed to the Murdochian Cult Media Machine. Oh, goody - another good acronym - the MCMM.
Quote from: heironymouspasparagus on August 23, 2012, 08:45:30 PM
Because NPR actually DOES make an effort - and it is pretty successful - to BE fair and balanced! As opposed to the Murdochian Cult Media Machine. Oh, goody - another good acronym - the MCMM.
i agree. NPR used to be "my" station. Then they started actually leaning a bit rightward and I still resent it. Me, not them. Still the best of radio.
Quote from: AquaMan on August 24, 2012, 10:03:13 AM
i agree. NPR used to be "my" station. Then they started actually leaning a bit rightward and I still resent it. Me, not them. Still the best of radio.
It streams in my office all day.
It cleanses me after seeing the crap on NBC morning show. (the wife likes it)
Opening story on NBC yesterday was nekkid Harry. I'll repeat that. Opening story on NBC yesterday was nekkid Harry.
Big four news programs suck. My opinion.
...nice.
http://blogs.wsj.com/washwire/2012/08/24/romney-makes-birth-certificate-joke/
Quote from: Hoss on August 24, 2012, 02:48:03 PM
...nice.
http://blogs.wsj.com/washwire/2012/08/24/romney-makes-birth-certificate-joke/
Trump's a speaker at the convention. Perfect example of how embarrassingly retarded this has gotten for the GOP. Bitterness ensues.
Quote from: Townsend on August 24, 2012, 02:51:32 PM
Trump's a speaker at the convention. Perfect example of how embarrassingly retarded this has gotten for the GOP. Bitterness ensues.
Joe Biden.
That is all.
Quote from: Gaspar on August 27, 2012, 07:22:44 AM
Joe Biden.
That is all.
Last I checked, Biden wasn't asking to see Romney's proof of US citizenship. Apples vs Oranges.
I'm sure the Obama camp was pleased this gave them yet one more day to avoid talking about the 23 million unemployed and $15 trillion in debt.
Quote from: Conan71 on August 27, 2012, 09:32:20 AM
I'm sure the Obama camp was pleased this gave them yet one more day to avoid talking about the 23 million unemployed and $15 trillion in debt.
\\
...that the previous republican administrations have left us.
BTW, if its all about unemployment and debt, how come Oklahomans aren't steadfastly behind Obama? We have low unemployment, millions in our reserve fund and Fallin says we are one of the most financially healthy and prosperous states of all. What gives?
A bonus of living in Oklahoma:
We're missing all the ads for the presidential race.
Too bad we have to see the train wreck that is Markwayne Mullin's ad.
Quote from: AquaMan on August 27, 2012, 09:35:45 AM
\\
...that the previous republican administrations have left us.
BTW, if its all about unemployment and debt, how come Oklahomans aren't steadfastly behind Obama? We have low unemployment, millions in our reserve fund and Fallin says we are one of the most financially healthy and prosperous states of all. What gives?
Because it is Oklahoma... land of Inhofe, et al.
Quote from: AquaMan on August 27, 2012, 09:35:45 AM
\\
...that the previous republican administrations have left us.
BTW, if its all about unemployment and debt, how come Oklahomans aren't steadfastly behind Obama? We have low unemployment, millions in our reserve fund and Fallin says we are one of the most financially healthy and prosperous states of all. What gives?
Because in reality the good isn't only attributable to the Democrats. Maybe they (like you) attribute some of the recent successes to the previous administration.
Quote from: erfalf on August 27, 2012, 10:27:02 AM
Because in reality the good isn't only attributable to the Democrats. Maybe they (like you) attribute some of the recent successes to the previous administration.
I do attribute some successes to each party and all of the blame for the financial meltdown to each party. Its that team thing. Yet we keep hearing from the party regulars that Obama has killed our chances for prosperity under his leadership and is ruining our futures. It doesn't wash and it ignores reality. Those who believe that all that is good is due to their party and all that is bad is the other party might as well be football fans at an ou/osu game. Its dumb, but it sells t-shirts and hats I guess.
For some reason, Okies, and Tulsans in particular, continue to blindly support a change in leadership in spite of the prosperous conditions we have. That negates the argument that voters vote their pocketbooks and their job security.
Governor Fallin is to speak at the convention Tuesday night.
I'm guessing that will be the opportunity for any television coverage to say "and we'll return to the convention right after these messages."
So nothing like the Palin Uproar or "joe the plumber" news stories that I've noticed.
Is this a much quieter election or have I just stopped paying the attention I did 4 years ago?
Quote from: Townsend on September 12, 2012, 04:28:08 PM
So nothing like the Palin Uproar or "joe the plumber" news stories that I've noticed.
Is this a much quieter election or have I just stopped paying the attention I did 4 years ago?
I think we are missing the geezer and bimbo factor for sure.
"I can almost see Russia from my shoreline!"
It's sad to see the Teapublicans and the old Republijerks both turning on Mitt the Sh!t while he casts away from Lyin' Ryan.
The dems have done a tremendous job enabling the wrong GOPee candidates to get into the general election.
Goldwater 2 .... Forward!
Homer votes 2012:
And from 2008:
Looks like they believe the general public is getting over it:
(http://s1.reutersmedia.net/resources/r/?m=02&d=20120925&t=2&i=656711021&w=&fh=&fw=&ll=700&pl=300&r=CBRE88O1GYV00)
Some conservatives reconsider funding Akin in Missouri Senate racehttp://www.reuters.com/article/2012/09/25/us-usa-campaign-akin-idUSBRE88N0W420120925 (http://www.reuters.com/article/2012/09/25/us-usa-campaign-akin-idUSBRE88N0W420120925)
QuoteWithin hours of a deadline to withdraw from the race, Missouri U.S. Senate hopeful Todd Akin appeared determined to stay in and he received a boost with news that some Tea Party-linked conservatives are considering giving him financial support.
Akin has come under pressure to quit from fellow Republicans over his controversial remarks on rape. In a sign of defiance, Akin was due to start a bus tour across the state on Tuesday to emphasize he will not file a motion with a local court by a 5 p.m. deadline to quit the race.
The Missouri senate race is a crucial one for Republicans who need a net gain of four seats to ensure a majority in the U.S. upper house.
Akin was pilloried, and top Republicans including presidential candidate Mitt Romney asked him to step down, after he said in August that women have natural defenses against pregnancy from "legitimate rape." Major Republican donors cut off funding for his campaign in an effort to force him out.
Before the rape comments, Akin had a much as a double-digit lead in polls over incumbent Democratic Senator Claire McCaskill, who is unpopular in a state trending conservative.
After the comments, Akin's support sank and the latest Real Clear Politics average of polls shows McCaskill with a lead of about five points.
Akin's determination to stay in the race has stirred speculation about whether Republican groups who pulled funding from his campaign will now return to his side.
"Round 2 starts at tonight at 5:01 and money will come back to him," said Roy Temple, a Democratic consultant who has worked on many statewide campaigns but is not employed by McCaskill. "If they think he can will, they will put in whatever money it takes."
The Senate Conservatives Fund, backed by U.S. Senate Tea Party kingmaker Jim DeMint of South Carolina, is considering backing Akin now that he will stay on the ballot, fund director Matt Hoskins said. Hoskins sent an email Tuesday to the fund's 100,000 or so members asking if Akin should get support.
"Congressman Akin may still be able to win this race even after all of the attacks from the liberal media and the Republican establishment," Hoskins said in the email, a copy of which was given to Reuters.
"This isn't the first time the Republican establishment has attacked and abandoned a conservative nominee... but we've helped candidates win races without their support before, and we can do it again if we're willing to fight," Hoskins wrote.
The Senate Conservatives Fund has donated as much as $2.1 million to Senate candidates around the country this year, with the top amount going to Ted Cruz in Texas, who supports the Tea Party cause of reducing the size of the federal government, according to the fund's website.
The National Republican Senatorial Committee has formally withheld support for Akin. On Sunday, Republican party chairman Reince Priebus vowed on ABC's 'This Week' that "we're not going to play in Missouri with Todd Akin."
Caitlin Legacki, spokeswoman for the McCaskill campaign, said she doesn't expect the candidate's message to change with the passing of the deadline for Akin to withdraw.
"There has been no shortage of distinctions drawn between Claire McCaskill and Todd Akin," Legacki said Tuesday. "We will continue working as if we are running from behind."
The Akin campaign did not immediately return requests for comment on Tuesday. (Editing by Greg McCune and Claudia Parsons)
So it looks like the "Blame Bush" meme is not going to die this time around:
http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/fact-checker/post/obamas-claim-that-90-percent-of-the-current-deficit-is-due-to-bush-policies/2012/09/26/e9bfbcd0-077e-11e2-a10c-fa5a255a9258_blog.html
Alf, it has not been about Bush for sometime. It's about McConnell Bohner Cantor Reid Pelosi. Those are the lousy leaders. Obama is fine.
Time to stop The Stench.
Landslide...
Quote from: erfalf on September 26, 2012, 12:50:24 PM
So it looks like the "Blame Bush" meme is not going to die this time around:
http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/fact-checker/post/obamas-claim-that-90-percent-of-the-current-deficit-is-due-to-bush-policies/2012/09/26/e9bfbcd0-077e-11e2-a10c-fa5a255a9258_blog.html
It's like pouring a drum of gasoline on a lit cigarette and blaming the cigarette for the resulting forrest fire.
I always have to come back to President Obama's creation of the Deficit Reduction Commission and then his subsequent snubbing and cherry-picking of the report they spent millions of dollars and years to develop for him.
Quote from: Gaspar on September 26, 2012, 01:28:28 PM
It's like pouring a drum of gasoline on a lit cigarette and blaming the cigarette for the resulting forrest fire.
I always have to come back to President Obama's creation of the Deficit Reduction Commission and then his subsequent snubbing and cherry-picking of the report they spent millions of dollars and years to develop for him.
Is there a study on government studies. I think we should be looking into this. ::)
Quote from: Gaspar on September 26, 2012, 01:28:28 PM
It's like pouring a drum of gasoline on a lit cigarette and blaming the cigarette for the resulting forrest fire.
Pour it fast enough and there will be no fire. Gasoline isn't very flammable. Gasoline vapors, on the other hand.... Back in the real world, the Obama spending increases are largely a myth. Existing programs are costing more money, but that's because of the economy, not because of policy changes.
Quote
I always have to come back to President Obama's creation of the Deficit Reduction Commission and then his subsequent snubbing and cherry-picking of the report they spent millions of dollars and years to develop for him.
Better than Ryan, who rejected it outright.
Quote from: nathanm on September 26, 2012, 02:03:43 PM
Pour it fast enough and there will be no fire. Gasoline isn't very flammable. Gasoline vapors, on the other hand.... Back in the real world, the Obama spending increases are largely a myth. Existing programs are costing more money, but that's because of the economy, not because of policy changes.
Funny how that comports with the pap the leftwing talking heads keep on spewing.
Quote from: Conan71 on September 26, 2012, 02:17:57 PM
Funny how that comports with the pap the leftwing talking heads keep on spewing.
Sometimes, talking heads spew facts. They may not be facts that support your team, but they are facts nonetheless.
Quote from: Conan71 on September 26, 2012, 02:17:57 PM
Funny how that comports with the pap the leftwing talking heads keep on spewing.
We need more spending to combat our spending problem. Better yet! Lets form a commission or commission a study! ;D
Quote from: Gaspar on September 26, 2012, 02:21:40 PM
We need more spending to combat our spending problem.
Still not getting it, eh? Spending since the end of FY2009 has increased at less than the rate of inflation. I'm not sure in what world that's "more spending."
Quote from: Conan71 on September 26, 2012, 02:17:57 PM
Funny how that comports with the pap the leftwing talking heads keep on spewing.
It's called r e a l i t y.
I spelled slow, so everyone can understand.
Quote from: nathanm on September 26, 2012, 02:03:43 PM
Pour it fast enough and there will be no fire. Gasoline isn't very flammable. Gasoline vapors, on the other hand....
You are correct about the liquid vs. vapor thing. However, gasoline is fairly volatile. I would like to see you give us a demonstration. I have a Blitz plastic gas can that I am willing to let you use.
It is also possible to put out a gasoline fire with water. I did it as part of my (volunteer) fireman training a long time ago. I would not suggest using a garden hose.
Quote from: nathanm on September 26, 2012, 02:20:59 PM
Sometimes, talking heads spew facts. They may not be facts that support your team, but they are facts nonetheless.
Even the right side talking heads? You have indeed surprised me if you believe, or even say without sarcasm, that the right side talking heads spew facts.
Quote from: nathanm on September 26, 2012, 02:23:08 PM
Still not getting it, eh? Spending since the end of FY2009 has increased at less than the rate of inflation. I'm not sure in what world that's "more spending."
The one where $1.01 > $1.00
I think this image might sum it all up right here:
(https://sphotos-b.xx.fbcdn.net/hphotos-ash4/420969_4460364794647_554643401_n.jpg)
I found this pretty telling too...although most of you crazy righties don't consider Scarbs a 'real' Conservative.
Quote from: heironymouspasparagus on September 26, 2012, 05:32:02 PM
It's called r e a l i t y.
I spelled slow, so everyone can understand.
No, you spelled "reality" slowly.
Quote from: Red Arrow on September 26, 2012, 08:21:36 PM
The one where $1.01 > $1.00
You'll be happy to know that last year we spent less than the year before.
It seems that Ohio is s done deal. Can't beat the Obamaphone.
Quote from: nathanm on September 26, 2012, 02:23:08 PM
Still not getting it, eh? Spending since the end of FY2009 has increased at less than the rate of inflation. I'm not sure in what world that's "more spending."
You use FY2009 as the benchmark, when it included a huge chunk of "one time spending" in the stimulus.
That was perfect Gasy. What about Mitt Romney? He sucks, Bad! Just a perfectly thought out reason. Stay classy Cleveland. Sad but that is the people that will vote him right back into the White House. It just makes me so proud.
You guys may or may not enjoy this.
http://d.yimg.com/nl/omg/site/player.html#browseCarouselUI=hide&vid=30716894
Simply aimed at the lowest common denominator. Yikes.
Watching a 12 years old talk about Planned Parenthood is pretty funny though.
Quote from: erfalf on September 27, 2012, 02:02:10 PM
Watching a 12 years old talk about Planned Parenthood is pretty funny though.
Why is that funny? If more of Oklahoma's kids had access to their services and learned about such things before they became sexually active, perhaps we wouldn't have such a ridiculously high teen pregnancy rate.
Quote from: erfalf on September 27, 2012, 02:02:10 PM
Simply aimed at the lowest common denominator. Yikes.
Watching a 12 years old talk about Planned Parenthood is pretty funny though.
Like most Oklahoma voters.
It's sad that a 12 year old needs to know about planned parenthood. Correct education from her guardian/s and schools would be better.
Quote from: Townsend on September 27, 2012, 02:06:53 PM
Like most Oklahoma voters.
It's sad that a 12 year old needs to know about planned parenthood. Correct education from her guardian/s and schools would be better.
Ding, ding, ding!
Quote from: erfalf on September 27, 2012, 02:14:02 PM
Ding, ding, ding!
You see my post earlier about Oklahoma's governor and her plans to better Oklahoma's education?
We will continue to need Planned Parenthood for quite some time.
Quote from: erfalf on September 27, 2012, 02:02:10 PM
Simply aimed at the lowest common denominator. Yikes.
Watching a 12 years old talk about Planned Parenthood is pretty funny though.
Leave it to you to be amused by something so tragically sad. 12 year olds... given everything else Romney/Ryan is all about, I bet they think she should have been in a factory somewhere for the last few years. Like those overseas sweatshops they and their cronies (of Croney Capitalism fame...) have helped corporate America go to.
Here's an assorted of their dream for America...a little R & R for the kiddies...
https://www.google.com/search?q=child+labor+pictures&hl=en&client=firefox-a&hs=W84&rls=org.mozilla:en-US:official&prmd=imvns&tbm=isch&tbo=u&source=univ&sa=X&ei=e_BkUI67KKjq2QXKo4CADQ&ved=0CCAQsAQ&biw=1397&bih=838
That little video brought to you by the Jewish Council for Education and Research.
According to the R & R group, I was definitely getting the impression that Obama had thrown Israel under the bus...go figure, why they would support him. Maybe they know something about Romney that the rest of us don't??
Oh, wait...I guess we are starting to know, now that he has been opening his mouth. Geez...I was thinking that this guy might actually be a reasonable alternative (for a while). Disappointment.
President Obama's new ads capitalize on the stupidity of his base, by treating women like helpless idiots, dependent on government for the care of their own bodies.
(https://secure.assets.bostatic.com/ecards/women/Women_postcard1_580.jpeg)
Target sells all three of the popular birth control formulations for a flat fee of $9 a month ($108 a year).
Nuvaring for about $60 a month ($712 a year).
30 Condoms for $29.97 (about $300 a year if you use one every day).
You can get a Toyota Corolla for less than $18,000.
If you had sex every day (like I do), it would take 60 years of condoms to equal $18,000.
Perhaps Republicans should offer to buy Toyotas for women in exchange for votes?
Once you give people their Obamarubbers, it's hard to take them away.
I find it interesting that you think that you know the details of someone's medical needs better than they do. Has the clairvoyance struck again?
Quote from: nathanm on September 28, 2012, 12:01:47 PM
I find it interesting that you think that you know the details of someone's medical needs better than they do. Has the clairvoyance struck again?
I suppose growing up in a house full of women, and having a family of my own to support has probably clouded my vision. Perhaps most women do blow through 50 condoms a day, and I am just unaware of it?
My wife's IUD only cost $188 and it's good for 5 years.
I think it would be different if he were referencing "health care" but he's not. He's referencing "Birth Control," so the ad is really silly unless you are an idiot.
(http://cdn.pjmedia.com/wp-content/author_photos/sandrafluke-1775002197.jpg)
Quote from: Gaspar on September 28, 2012, 12:08:07 PM
I suppose growing up in a house full of women, and having a family of my own to support has probably clouded my vision. Perhaps most women do blow through 50 condoms a day, and I am just unaware of it?
You make the mistake of assuming that what works for people you know works for everyone. There are people out there for whom IUDs are not an option. There are also people out there who can't use generic BCPs.
Quote from: nathanm on September 28, 2012, 12:13:21 PM
You make the mistake of assuming that what works for people you know works for everyone. There are people out there for whom IUDs are not an option. There are also people out there who can't use generic BCPs.
Yeah, but notice how they are using completely absurd hyperbole like every woman out there needs the most expensive method?
Secondly, why does everyone want to abdicate their own personal responsibility for birth control onto their parents, the government, or their employer? I sure as hell didn't make my company or government pay for my vasectomy. It was not an expensive procedure. Last I checked there was no Constitutional right to birth control.
Our choice of birth control is my personality, or so I am told.
Quote from: RecycleMichael on September 28, 2012, 12:21:29 PM
Our choice of birth control is my personality, or so I am told.
There's been a few people I've know for whom retroactive birth control would have been a great idea.
Quote from: RecycleMichael on September 28, 2012, 12:21:29 PM
Our choice of birth control is my personality, or so I am told.
That is expensive. I stand corrected.
Quote from: Conan71 on September 28, 2012, 12:22:13 PM
There's been a few people I've know for whom retroactive birth control would have been a great idea.
Probably makes the case for extreeemly late term abortions.
Quote from: Conan71 on September 28, 2012, 12:18:52 PM
I sure as hell didn't make my company or government pay for my vasectomy.
Your health insurance didn't cover your vasectomy? Color me surprised.
Quote from: nathanm on September 28, 2012, 12:13:21 PM
You make the mistake of assuming that what works for people you know works for everyone. There are people out there for whom IUDs are not an option. There are also people out there who can't use generic BCPs.
I've got my wife chewing on this now. Before we had kids, she was on the most expensive BC Yaz or Yasmin or whatever.
She still can't make the numbers work, because it comes out to over 30 years, and you actually can't use those products that long.
I'm sorry that you can't recognize even the stupidest of pandering through your cloud of love for Dear Leader.
Quote from: Gaspar on September 28, 2012, 12:28:31 PM
you actually can't use those products that long.
(http://i0.kym-cdn.com/photos/images/masonry/000/002/109/orly_owl.jpg)
Quote from: Gaspar on September 28, 2012, 12:28:31 PM
I've got my wife chewing on this now. Before we had kids, she was on the most expensive BC Yaz or Yasmin or whatever.
She still can't make the numbers work, because it comes out to over 30 years, and you actually can't use those products that long.
I'm sorry that you can't recognize even the stupidest of pandering through your cloud of love for Dear Leader.
Wow..ODS much?
Sent from my GNex with fat fingers
Quote from: Gaspar on September 28, 2012, 12:28:31 PM
I've got my wife chewing on this now. Before we had kids, she was on the most expensive BC Yaz or Yasmin or whatever.
She still can't make the numbers work, because it comes out to over 30 years, and you actually can't use those products that long.
I'm sorry that you can't recognize even the stupidest of pandering through your cloud of love for Dear Leader.
Agreed, wife used something that was pretty expensive for a stretch, non generic pill thing. It was still less than $100/month. Since, a pill type thing would only set her back $15/month to $0 believe it or not. The insurance we currently have covers 100%.
I understand not everything works for everyone. But this is still an incredibly lame argument. Fluke flunked.
Quote from: erfalf on September 28, 2012, 12:32:48 PM
Agreed, wife used something that was pretty expensive for a stretch, non generic pill thing. It was still less than $100/month.
$37.50 a month for 40 years is $18,000. My SO's non-generic BCP (when she was on it) was $45 a month, but the insurance company paid $40 of it.
(I don't disagree that it's a silly way to put it, but I don't agree that it's factually incorrect)
Quote from: erfalf on September 28, 2012, 12:32:48 PM
Agreed, wife used something that was pretty expensive for a stretch, non generic pill thing. It was still less than $100/month. Since, a pill type thing would only set her back $15/month to $0 believe it or not. The insurance we currently have covers 100%.
I understand not everything works for everyone. But this is still an incredibly lame argument. Fluke flunked.
It doesn't matter. They could have put a $70,000 price tag on it and the Taxers would be foaming at the mouth that it's a legitimate responsibility of government to cover or mandate coverage for it. The derangement stems from watching people around you swallow all this crap without question or even the application of simple reason.
Quote from: nathanm on September 28, 2012, 12:38:16 PM
$37.50 a month for 40 years is $18,000. My SO's non-generic BCP (when she was on it) was $45 a month, but the insurance company paid $40 of it.
(I don't disagree that it's a silly way to put it, but I don't agree that it's factually incorrect)
I doubt you will find a woman who uses BC for 40 years. Any physician that allows a woman to continuously use BC for that long should have his license revoked.
Quote from: Gaspar on September 28, 2012, 12:40:28 PM
reason.
You seem to be under the mistaken impression that you have a monopoly on reason, and that any reasonable person would obviously come to the same conclusion as you do.
Perhaps an excerpt from Bob Crandall's recent letter to an AA pilot will help clarify things.
Quote
When two groups have differing opinions on a subject, the disagreement implies nothing except that there are multiple views about the probable results of a particular decision.
Quote
Any physician that allows a woman to continuously use BC for that long should have his license revoked.
Cue the owl again. Why is that, doctor?
Quote from: nathanm on September 28, 2012, 12:47:01 PM
You seem to be under the mistaken impression that you have a monopoly on reason, and that any reasonable person would obviously come to the same conclusion as you do.
Perhaps an excerpt from Bob Crandall's recent letter to an AA pilot will help clarify things.
Cue the owl again. Why is that, doctor?
Might be the "Holiday Inn Express" syndrome?
Quote from: nathanm on September 28, 2012, 12:47:01 PM
You seem to be under the mistaken impression that you have a monopoly on reason, and that any reasonable person would obviously come to the same conclusion as you do.
Perhaps an excerpt from Bob Crandall's recent letter to an AA pilot will help clarify things.
Cue the owl again. Why is that, doctor?
Greatly increases the risk of breast cancer, as well as several other diseases.
We're only moderately effective at screwing with nature. ;)
Quote from: Gaspar on September 28, 2012, 12:59:09 PM
Greatly increases the risk of breast cancer, as well as several other diseases.
Try to keep up with the literature, doc. There have been new developments in medicine since 1983.
My prediction for 2013.
If Obama is to win, he will have bookoos of time since he won't be constantly campaighning. ;D
If Romney wins, the blame train will live on.
Quote from: erfalf on September 28, 2012, 01:51:50 PM
My prediction for 2013.
If Obama is to win, he will have bookoos of time since he won't be constantly campaighning. ;D
If Romney wins, the blame train will live on.
beaucoup.
Quote from: Gaspar on September 28, 2012, 11:58:37 AM
President Obama's new ads capitalize on the stupidity of his base, by treating women like helpless idiots, dependent on government for the care of their own bodies.
(https://secure.assets.bostatic.com/ecards/women/Women_postcard1_580.jpeg)
Target sells all three of the popular birth control formulations for a flat fee of $9 a month ($108 a year).
Nuvaring for about $60 a month ($712 a year).
30 Condoms for $29.97 (about $300 a year if you use one every day).
You can get a Toyota Corolla for less than $18,000.
If you had sex every day (like I do), it would take 60 years of condoms to equal $18,000.
Perhaps Republicans should offer to buy Toyotas for women in exchange for votes?
Once you give people their Obamarubbers, it's hard to take them away.
Something else comes to mind here.
Why do Democrats take such a sexist stance that birth control is the sole responsibility of a woman in the first place?
There's no war on women from the right, the Democrats are simply pimping them out for votes.
Quote from: Conan71 on September 28, 2012, 02:05:47 PM
Something else comes to mind here.
Why do Democrats take such a sexist stance that birth control is the sole responsibility of a woman in the first place?
There's no war on wo.men from the right, the Democrats are simply pimping them out for votes.
The dims do not take that sole position you dreamt up. Or is it just another republijerk false equivalency. You need to quit with the abortion issue. There are far more important priorities that need attention.
Quote from: Teatownclown on September 28, 2012, 02:17:04 PM
The dims do not take that sole position you dreamt up. Or is it just another republijerk false equivalency. You need to quit with the abortion issue. There are far more important priorities that need attention.
Much more important priorities that those who write these memes should be holding Obama accountable for instead of abetting the reelection of an abject failure at the issues which really do matter: economy, energy, debt, deficit, etc.
And FYI, I didn't say a thing about abortion. I was commenting on this stupid meme the DNC put out about a girl asking her mother for $18,000 for birth control and commenting that it's a sexist position that women are soley responsible for birth control.
BS...this falls under the social issue on religious ideology.
Get over it.
Quote from: Conan71 on September 28, 2012, 02:05:47 PM
Something else comes to mind here.
Why do Democrats take such a sexist stance that birth control is the sole responsibility of a woman in the first place?
There's no war on women from the right, the Democrats are simply pimping them out for votes.
We've been over this before. ;)
They buy votes by making people into victims.
If you are strong or independent, you are of little value to them.
Quote from: Gaspar on September 28, 2012, 02:46:36 PM
We've been over this before. ;)
They buy votes by making people into victims.
If you are strong or independent, you are of little value to them.
Yes we have. But is it a victim or the crime to help the less fortunate, those that need help.
Sand kicker.
Oh no. His momma was a porn star.
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2210012/Film-claiming-Obamas-mother-posed-pornographic-pictures-sent-million-swing-voters.html
Quote from: Teatownclown on September 28, 2012, 03:09:49 PM
Yes we have. But is it a victim or the crime to help the less fortunate, those that need help.
Sand kicker.
(http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3345/4632235031_f4ec989849.jpg)
Bagger's cups...crownan and mrs. Crownan.
http://m.youtube.com/#/watch?feature=related&v=GyjKyby-76w&desktop_uri=%2Fwatch%3Fv%3DGyjKyby-76w%26feature%3Drelated
Quote from: Hoss on September 26, 2012, 08:27:56 PM
I found this pretty telling too...although most of you crazy righties don't consider Scarbs a 'real' Conservative.
Good grief...
Quote@3:36 p.m.: Mitt Romney begins speaking to the crowd. Asks them to chant, "Romney, Ryan; Romney, Ryan; Romney, Ryan ..."
@3:35 p.m.: Ryan pauses for a moment while the crowd begins to chant, "Romney, Romney, Romney ..."[/quote]
http://www.whiotv.com/news/news/setup-underway-for-romney-rally-at-airport/nSLFM/
Quote from: guido911 on September 28, 2012, 06:44:22 PM
Good grief...
I heard about this today. Seriously, there is plenty of material without them completely making stuff up. And they accuse Fox of being out there.
Quote from: erfalf on September 28, 2012, 06:56:09 PM
And they accuse Fox of being out there.
"And they are out there". --clever comeback
Seriously, I try (and fail sometimes) to make sure what I post is accurate and not doctored or poorly edited precisely because of this sort of thing.
Quote from: Conan71 on September 28, 2012, 02:05:47 PM
Why do Democrats take such a sexist stance that birth control is the sole responsibility of a woman in the first place?
Nobody said it was; that's just something you invented yourself. The point is to make sure that women of any means are empowered to take control of their own reproductive health, rather than limiting that option to people who don't have to make the choice between birth control and the light bill. Not to mention that hormonal contraceptives are often prescribed for reasons other than birth control.
Quote from: Conan71 on September 28, 2012, 02:21:17 PM
Much more important priorities that those who write these memes should be holding Obama accountable for instead of abetting the reelection of an abject failure at the issues which really do matter: economy, energy, debt, deficit, etc.
If those are your priorities, why would you support a couple of people whose stated plan is to do the exact opposite of that which would help conditions in those areas?
Quote from: nathanm on September 28, 2012, 07:17:27 PM
Nobody said it was; that's just something you invented yourself. The point is to make sure that women of any means are empowered to take control of their own reproductive health, rather than limiting that option to people who don't have to make the choice between birth control and the light bill. Not to mention that hormonal contraceptives are often prescribed for reasons other than birth control.
Where does it end? I understand that contraceptives are sometimes prescribed for reasons other than to stop contraception. But where do you stop. I'm certain there are millions that need all kinds of things that can't afford them. When I was between jobs, I needed some dental work done, BAD, but you know what, I toughed it out until I could afford it. That's life.
Quote from: nathanm on September 28, 2012, 12:47:01 PM
You seem to be under the mistaken impression that you have a monopoly on reason,
As do you.
Quote from: nathanm on September 28, 2012, 12:38:16 PM
$37.50 a month for 40 years is $18,000. My SO's non-generic BCP (when she was on it) was $45 a month, but the insurance company paid $40 of it.
(I don't disagree that it's a silly way to put it, but I don't agree that it's factually incorrect)
Tell me again how much it costs to raise a kid and how birth control is more expensive than raising a kid.
Quote from: Red Arrow on September 28, 2012, 09:54:39 PM
Tell me again how much it costs to raise a kid and how birth control is more expensive than raising a kid.
If you can raise a child on $450 a year, I commend you.
Quote from: nathanm on September 28, 2012, 10:14:30 PM
If you can raise a child on $450 a year, I commend you.
My point exactly. If you cannot afford to raise a child, you should pay for contraception.
Quote from: Red Arrow on September 28, 2012, 10:16:36 PM
My point exactly. If you cannot afford to raise a child, you should pay for contraception.
And if you can't afford it, don't have sex, right?
Quote from: nathanm on September 28, 2012, 10:24:35 PM
And if you can't afford it, don't have sex, right?
You expect me to pay for your having sex? Gimme a break.
Edit:
It's bad enough that I will have to help pay for the education of the potential results of your having sex.
Quote from: Red Arrow on September 28, 2012, 10:30:38 PM
You expect me to pay for your having sex? Gimme a break.
That attitude is precisely why we have one of the highest teen pregnancy rates in the nation.
Quote from: nathanm on September 28, 2012, 11:08:39 PM
That attitude is precisely why we have one of the highest teen pregnancy rates in the nation.
How is that? Talk about false equivalence. You've been off your game this last week.
Quote from: erfalf on September 28, 2012, 11:24:26 PM
How is that? Talk about false equivalence. You've been off your game this last week.
What, you think that you can wish away the reality of biology? Giving people contraceptives is a hell of a lot cheaper than imprisoning unwanted children that become criminals. Call me a pragmatist.
Quote from: nathanm on September 28, 2012, 11:26:51 PM
What, you think that you can wish away the reality of biology? Giving people contraceptives is a hell of a lot cheaper than imprisoning unwanted children that become criminals. Call me a pragmatist.
Well maybe we should put rubber boundaries on the edge of every lane so that people can drive faster then. Or give everyone A's in school.
Quote from: erfalf on September 28, 2012, 11:52:05 PM
Well maybe we should put rubber boundaries on the edge of every lane so that people can drive faster then. Or give everyone A's in school.
Holy crap....
Quote from: erfalf on September 28, 2012, 11:52:05 PM
Well maybe we should put rubber boundaries on the edge of every lane so that people can drive faster then. Or give everyone A's in school.
We are putting concrete barriers up in the median and along the shoulder in many places.
We live in a bumper car world.
Quote from: erfalf on September 28, 2012, 11:52:05 PM
Well maybe we should put rubber boundaries on the edge of every lane so that people can drive faster then. Or give everyone A's in school.
You're not alone in wanting to cut off your nose to spite your face. Somewhere around 40% of the country agrees with you.
Quote from: nathanm on September 29, 2012, 12:01:02 AM
You're not alone in wanting to cut off your nose to spite your face. Somewhere around 40% of the country agrees with you.
Explain the difference. Where does it stop. If we as a society make it easier for people to continue reckless behavior, how is that good for society?
Quote from: erfalf on September 29, 2012, 12:05:11 AM
Explain the difference. Where does it stop. If we as a society make it easier for people to continue reckless behavior, how is that good for society?
You were allowed to go to business school - in spite of all the well know adverse effects of that for many decades in this country...how is THAT good for society??
Quote from: heironymouspasparagus on September 29, 2012, 12:07:05 AM
You were allowed to go to business school - in spite of all the well know adverse effects of that for many decades in this country...how is THAT good for society??
There is a benefit to society... arguably. ;)
Edit: And a benefit to myself.
Quote from: erfalf on September 29, 2012, 12:05:11 AM
Explain the difference. Where does it stop. If we as a society make it easier for people to continue reckless behavior, how is that good for society?
What's reckless about having sex? Do I detect moral opprobrium, or am I just reading too much into that?
Not having children until you are ready is the opposite of reckless.
Quote from: nathanm on September 29, 2012, 12:09:00 AM
What's reckless about having sex? Do I detect moral opprobrium, or am I just reading too much into that?
Reading too much into it. :o
Quote from: erfalf on September 29, 2012, 12:07:56 AM
There is a benefit to society... arguably. ;)
Edit: And a benefit to myself.
Actually.... no. There is none to society. Only to yourself.
Quote from: heironymouspasparagus on September 29, 2012, 12:11:29 AM
Actually.... no. There is none to society. Only to yourself.
Because stuff sells itself. Seriously. If it's a joke, fine. If not, you need to get over your hatred for Business majors.
Wow.
http://jacksonville.com/news/metro/2012-09-27/story/call-clay-county-gop-obama-muslim-wholl-take-away-medicare
Especially laugh at the part where she says 'if you could get out and watch Fox News'... and her referencing Obama's 'socialistic' agenda.
Riot!
Quote from: nathanm on September 28, 2012, 11:08:39 PM
That attitude is precisely why we have one of the highest teen pregnancy rates in the nation.
No, a lack of personal responsibility is the reason.
Cant believe no one has posted this yet.
Relatively safe for work (i.e., F-bombs bleeped out)
It's Samuel L Jackson, so it is what it is...
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=og35U0d6WKY
Even if you dont agree with the message, the video is well done.
Quote from: Red Arrow on September 29, 2012, 11:36:07 AM
No, a lack of personal responsibility is the reason.
When you have a problem, there are at least two ways to deal with it. One is to fume at people's refusal to do what you want, and the other is to help them make better decisions by providing them the tools that allow them to do so. Who needs schools when kids can just educate themselves? After all, we have libraries that they could use if they weren't so damned lazy!
Quote from: nathanm on September 29, 2012, 01:11:15 PM
When you have a problem, there are at least two ways to deal with it. One is to fume at people's refusal to do what you want, and the other is to help them make better decisions by providing them the tools that allow them to do so.
In the case of teen pregnancies, better sex education, including the cost and responsibility of raising a child, would help and somewhere along the line someone should teach them personal responsibility. They can pay for their own condoms. I know you cannot stop biology but if the kids were aware of how it really works, they could make informed decisions.
Quote from: erfalf on September 29, 2012, 10:19:34 AM
Because stuff sells itself. Seriously. If it's a joke, fine. If not, you need to get over your hatred for Business majors.
I don't hate business majors (I have a kid that is one...) - what I hate is the way the "Harvard School of Business mentality" has taken over the collective consciousness of the US and much of the world, and somehow convinced people that if we just treat all government activity as a business, all will be well. BS.
Value to society...hmmm, well, I guess there is value in selling people the idea that they should use 3 billion water bottles a year...versus a reusable container. Or buy some 800 calorie hamburger from McDonald's.
Quote from: heironymouspasparagus on September 29, 2012, 07:22:27 PM
I don't hate business majors (I have a kid that is one...) - what I hate is the way the "Harvard School of Business mentality" has taken over the collective consciousness of the US and much of the world, and somehow convinced people that if we just treat all government activity as a business, all will be well. BS.
Value to society...hmmm, well, I guess there is value in selling people the idea that they should use 3 billion water bottles a year...versus a reusable container. Or buy some 800 calorie hamburger from McDonald's.
I blame marketing propaganda... Freud... or more directly, his nephew... oh... and... "Torches of Freedom" (0:11:30)... 8)
The Century Of The Self
Quote from: Red Arrow on September 29, 2012, 06:22:34 PM
In the case of teen pregnancies, better sex education, including the cost and responsibility of raising a child, would help and somewhere along the line someone should teach them personal responsibility. They can pay for their own condoms. I know you cannot stop biology but if the kids were aware of how it really works, they could make informed decisions.
I agree that does make a big difference, but availability of contraceptives has also proven to be important.
Quote from: nathanm on September 30, 2012, 02:29:04 AM
I agree that does make a big difference, but availability of contraceptives has also proven to be important.
I agree that contraceptives should be available. I also think the user should pay for them. Treatments for a medical condition should be treated like any other prescription medicine.
Quote from: Red Arrow on September 30, 2012, 11:12:44 AM
I also think the user should pay for them.
Should men have to pay for Viagra if the ED isn't causing any other medical issues?
I agree that in an ideal world, everybody would be responsible enough to avoid doing the nasty if they couldn't afford the condoms or whatever. However, that not being the world I inhabit, I'd prefer to not pay for raising the kids that result from their irresponsibility when a few bucks worth of given away contraceptives helps people make the right decision. Planned Parenthood actually gives away a lot of contraceptives, but there's obviously only so much one organization can do, especially when many on the right are trying their level best to get them shut down even where they don't provide abortion services.
Quote from: nathanm on September 30, 2012, 03:26:02 PM
Should men have to pay for Viagra if the ED isn't causing any other medical issues?
Yes. Absolutely. But the old white guys making the rules made it so insurance has to pay for it. Go figure....
Quote from: nathanm on September 30, 2012, 03:26:02 PM
Should men have to pay for Viagra if the ED isn't causing any other medical issues?
Yes
Quote from: Red Arrow on September 30, 2012, 06:01:48 PM
Yes
I admire your consistency. It's too bad some insurance companies and many of those who agitate against coverage for contraceptives do not share that trait with you.
Quote from: nathanm on September 30, 2012, 06:58:16 PM
I admire your consistency. It's too bad some insurance companies and many of those who agitate against coverage for contraceptives do not share that trait with you.
I'm going to have to be a bit inconsistent and say that I can understand the difference between those who
cannot and those who
will not afford contraception. A couple who choses to, for example, go out to dinner a couple of times a month rather than pay for contraception gets little to no sympathy from me. A couple that can barely feed themselves and any kids they have need some help to not have more kids. If it's merely a condition of mental balance, you all can start paying for my avgas.
I'm amending my predictions:
(https://sphotos-b.xx.fbcdn.net/hphotos-snc7/298420_474578105906790_411465525_n.jpg)
Inhofe and Coburn are backing Todd Akin.
So, that's nice.
KTUL FB post:
Inhofe, Coburn Help Raise Money For Akin After "Legitimate Rape" CommentQuoteOklahoma's two state senators are throwing their support behind controversial Missouri Senate candidate Todd Akin.
According to POLITICO, Sens. Jim Inhofe and Tom Coburn are two of four senators listed as honorary hosts of a Wednesday fundraiser for the Republican candidate in Washington, D.C.
The other two senators are Jim DeMint and Lindsey Graham of South Carolina.
Akin has gotten little financial support from the national party after his statement about "legitimate rape."
The requested donation for Wednesday's event is $2,500.
Democrats have indicated they will take on any GOP official or candidate who join up with Akin, so it's not a surprise the four senators involved in this event are in some of the country's reddest states.
Quote from: Townsend on October 02, 2012, 07:56:08 AM
Inhofe and Coburn are backing Todd Akin.
So, that's nice.
KTUL FB post:
Inhofe, Coburn Help Raise Money For Akin After "Legitimate Rape" Comment
With 1/3 of the Senate seats in play, they don't have much of a choice if the GOP wants any chance of taking control of the Senate.
Quote from: Conan71 on October 02, 2012, 09:16:43 AM
With 1/3 of the Senate seats in play, they don't have much of a choice if the GOP wants any chance of taking control of the Senate.
Should be a big ol' "Oooo, we may have to write this one off. He's horribly detrimental for everyone."
Quote from: Townsend on October 02, 2012, 09:41:22 AM
Should be a big ol' "Oooo, we may have to write this one off. He's horribly detrimental for everyone."
I'm sure a good whore's bath is in order after fundraising for Akin.
Quote from: Conan71 on October 02, 2012, 09:43:07 AM
I'm sure a good whore's bath is in order after fundraising for Akin.
Maybe a legitimate whore's bath.
The president's special little guy is flapping his gums today. I think he's going to single-handedly attempt to lose the election for President Obama.
Quote from: Gaspar on October 02, 2012, 03:15:13 PM
I think he's going to single-handedly attempt to lose the election for President Obama.
He can't. Have you seen the GOP candidate? He's Highlander 2. We never should've known about him.
Quote from: Townsend on October 02, 2012, 03:25:12 PM
He can't. Have you seen the GOP candidate? He's Highlander 2. We never should've known about him.
I think Gas is starting to get the sad now...
Haven't read the details, but if Coburn is actually supporting Akin, that does it for me. No more Coburn.
That's disgusting.
Finally, a reason for some in here to support Obama:
(http://www.weeklystandard.com/sites/all/files/images/ladyparts.img_assist_custom-640x399.jpg)
Drudge is bringing up the Jeremiah Wright stuff again. Here's a link to a story on Obama and his new accent re: Katrina:
http://hotair.com/archives/2012/10/02/open-thread-hannity-and-the-daily-caller-on-the-obama-tape/
This picture right here might say it all about Willard
(http://www.alan.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/10/chipotle-650x382.jpg)
:D
Quote from: guido911 on October 02, 2012, 08:47:47 PM
Drudge is bringing up the Jeremiah Wright stuff again. Here's a link to a story on Obama and his new accent re: Katrina:
http://hotair.com/archives/2012/10/02/open-thread-hannity-and-the-daily-caller-on-the-obama-tape/
But wait! I...I.....I thought Obummer was a Mooslim?
::)
Quote from: guido911 on October 02, 2012, 08:47:47 PM
Drudge is bringing up the Jeremiah Wright stuff again. Here's a link to a story on Obama and his new accent re: Katrina:
http://hotair.com/archives/2012/10/02/open-thread-hannity-and-the-daily-caller-on-the-obama-tape/
But he was never in that church when Wright was preaching his harsh words against the US.
I think it's a good video. Like Hillary, he has the ability to alter his dialect to appeal to the crowd he's addressing. He seems to do it better than Hillary did. The video also shows that he doesn't need a teleprompter to give a moving speech. I admire his love for his paster and would never criticize him for that. His paster, unfortunately, has some issues.
Supposedly, this is a mild video. Drudge apparently has others to be released. I'm waiting for Huff to uncover the Mitt Romney pet care videos.
Quote from: guido911 on October 02, 2012, 08:47:47 PM
Drudge is bringing up the Jeremiah Wright stuff again. Here's a link to a story on Obama and his new accent re: Katrina:
Oooh, is this where everyone forgets their manners and starts making racist remarks? If you don't code switch, you're less human than I thought you were.
Quote from: nathanm on October 03, 2012, 03:53:14 PM
Oooh, is this where everyone forgets their manners and starts making racist remarks? If you don't code switch, you're less human than I thought you were.
"code switch?" You have me at a loss.
Quote from: nathanm on October 03, 2012, 03:53:14 PM
Oooh, is this where everyone forgets their manners and starts making racist remarks? If you don't code switch, you're less human than I thought you were.
Hey RecyckledMichele, does this make RMoney's religion fair game?
Quote from: Gaspar on October 03, 2012, 03:56:43 PM
"code switch?" You have me at a loss.
Use the Googles, Luke.
Quote from: Hoss on October 02, 2012, 09:06:57 PM
This picture right here might say it all about Willard
(http://www.alan.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/10/chipotle-650x382.jpg)
:D
(https://sphotos-b.xx.fbcdn.net/hphotos-ash4/319039_319691974795759_1164761996_n.jpg)
Crazy Uncle Joe at it again...
Why Obama's campaign is coming off the tracks....
QuoteAny fan of Obama who tells you he expected the country to be in this condition at this moment is either lying to you or lying to themselves.
Read more: http://www.nydailynews.com/opinion/falling-article-1.1176348#ixzz28lBepoR8
http://www.nydailynews.com/opinion/falling-article-1.1176348
Quote from: guido911 on October 08, 2012, 08:12:17 PM
Why Obama's campaign is coming off the tracks....
http://www.nydailynews.com/opinion/falling-article-1.1176348
Obama's campaign is not coming off the tracks. I'd bet you, but like your candidate you are dishonest.
Gweed's wishful thinking again.
I think during the debate, Romney may have 'let the genie out of the bottle'...so to speak...with fodder for further debates. Both VP and Presidential.
The poll trackers (fivethirtyeight for one, which has historically always been pretty much on the money) have seen the slide settle, augmented some by those damned ole' made up job numbers.
27 lies in 38 minutes. That's pretty impressive by the Etch-A-Sketch candidate.
The President's lack of response on the debate has many wondering...was this a calculated move?
I'm sure the usual suspects on here (conan, Gweed and others) will guffaw at the notion.
But the President IS a politician. He's pretty good at it as well.
Looks like the electorate has finally gotten wise and is started to abandon Obama in droves. Everything has changed. People making excuses for Obama's poor debate performance--including LSD-induced conspiracies, media beginning to attack Obama instead of covering for his mistakes, and even dems are looking to Biden to save the day, etc. Big Mo has obviously shifted. Is anyone else sensing the collective rectal pucker from the left in here? Bwahahaha...
Quote from: guido911 on October 08, 2012, 08:58:33 PM
Looks like the electorate has finally gotten wise and is started to abandon Obama in droves. Everything has changed. People making excuses for Obama's poor debate performance--including LSD-induced conspiracies, media beginning to attack Obama instead of covering for his mistakes, and even dems are looking to Biden to save the day, etc. Big Mo has obviously shifted. Is anyone else sensing the collective rectal pucker from the left in here? Bwahahaha...
And then Romney will open his mouth and remind everyone why his likability rating is so bad...
Quote from: Teatownclown on October 03, 2012, 03:58:58 PM
Hey RecyckledMichele, does this make RMoney's religion fair game?
Nothing makes a candidate's religion "fair game" regardless of which side of the aisle he's on. Some on both the right and left have adopted gutter tactics that do nothing to facilitate serious political discourse, preferring instead to score cheap points at the expense of destroying collegiality and common cause. We are all in this together - like it or not - and the only way to bring an end to the deadlock between our political parties is to begin acting like responsible adults. If we want change at the top, the place to start is by changing ourselves.
Quote from: guido911 on October 08, 2012, 08:12:17 PM
Why Obama's campaign is coming off the tracks....
Heh, one poll means Obama is being abandoned in droves. Here's the thing, guido. In December 2008, there were zero people expecting the economy would be where it is right now. Why? Because nobody yet knew how bad it was at the time. BLS was understating job losses fairly significantly, as sometimes happens in a rapidly changing economic environment.
Hoss, I don't recall the President failing to respond to Romney's lies, although maybe things got worse in the last 10 minutes of the debate after I turned it off. Romney just called Obama a liar every time and stuck by his own falsehoods. When faced with that, the proper response is not to give Romney the opportunity to repeat the same lie again and again, which is what the media seems to have expected him to do.
In other news, Romney today said that if he were President, he would make the country strong so we wouldn't get into wars in the middle east. Moments later, he proposed going to war with Syria. You'd think he could at least keep his themes straight within a single speech.
Because nothing oozes likability than ending an interview on a valid question with a bit of a tantrum. Good job Ryan. Maybe you should have run a 2 hour marathon instead.
Quote from: nathanm on October 08, 2012, 09:05:48 PM
Heh, one poll means Obama is being abandoned in droves. Here's the thing, guido. In December 2008, there were zero people expecting the economy would be where it is right now. Why? Because nobody yet knew how bad it was at the time. BLS was understating job losses fairly significantly, as sometimes happens in a rapidly changing economic environment.
Hoss, I don't recall the President failing to respond to Romney's lies, although maybe things got worse in the last 10 minutes of the debate after I turned it off. Romney just called Obama a liar every time and stuck by his own falsehoods. When faced with that, the proper response is not to give Romney the opportunity to repeat the same lie again and again, which is what the media seems to have expected him to do.
In other news, Romney today said that if he were President, he would make the country strong so we wouldn't get into wars in the middle east. Moments later, he proposed going to war with Syria. You'd think he could at least keep his themes straight within a single speech.
That's Etch-a-Sketch at it's finest. He can't even wait for the hour to end before he makes the switch. It's clear to me that really the only reason he's in this is to pad his resume. He doesn't care about serving his country. He's just serving himself at this point.
Even Gallup is telling people to discount the only good news Barry has gotten in the past 10 days or so.
http://www.readingthescore.com/gallups-chief-economist-big-drop-unemployment-rate-discounted/
Even in Hoss' video Ryan is seen slapping down a lib trying to push a stupid straw man and its viewed as a "tantrum". That about sums up what the left has going for it... And I'll raise you likability factor with this blast from the past (go to :40 for the hit)
Quote from: guido911 on October 08, 2012, 09:15:56 PM
Even Gallup is telling people to discount the only good news Barry has gotten in the past 10 days or so.
http://www.readingthescore.com/gallups-chief-economist-big-drop-unemployment-rate-discounted/
Even in Hoss' video Ryan is seen slapping down a lib trying to push a stupid straw man and its viewed as a "tantrum". That about sums up what the left has going for it... And I'll raise you likability factor with this blast from the past (go to :40 for the hit)
Hey, dude asked a valid question. Then Ryan's handlers tell the press it was because 'he went over the alloted time'. Yeah, right. Why do we see an aide trying to block the camera at the end? Does he not want the rest of the exchange recorded?
The fear is palpable in this forum. Could it be that the guy who couldn't get a job in Bain's mail room be toppled? And I am not even looking at polls, I mean other than the poling Obama is currently getting from the electorate, because polls generally suck.
And look what's coming up. Libya cover up, foreign campaign contributions, F&F, Biden for just being him...
Quote from: guido911 on October 08, 2012, 09:20:52 PM
The fear is palpable in this forum. Could it be that the guy who couldn't get a job in Bain's mail room be toppled? And I am not even looking at polls, I mean other than the poling Obama is currently getting from the electorate, because polls generally suck.
And look what's coming up. Libya cover up, foreign campaign contributions, F&F, Biden for just being him...
And like I said again, all Romney has to do is speak. On a pretty constant basis, Romney makes Biden look like a rank amateur at the art of the gaffe. I'm sure his campaign leaders have a pucker factor of 9 or better when Romney is at the podium.
Fact of the matter is, I like neither candidate. I just happen to dislike Romney more because he is the master flip-flopper. And a straight-up liar. All politicians are liars. He should get a gold medal for it though.
http://bigstory.ap.org/article/nickelodeon-tv-says-romney-skipped-kids-questions#overlay-context=article/nhs-small-size-belies-its-political-power
Guessing he must have needed about 2 months to prep for the questions these kids were going to send his way.
What do you think?
What happened to that Gallup poll tie Romney had?
http://www.gallup.com/poll/election.aspx
In case it changes, here you go:
(http://tulsatrafficcirclewx.com/images/10082012.JPG)
Tell me Guido, does Romney still think we should have used whatever means necessary to keep Mubarak in power and contend that we'd be better off with Qaddafi? Or did he finally realize what a joke his Middle East policy is?
Quote from: Ed W on October 08, 2012, 09:03:22 PM
Nothing makes a candidate's religion "fair game" regardless of which side of the aisle he's on. Some on both the right and left have adopted gutter tactics that do nothing to facilitate serious political discourse, preferring instead to score cheap points at the expense of destroying collegiality and common cause. We are all in this together - like it or not - and the only way to bring an end to the deadlock between our political parties is to begin acting like responsible adults. If we want change at the top, the place to start is by changing ourselves.
Hoss...Gallup is not a poll star ....it's something Mitten's horses do...Nate, RMoney's mid east plan is based on hope with out touching.
Ed, you can underline it all you desire but I don't recall you being around when these jokers were playing the Rev. Wright card.
I think a persons religious convictions are as important as their character. Not all religions are alike. Some religions are not born from principle. I want to know who will be pulling their strings and to whom they are beholden to. I want to understand why they put their religion in a priority position over their country.
The inner circle of Mitt Romney's tabernacle have their sole goal but to get a Mormon into office and thereby accepted by DC...they will tell his candidate to say anything he needs to for elect-ability. I know more Christians who murmur in private conversation their skepticism over Mormons.
They've gamed our tax system while they evolved out of a cult. Today would such a new wave religious phenomena be possible?
What would happen if one year from today POTUS Obama were to pull a Clay/Ali transfiguration?
Quote from: guido911 on October 08, 2012, 09:20:52 PM
...And I am not even looking at polls, I mean other than the poling Obama is currently getting from the electorate, because polls generally suck.
Guido, Nate Silver's aggregated polling numbers still indicate that the president has a 75 percent chance of winning. That's down from 85% last week. I know it's the current theme du jour in Republican circles to downplay these polls, but they're mostly devoid of bias.
What happens when the election is over and they're shown to be correct?
Quote from: Teatownclown on October 08, 2012, 09:41:14 PM
Nate, RMoney's mid east plan is based on hope with out touching.
Given that he's said that he'd basically do whatever Netanyahu asks, I don't think not touching is the Romney plan. Of course, that assumes he hasn't changed his plan in the last week.
Quote from: Ed W on October 08, 2012, 09:51:46 PM
Guido, Nate Silver's aggregated polling numbers still indicate that the president has a 75 percent chance of winning. That's down from 85% last week. I know it's the current theme du jour in Republican circles to downplay these polls, but they're mostly devoid of bias.
What happens when the election is over and they're shown to be correct?
And Nate's poll aggregations (remember, it's not his data; he's merely aggregating state and national polling data using formulas...you know, Republicans...math?) have been pretty darn accurate in the last two elections from my understanding (by last two elections, I mean the 2008 and the mid-terms).
I'm by no means the vision of physical fitness, but for one who professes to eat healthy, you'd think he could pony up some of that Bain money to treat the poor press corp to a little more diverse and healthy offerings!
:o
http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/election-2012/wp/2012/10/08/mitt-romney-hands-out-hamburgers-avoids-questions/
Quote from: Hoss on October 08, 2012, 10:17:47 PM
I'm by no means the vision of physical fitness, but for one who professes to eat healthy, you'd think he could pony up some of that Bain money to treat the poor press corp to a little more diverse and healthy offerings!
I can see the headline if Romney had offered a healthy choice....
Romney offers elitist food to press corp. Shows again he cannot relate to the common citizen.
Can't please anyone.
Quote from: Red Arrow on October 08, 2012, 10:31:11 PM
Romney offers elitist food to press corp. Shows again he cannot relate to the common citizen.
They have been pretty regularly attacking Michelle Obama for daring to suggest that kids might be better off if they ate more appropriate portion sizes of healthier food, so you're probably right.
Quote from: Teatownclown on October 08, 2012, 09:41:14 PM
I think a persons religious convictions are as important as their character. Not all religions are alike. Some religions are not born from principle. I want to know who will be pulling their strings and to whom they are beholden to. I want to understand why they put their religion in a priority position over their country.
How did you feel about JFK being Catholic?
This has been Guido's test of the "Oh My God Romney Might Win" emergency system. If this had been an actual Romney election victory, I know about half of TNF would be on suicide watch.
Sheesh, I know the race is close and Romney is not running away with anything.
Quote from: nathanm on October 08, 2012, 10:09:32 PM
Given that he's said that he'd basically do whatever Netanyahu asks, I don't think not touching is the Romney plan. Of course, that assumes he hasn't changed his plan in the last week.
Yes. Believe it or not I think he has....
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/10/08/romney-foreign-policy-speech_n_1947074.html
RMoney can't be trusted. He won't be listening to his generals...but he will be listening to the inner sanctum (who will that be?).
Quote from: guido911 on October 08, 2012, 10:41:36 PM
This has been Guido's test of the "Oh My God Romney Might Win" emergency system. If this had been an actual Romney election victory, I know about half of TNF would be on suicide watch.
Sheesh, I know the race is close and Romney is not running away with anything.
Yes. RMoney is running away from his previous position.....
Quote from: nathanm on October 08, 2012, 10:33:52 PM
They have been pretty regularly attacking Michelle Obama for daring to suggest that kids might be better off if they ate more appropriate portion sizes of healthier food, so you're probably right.
I have no problem with Michelle Obama
suggesting that kids eat healthier food and portions. Anything beyond suggestions will require careful scrutiny.
Apparently Andrew Sullivan is officially going "Full Hudson"
http://andrewsullivan.thedailybeast.com/2012/10/did-obama-just-throw-the-entire-election-away.html
Quote from: Red Arrow on October 08, 2012, 10:34:47 PM
How did you feel about JFK being Catholic?
What difference does that make? I was 7.
This country will never elect a Jew nor a Muslim.
Quote from: Teatownclown on October 08, 2012, 10:46:39 PM
This country will never elect a Jew nor a Muslim.
Not for a while anyway.
Before 1960, you could have said the same thing about a Catholic.
Quote from: Teatownclown on October 08, 2012, 10:46:39 PM
What difference does that make? I was 7.
You are not as old as I thought.
Quote from: guido911 on October 08, 2012, 10:45:15 PM
Apparently Andrew Sullivan is officially going "Full Hudson"
http://andrewsullivan.thedailybeast.com/2012/10/did-obama-just-throw-the-entire-election-away.html
Not difficult if all you are citing is one poll that is the outlier of all the other major polls. And considering it based it's data with a subset of 31% democrats, 36% republican and about 30% independents.
Me thinks people are seeing something that isn't quite there yet.
But keep trying.
Quote from: Red Arrow on October 08, 2012, 10:50:31 PM
You are not as old as I thought.
That's what you get for being so judgmental.
Guido, landslide coming. Keep your hopes up. I want you to be let down...hard.
Quote from: Red Arrow on October 08, 2012, 10:49:38 PM
Not for a while anyway.
Before 1960, you could have said the same thing about a Catholic.
No. Not really. the Catholics at least got the country through prohibition.
Quote from: Teatownclown on October 08, 2012, 10:53:48 PM
No. Not really. the Catholics at least got the country through prohibition.
I remember JFK being Catholic was a pretty big deal in a significant quantity of folks' minds. Many were very concerned that he would be subservient to the Pope. "They" may have been thankful that Papa Kennedy brought them them their Chivas but a Catholic for President was a totally different question.
Quote from: Teatownclown on October 08, 2012, 10:52:21 PM
That's what you get for being so judgmental.
Call it what you want, that is the impression I get from your posts. At least the age impression is not intended as an insult.
Quote from: Red Arrow on October 08, 2012, 11:04:40 PM
I remember JFK being Catholic was a pretty big deal in a significant quantity of folks' minds. Many were very concerned that he would be subservient to the Pope. "They" may have been thankful that Papa Kennedy brought them them their Chivas but a Catholic for President was a totally different question.
The Pope wasn't going to be hanging with the Kennedy's in the Oval Office....but again I ask, are you aware of Mitt's inner sanctum? They are religious zealots. Sorry, not my idea of brain power....
Quote from: Red Arrow on October 08, 2012, 11:07:44 PM
Call it what you want, that is the impression I get from your posts. At least the age impression is not intended as an insult.
Well it doesn't seem your perception of me is "one with wisdom." And don't tell me I seem senile....
Quote from: Teatownclown on October 08, 2012, 11:10:00 PM
The Pope wasn't going to be hanging with the Kennedy's in the Oval Office....
Didn't have to be. People were afraid of Kennedy's allegiance as a Catholic to the Pope over the USA. Right or wrong didn't matter. That was the concern.
Quote from: Teatownclown on October 08, 2012, 11:11:58 PM
Well it doesn't seem your perception of me is "one with wisdom." And don't tell me I seem senile....
I think this should stop at you and I disagree on almost everything.
Quote from: Red Arrow on October 08, 2012, 10:44:53 PM
I have no problem with Michelle Obama suggesting that kids eat healthier food and portions. Anything beyond suggestions will require careful scrutiny.
The USDA already changed the school lunches they pay for. Smaller portions, more fruits and vegetables, and no second helpings except of the fruits and vegetables, which are unlimited. That's what I've read, anyway. I'm neither in school nor have a child in school, so I can't say for sure. Apparently a few Republicans have decided that Obama is trying to starve children or something.
Kids can, of course, buy whatever they like in schools where there is food for sale other than the USDA lunch or bring whatever they'd like, just like the old days.
Man, I wouldn't mind some good old USDA standard vegetable beef stew with a USDA standard grilled cheese sandwich right now. ;)
Romney...Believe it.
(http://l1.yimg.com/bt/api/res/1.2/qMzQk0mPiKHd3nzxu6bM4g--/YXBwaWQ9eW5ld3M7cT04NTt3PTYzMA--/http://media.zenfs.com/en/blogs/theticket/151117608.jpg)
Quote from: guido911 on October 08, 2012, 10:45:15 PM
Apparently Andrew Sullivan is officially going "Full Hudson"
http://andrewsullivan.thedailybeast.com/2012/10/did-obama-just-throw-the-entire-election-away.html
Obama's October surprise:
He's got Asperger's!
(http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-aaa1pubeB0Y/UC2CW_WzRUI/AAAAAAAAAIY/CEyWtbxRQ5A/s1600/call+in+sick.jpg)
Uh-Oh...And one of the polls that favors Obama precedes the debate.
http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2012/president/us/general_election_romney_vs_obama-1171.html
More starfish pucker fodder for the left.
The CNN poll ought to pucker you right up. If Romney loses Ohio (Obama is +4 among LVs and +10 among RVs), there's still little chance of a win for him.
^^^^^That's why I post here...
edited. Something happened.
Quote from: nathanm on October 09, 2012, 04:09:06 PM
The CNN poll ought to pucker you right up. If Romney loses Ohio (Obama is +4 among LVs and +10 among RVs), there's still little chance of a win for him.
Polls do not mean Hoss to me. I hate them, and the fact that you have not picked up on that explains why you miss my joke on the subject.
Today's CNN/ORC poll for Ohio.
However, this should cheer you up:
(http://s3-ec.buzzfed.com/static/enhanced/web05/2012/10/9/14/anigif_enhanced-buzz-18389-1349808359-0.gif)
Quote from: guido911 on October 09, 2012, 04:14:05 PM
Polls do not mean Hoss to me. I hate them, and the fact that you have not picked up on that explains why you miss my joke on the subject.
I love the fact that I piss you off enough that you replace a profanity with my name. Awesome! Just like a child!
Quote from: Hoss on October 09, 2012, 04:17:19 PM
I love the fact that I piss you off enough that you replace a profanity with my name. Awesome! Just like a child!
I could have went with the "a-holes" thing, but I decided to spine up, post what I thought, and not delete it. O/T.
(http://sadhillnews.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/10/obama-scream-fear-scared-america-think-clearly-sad-hill-news.jpg)
edited. I am not sure why the jobs report has not made more positive waves than it perhaps should have. Maybe it was the long weekend thing...
Quote from: nathanm on October 09, 2012, 04:09:06 PM
The CNN poll ought to pucker you right up. If Romney loses Ohio (Obama is +4 among LVs and +10 among RVs), there's still little chance of a win for him.
This is the only poll I've seen re: Ohio, which is reason number _____ why I can't stand them. Romney up 1
http://americanresearchgroup.com/pres2012/OH12.html
Quote from: guido911 on October 09, 2012, 04:58:58 PM
This is the only poll I've seen re: Ohio, which is reason number _____ why I can't stand them. Romney up 1
You'd probably deal with them better if you looked at the margin of error, which for that particular poll is 4%. Looking at all the polls it appears it's back to being the close race it was after Ryan was announced as Romney's running mate. The good news for Romney is that the trend is no longer against him, so he's at least got a shot if he and Ryan put in more solid debate performances.
Quote from: nathanm on October 09, 2012, 04:15:51 PM
Today's CNN/ORC poll for Ohio.
However, this should cheer you up:
(http://s3-ec.buzzfed.com/static/enhanced/web05/2012/10/9/14/anigif_enhanced-buzz-18389-1349808359-0.gif)
Here's a link to several of these gifs.
http://www.buzzfeed.com/dorsey/andrew-sullivans-obama-meltdown-in-8-key-gifs#HTWF2
Voter Deadline Approaches(If you live anywhere in Oklahoma you can register through Friday, at the Tulsa County Election Board, 555 N Denver, Tulsa, until midnight)
http://kwgs.com/post/voter-deadline-approaches (http://kwgs.com/post/voter-deadline-approaches)
QuoteIf you want to vote in the November 6th presidential election, then you only have through Friday to register. Assistant Election Board secretary Shelly Boggs says the office on North Denver Avenue will stay open late Friday.
"The Tulsa County Election Board is going to stay open till midnight on October the 12th, so that we can give everybody the opportunity to come and either register for the first time or change their address or any information they needed to change. That's the last day by law." Boggs says, "Anyone needing to make that change, their change has to postmark by midnight on October the 12th, or in the hands of a voter registration agency, which would be a tag agency or the county election board. So, to make that convenient for anyone who has to make changes or register new, our office at 555 North Denver will be open until Midnight."
She says the registration if for Democrats, Republicans, and Independents, and you don't even have to be a Tulsa county resident to register here.
"All parties in Oklahoma, in any county as well, can come to the Tulsa
County Election Board and register through midnight on October the 12th." Boggs says, "The law was changed several years ago to allow residents of other counties to register to vote in another county, as long as it is within Oklahoma.
Boggs is also putting out the call for precinct officials to work the polls on Election Day.
"We have about 75 to 100 vacancies for substitute precinct officials, and a few of them are for permanent precinct officials. We are going to be having classes beginning the 16th of October. We are going to have about five classes, and we have advertised to reach out to voters who might consider themselves to be very civic minded and want to help out on the November 6th election." Boggs says, "There's a little bit of pay with that too. Inspectors are paid 97 dollars in mileage and they're the ones actually in charge of the precinct. Other officials are paid 87 dollars, and it is a 12 hours day. It is a long day."
And they're taking applications now.
Boggs says, "They would call Tulsa County Election Board, you can call 596-5780 or 596-5762, and we will connect that person to the precinct official coordinators to get them signed up."
And Boggs says you still have time if you need an absentee ballot.
"Absentee voting, people have until the Wednesday prior to the election to apply for an absentee ballot. We always mail ballots out just right up to the week before the election. We will have early voting starting in our office starting November 2nd. Saturday, the hours on Saturday are somewhat shorter. On Friday it's 8 to 6. On Saturday it's 8 to 1, and on Monday it's 8 to 6. The only voting on Tuesdays, November 6th, is at the polling place."
Again, Friday is the last day to register for the upcoming presidential election and the Tulsa County Election Board will stay open until midnight on Friday.
Quote from: Townsend on October 10, 2012, 08:40:21 AM
Voter Deadline Approaches
(If you live anywhere in Oklahoma you can register through Friday, at the Tulsa County Election Board, 555 N Denver, Tulsa, until midnight)
http://kwgs.com/post/voter-deadline-approaches (http://kwgs.com/post/voter-deadline-approaches)
Democrats have until Monday.
Quote from: Conan71 on October 10, 2012, 09:30:37 AM
Democrats have until Monday.
I was wondering if this would show up today.
Right-leaning Indies? Too late, your deadline has passed.
;D
Jack Welch Takes His Column and Goes Home
http://finance.yahoo.com/blogs/the-exchange/jack-welch-takes-column-goes-home-181843415.html (http://finance.yahoo.com/blogs/the-exchange/jack-welch-takes-column-goes-home-181843415.html)
Turns out Jack Welch can't take the heat after all.
On Tuesday it was reported that the former General Electric CEO and his wife -- former Harvard Business Review editor-in-chief, Suzy Welch -- would no longer be writing their joint, biweekly column for Fortune magazine and Reuters.com, informing the editors of both publications via email that they were terminating their contract because they felt that they would get better "traction" for their writing elsewhere. The couple's articles have been running on Fortune since March 2012.
The move came after days of withering criticism from both sides of the aisle in response to Welch's tweet last Friday in which he suggested that the Obama administration had possibly manipulated the September jobs report number. "Unbelievable jobs numbers .. these Chicago guys will do anything .. can't debate so change numbers," Welch wrote. The insinuation, which Welch doubled down on after the fact, was that the president wanted to make the economy look healthier than it actually is heading into the November election.
The response was quick and critical (although he has found some supporters), with the White House calling his assertions "ludicrous." Fortune Managing Editor Andy Serwer called Welch out on the Monday morning episode of MSNBC's "Morning Joe," saying that, as far as the data are concerned, he feels the state of the U.S. economy is "exactly the opposite of what Jack Welch is saying. Things are actually improving."
The last straw for Welch was apparently an article that appeared on Fortune.com on Tuesday, which called Welch a job destroyer and highlighted the 100,000-plus jobs that he cut at GE during his 20 years at the helm.
Welch has become something of a media star since retiring from GE in 2001, appearing regularly on the cable news circuit and writing op-eds for a variety of print and online outlets. That trend will likely continue long term, but for now at least "Neutron Jack" has decided to take his ball and go home.
Quote from: Conan71 on October 10, 2012, 09:30:37 AM
Democrats have until Monday.
Well, that's only because they are supposed to vote on November 7th.
Quote from: Townsend on October 10, 2012, 09:36:25 AM
Jack Welch Takes His Column and Goes Home
http://finance.yahoo.com/blogs/the-exchange/jack-welch-takes-column-goes-home-181843415.html (http://finance.yahoo.com/blogs/the-exchange/jack-welch-takes-column-goes-home-181843415.html)
Turns out Jack Welch can't take the heat after all.
On Tuesday it was reported that the former General Electric CEO and his wife -- former Harvard Business Review editor-in-chief, Suzy Welch -- would no longer be writing their joint, biweekly column for Fortune magazine and Reuters.com, informing the editors of both publications via email that they were terminating their contract because they felt that they would get better "traction" for their writing elsewhere. The couple's articles have been running on Fortune since March 2012.
The move came after days of withering criticism from both sides of the aisle in response to Welch's tweet last Friday in which he suggested that the Obama administration had possibly manipulated the September jobs report number. "Unbelievable jobs numbers .. these Chicago guys will do anything .. can't debate so change numbers," Welch wrote. The insinuation, which Welch doubled down on after the fact, was that the president wanted to make the economy look healthier than it actually is heading into the November election.
The response was quick and critical (although he has found some supporters), with the White House calling his assertions "ludicrous." Fortune Managing Editor Andy Serwer called Welch out on the Monday morning episode of MSNBC's "Morning Joe," saying that, as far as the data are concerned, he feels the state of the U.S. economy is "exactly the opposite of what Jack Welch is saying. Things are actually improving."
The last straw for Welch was apparently an article that appeared on Fortune.com on Tuesday, which called Welch a job destroyer and highlighted the 100,000-plus jobs that he cut at GE during his 20 years at the helm.
Welch has become something of a media star since retiring from GE in 2001, appearing regularly on the cable news circuit and writing op-eds for a variety of print and online outlets. That trend will likely continue long term, but for now at least "Neutron Jack" has decided to take his ball and go home.
Hilarious...considering that GE
owns partially owns all the NBC brands...LOL.
EDITED: my bad..they're not the sole owner.
Quote from: Hoss on October 10, 2012, 10:02:14 AM
Hilarious...considering that GE owns partially owns all the NBC brands...LOL.
EDITED: my bad..they're not the sole owner.
Had to get out your Etch-A-Sketch, didn't you?
Quote from: Conan71 on October 10, 2012, 10:45:13 AM
Had to get out your Etch-A-Sketch, didn't you?
Have to keep in with the Romn...err...political theme!
Quote from: Hoss on October 10, 2012, 10:02:14 AM
Hilarious...considering that GE owns partially owns all the NBC brands...LOL.
EDITED: my bad..they're not the sole owner.
Knowing JW, he's a megalomaniac...and a horses a$$.
Quote from: Conan71 on February 02, 2012, 02:53:28 PM
Sure makes the Gingrich camp look stupid. I wonder if Newt is throwing a hissy fit in his suite at the Wynn right now?
Speaking of Wynn, listen to this interview...
http://www.realclearpolitics.com/video/2012/10/09/steve_wynn_on_obama_ill_be_damned_if_ill_have_him_lecture_me.html
QuoteWYNN: I've created about 250,000 direct and indirect jobs according to the state of Nevada's measurement. If the number is 250,000, that's exactly 250,000 more than this president, who I'll be damned if I want to have him lecture me about small business and jobs. I'm a job creator. Guys like me are job creators and we don't like having a bulls-eye painted on our back.
The president is trying to put himself between me and my employees. By class warfare, by deprecating and calling a group that makes money 'billionaires and millionaires who don't pay their share.' I gave 120% of my salary and bonus away last year to charities, as I do most years. I can't stand the idea of being demagogued, that is put down by a president who has never created any jobs and who doesn't even understand how the economy works.
Steve Wynn's another megalomaniac.... mobsters and shicksters.
What's with the Republijerks? Can't they do better than Vegas dweebs and old coots?
Even clowns would be better criers....
(https://sphotos-a.xx.fbcdn.net/hphotos-ash4/5043_383858191688464_433994309_n.jpg)
Ouch.
Quote6:11PM EDT October 15. 2012 - WASHINGTON — Mitt Romney leads President Obama by four percentage points among likely voters in the nation's top battlegrounds, a USA TODAY/Gallup Poll finds, and he has growing enthusiasm among women to thank.
As the presidential campaign heads into its final weeks, the survey of voters in 12 crucial swing states finds female voters much more engaged in the election and increasingly concerned about the deficit and debt issues that favor Romney. The Republican nominee now ties the president among women who are likely voters, 48%-48%, while he leads by 12 points among men.
http://hotair.com/archives/2012/10/15/oh-my-gallup-shows-romney-leading-by-five-in-swing-states/#comments
And there is this to make the left happy. Never ending blaming coming to an end and candidate substance is coming to the fore. Oh wait, did I say that was going to make the left "happy"?
QuoteWas it the blame-gaming — "Bush did it!," ATMs are at fault, tsunamis are the culprit, no other administration has had such challenges, the euro meltdown is to blame, earthquakes shook our confidence — that finally turned the country off of Obama?
For the last two years, millions of Americans have grown, ever so insidiously, tired of Barack Obama and his administration. The Tea Party brought such frustrations to the fore. And now the debates — and the ability of Romney to show millions that he is a decent, competent alternative to Obama rather than the caricatured greedy white man of Obama's sleazy ads — are closing the deal.
In the first debate, Romney was not just far better-informed and spoken, but far more likeable. Joe Biden's frenzied rudeness was the sort of debate performance that mesmerizes one by its very boorishness, eliciting a weird reaction in the room like "Come over and check this out: I can't believe the Vice president of the United States is trumping The Joker" (after all, the sick Joker is more entertaining that the sober and judicious Batman) — but within hours leaves a bitter aftertaste in the mouth of something along the lines of "Surely, we could have done better than that rude buffoon?"
The election is not over, but it is starting to resemble October 29 or November 1 in 1980, when, after just one debate, the nation at last decided that it really did not like Jimmy Carter very much or what he had done, and discovered that Ronald Reagan was not the mad Dr. Strangelove/Jefferson Davis of the Carter summer television ads. Like Carter, Obama both has no wish to defend his record (who would?) and is just as petulant. In the next three weeks, he has only three hours left to save his presidency.
http://pjmedia.com/victordavishanson/the-obama-breaking-point/?singlepage=true
That analysis is about a week late.
More ouch...
http://www.gallup.com/home.aspx
For those insufferable braggarts that were pulling a shroud over Romney just a few weeks ago. Maybe this surge is just an "etch-a-sketch" from the pollsters following the debate.
(http://www.demotivationalposters.org/image/demotivational-poster/1102/suicide-watch-sucicide-popcorn-demotivational-posters-1298427526.jpg)
Quote from: guido911 on October 16, 2012, 02:48:43 PM
More ouch...
http://www.gallup.com/home.aspx
(http://www.demotivationalposters.org/image/demotivational-poster/1102/suicide-watch-sucicide-popcorn-demotivational-posters-1298427526.jpg)
Not so much
http://www.fivethirtyeight.com
Quote from: Hoss on October 16, 2012, 02:51:05 PM
Not so much
http://www.fivethirtyeight.com
QuoteNext, the news media, having "called" the first debate for Mr. Romney, might be inclined to do the opposite in this case — fairly or not.
I'm sure Chris Matthews already has his slobbering Obama victory script written.
Quote from: Conan71 on October 16, 2012, 03:40:34 PM
I'm sure Chris Matthews already has his slobbering Obama victory script written.
But will he be able to keep his hand out of his pants?
(http://t2.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcQJSWJJyc9MXW4Mu5BzR37THY82hFnx17vzb4K9tuUf5YUaipgDeIBkhUdixQ)
Quote from: Conan71 on October 16, 2012, 03:40:34 PM
I'm sure Chris Matthews already has his slobbering Obama victory script written.
You don't have Keith Olbermann to kick around anymore?
Quote from: Teatownclown on October 16, 2012, 04:08:36 PM
You don't have Keith Olbermann to kick around anymore?
He did a fine job of kicking himself out of a job.
Quote from: Gaspar on October 16, 2012, 04:21:38 PM
He did a fine job of kicking himself out of a job.
Ba-ZIIIIIIIING!
Quote from: guido911 on October 16, 2012, 02:48:43 PM
For those insufferable braggarts that were pulling a shroud over Romney just a few weeks ago. Maybe this surge is just an "etch-a-sketch" from the pollsters following the debate.
Sorry, the state level polling has been good news for Obama for the last four or five days now. The only disappointing poll in that respect was one that wasn't released until it was a week old.
Quote from: nathanm on October 16, 2012, 05:40:45 PM
Sorry, the state level polling has been good news for Obama for the last four or five days now. The only disappointing poll in that respect was one that wasn't released until it was a week old.
You're right, Obama has been taking a good poling over the past few weeks.
Quote from: nathanm on October 16, 2012, 05:40:45 PM
Sorry, the state level polling has been good news for Obama for the last four or five days now. The only disappointing poll in that respect was one that wasn't released until it was a week old.
If Obama loses, I can't wait to hear your Weds. morning quarterbacking. It will be entertaining.
Quote from: nathanm on October 16, 2012, 05:40:45 PM
Sorry, the state level polling has been good news for Obama for the last four or five days now. The only disappointing poll in that respect was one that wasn't released until it was a week old.
TodayNew Hampshire: Romney vs. Obama Suffolk/7News Obama 47, Romney 47 Tie
Pennsylvania: Romney vs. Obama Quinnipiac Obama 50, Romney 46 Obama +4
Colorado: Romney vs. Obama WeAskAmerica Romney 48, Obama 47 Romney +1
Iowa: Romney vs. Obama WeAskAmerica Obama 49, Romney 46 Obama +3
New Jersey: Romney vs. Obama Quinnipiac Obama 51, Romney 43 Obama +8
MondayPennsylvania: Romney vs. Obama Morning Call Obama 49, Romney 45 Obama +4
Iowa: Romney vs. Obama ARG Obama 48, Romney 48 Tie
Virginia: Romney vs. Obama ARG Obama 47, Romney 48 Romney +1
Colorado: Romney vs. Obama Gravis Marketing Romney 46, Obama 48 Obama +2
Florida: Romney vs. Obama Gravis Marketing Romney 49, Obama 48 Romney +1
Pennsylvania: Romney vs. Obama PPP (D) Obama 51, Romney 44 Obama +7
North Carolina: Romney vs. Obama PPP (D) Romney 49, Obama 47 Romney +2
Missouri: Romney vs. Obama Wenzel Strategies (R) Romney 55, Obama 41 Romney +14
SundayFlorida: Romney vs. Obama PPP (D) Romney 49, Obama 48 Romney +1
New Mexico: Romney vs. Obama Albuquerque Journal* Obama 49, Romney 39 Obama +10
Georgia: Romney vs. Obama Atlanta Journal-Constitution Romney 51, Obama 43 Romney +8
Idaho: Romney vs. Obama Mason-Dixon Romney 63, Obama 27 Romney +36
SaturdayOhio: Romney vs. Obama PPP (D) Obama 51, Romney 46 Obama +5
Minnesota: Romney vs. Obama NMB Research/AFF (R) Obama 47, Romney 43 Obama +4
Arizona: Romney vs. Obama Behavior Research Center* Romney 42, Obama 44 Obama +2
FridayVirginia: Romney vs. Obama Rasmussen Reports Obama 47, Romney 49 Romney +2
New Hampshire: Romney vs. Obama ARG Obama 46, Romney 50 Romney +4
Colorado: Romney vs. Obama Denver Post/SurveyUSA Romney 48, Obama 47 Romney +1
Florida: Romney vs. Obama Rasmussen Reports Romney 51, Obama 47 Romney +4
Florida: Romney vs. Obama ARG Romney 49, Obama 46 Romney +3
Michigan: Romney vs. Obama Rasmussen Reports Obama 52, Romney 45 Obama +7
Out of that whole list, there are about 4 that could arguably be called good news for Obama.
Quote from: Oil Capital on October 16, 2012, 11:22:52 PM
Today
New Hampshire: Romney vs. Obama Suffolk/7News Obama 47, Romney 47 Tie
Pennsylvania: Romney vs. Obama Quinnipiac Obama 50, Romney 46 Obama +4
Colorado: Romney vs. Obama WeAskAmerica Romney 48, Obama 47 Romney +1
Iowa: Romney vs. Obama WeAskAmerica Obama 49, Romney 46 Obama +3
New Jersey: Romney vs. Obama Quinnipiac Obama 51, Romney 43 Obama +8
Monday
Pennsylvania: Romney vs. Obama Morning Call Obama 49, Romney 45 Obama +4
Iowa: Romney vs. Obama ARG Obama 48, Romney 48 Tie
Virginia: Romney vs. Obama ARG Obama 47, Romney 48 Romney +1
Colorado: Romney vs. Obama Gravis Marketing Romney 46, Obama 48 Obama +2
Florida: Romney vs. Obama Gravis Marketing Romney 49, Obama 48 Romney +1
Pennsylvania: Romney vs. Obama PPP (D) Obama 51, Romney 44 Obama +7
North Carolina: Romney vs. Obama PPP (D) Romney 49, Obama 47 Romney +2
Missouri: Romney vs. Obama Wenzel Strategies (R) Romney 55, Obama 41 Romney +14
Sunday
Florida: Romney vs. Obama PPP (D) Romney 49, Obama 48 Romney +1
New Mexico: Romney vs. Obama Albuquerque Journal* Obama 49, Romney 39 Obama +10
Georgia: Romney vs. Obama Atlanta Journal-Constitution Romney 51, Obama 43 Romney +8
Idaho: Romney vs. Obama Mason-Dixon Romney 63, Obama 27 Romney +36
Saturday
Ohio: Romney vs. Obama PPP (D) Obama 51, Romney 46 Obama +5
Minnesota: Romney vs. Obama NMB Research/AFF (R) Obama 47, Romney 43 Obama +4
Arizona: Romney vs. Obama Behavior Research Center* Romney 42, Obama 44 Obama +2
Friday
Virginia: Romney vs. Obama Rasmussen Reports Obama 47, Romney 49 Romney +2
New Hampshire: Romney vs. Obama ARG Obama 46, Romney 50 Romney +4
Colorado: Romney vs. Obama Denver Post/SurveyUSA Romney 48, Obama 47 Romney +1
Florida: Romney vs. Obama Rasmussen Reports Romney 51, Obama 47 Romney +4
Florida: Romney vs. Obama ARG Romney 49, Obama 46 Romney +3
Michigan: Romney vs. Obama Rasmussen Reports Obama 52, Romney 45 Obama +7
Out of that whole list, there are about 4 that could arguably be called good news for Obama.
After tonight, that will likely change.
Oh, unless you're a Republican, that is...
Quote from: Hoss on October 16, 2012, 11:27:28 PM
After tonight, that will likely change.
Oh, unless you're a Republican, that is...
Of course the polls may (and will) change. That doesn't change the fact of thee polls. And these polls show that any thought that the last 4-5 days of state polls were good for Obama was nothing but wishful thinking.
If I were Romney, I'd be nervous about that Gravis Marketing with him only up by 1 in Florida. If he loses Florida, he's got basically no chance at all and Gravis has been leaning heavily Republican.
Quote from: Oil Capital on October 17, 2012, 12:03:45 AM
From the polling so far, any change coming from tonight's debate is likely to improve Romney's numbers. Something tells me the is not what you had in mind.
Stop bogarting the joysticks, man.
Quote from: Oil Capital on October 17, 2012, 12:03:45 AM
From the polling so far, any change coming from tonight's debate is likely to improve Romney's numbers. Something tells me the is not what you had in mind.
^^^ That's funny.
so is this!
(http://25.media.tumblr.com/tumblr_mc0pqiVReY1rj8amio1_1280.jpg)
Uh-oh. Now its six points.
http://www.gallup.com/poll/157817/election-2012-likely-voters-trial-heat-obama-romney.aspx
Quote from: guido911 on October 17, 2012, 03:58:27 PM
Uh-oh. Now its six points.
http://www.gallup.com/poll/157817/election-2012-likely-voters-trial-heat-obama-romney.aspx
uh oh spaghetti o's!
Let's make sure and push back all the unsavory things about ACA until after the election.
http://www.kaiserhealthnews.org/Daily-Reports/2012/September/28/cap-hill-watch.aspx
http://thehill.com/blogs/healthwatch/medicare/259023-issa-threatens-to-subpoena-hhs-in-medicare-probe
Sometimes I wonder how intelligent these guys are. Wouldn't someone have thought of this one already (the open enrollment deadline). I would just like to think that the people pulling the wool over our eyes were a little more careful than this.
If you still take Issa seriously after every one of his alleged conspiracies has turned out to be bunkum, I don't know what to tell you.
It turned out Fast & Furious started under Bush by a low level functionary who hid it from his superiors because he knew they wouldn't allow it. It turned out that extra security for Benghazi was not in fact requested, the extra security was requested in Tripoli. And there have been more that I don't recall at the moment.
You remind me of those Republicans in the 90s who just insisted Clinton did something wrong in Whitewater, that he was running drugs through Mena, and killed Vince Foster.
Quote from: nathanm on October 19, 2012, 03:37:39 PM
If you still take Issa seriously after every one of his alleged conspiracies has turned out to be bunkum, I don't know what to tell you.
It turned out Fast & Furious started under Bush by a low level functionary who hid it from his superiors because he knew they wouldn't allow it. It turned out that extra security for Benghazi was not in fact requested, the extra security was requested in Tripoli. And there have been more that I don't recall at the moment.
You remind me of those Republicans in the 90s who just insisted Clinton did something wrong in Whitewater, that he was running drugs through Mena, and killed Vince Foster.
OOPS. Bad timing, Nathan. Jack Tapper, ABC News posted this at 3:22PM today:
http://abcnews.go.com/blogs/politics/2012/10/documents-back-up-claims-of-requests-for-greater-security-in-benghazi/ (http://abcnews.go.com/blogs/politics/2012/10/documents-back-up-claims-of-requests-for-greater-security-in-benghazi/)
Quote from: Oil Capital on October 19, 2012, 03:44:45 PM
OOPS. Bad timing, Nathan. Jack Tapper, ABC News posted this at 3:22PM today:
documents-back-up-claims-of-requests-for-greater-security-in-benghazi[/b]/]http://abcnews.go.com/blogs/politics/2012/10/documents-back-up-claims-of-requests-for-greater-security-in-benghazi/ (http://abcnews.go.com/blogs/politics/2012/10/%5Bb)
QuoteBeau Biden Defends Father's Vice Presidential Debate Performance
I actually laughed lightly through my nose on that.
Quote from: nathanm on October 19, 2012, 03:37:39 PM
You remind me of those Republicans in the 90s who just insisted Clinton did something wrong in Whitewater, that he was running drugs through Mena, and killed Vince Foster.
Like getting Lewinski-ed, or getting disbarred, or lying under oath, or_________.
Quote from: Oil Capital on October 19, 2012, 03:44:45 PM
OOPS. Bad timing, Nathan. Jack Tapper, ABC News posted this at 3:22PM today:
documents-back-up-claims-of-requests-for-greater-security-in-benghazi[/b]/]http://abcnews.go.com/blogs/politics/2012/10/documents-back-up-claims-of-requests-for-greater-security-in-benghazi/ (http://abcnews.go.com/blogs/politics/2012/10/%5Bb)
You have not posted enough to know this is par for the course for ol' Nate. Leads with his chin far too much.
edited. Link to documents.
http://oversight.house.gov/wp-content/uploads/2012/10/DEI-to-BHO-10-19-2012-attachments.pdf
Quote from: guido911 on October 19, 2012, 03:53:17 PM
Like getting Lewinski-ed, or getting disbarred, or lying under oath, or_________.
The arrow of time, my friend. It is not on your side. None of that had happened when people were making smile up about Whitewater, Mena, and Vince Foster.
And maybe read that document yourself, rather than relying on someone's spin of what's in it. First, note the dates.
http://mediamatters.org/video/2012/10/18/msnbcs-maddow-blasts-right-wing-media-conspirac/190728
This explains the mentality of the Tulsa Now fringe....
Quote from: Teatownclown on October 19, 2012, 04:17:20 PM
http://mediamatters.org/video/2012/10/18/msnbcs-maddow-blasts-right-wing-media-conspirac/190728
This explains the mentality of the Tulsa Now fringe....
And now the Award for Biggest &SS Doosh in Hypocrisy goes to? ^^^^^^
Quote from: guido911 on October 19, 2012, 04:23:01 PM
And now the Award for Biggest &SS Doosh in Hypocrisy goes to? ^^^^^^
You are not fringe...you and Conan are bubble heads. I'm not falling for your head fakes....
Now here are some newsworthy endorsements:
http://times247.com/articles/obama-receives-endorsements-from-three-dictators
And apparently only Romney/Ryan have to have the specifics, let alone actually "pay for" (even though I hate that phrasing) tax cuts. $103 billion worth.
http://www.usatoday.com/story/money/business/2012/10/21/taxes-2013-163m-workers/1647251/
Quote from: erfalf on October 22, 2012, 08:34:37 AM
And apparently only Romney/Ryan have to have the specifics, let alone actually "pay for" (even though I hate that phrasing) tax cuts. $103 billion worth.
Obama is not the one arguing that the deficit needs to be eliminated right this second.
Quote from: nathanm on October 22, 2012, 08:58:16 AM
Obama is not the one arguing that the deficit needs to be eliminated right this second.
I'm referring to the relentless attack on the Romney/Ryan tax plans. They are always criticized for not "paying for" their tax cuts.
Quote from: erfalf on October 22, 2012, 09:12:48 AM
I'm referring to the relentless attack on the Romney/Ryan tax plans. They are always criticized for not "paying for" their tax cuts.
And rightly so. Where are the details?
Quote from: Hoss on October 22, 2012, 09:15:50 AM
And rightly so. Where are the details?
Same question for O?
Quote from: erfalf on October 22, 2012, 09:20:07 AM
Same question for O?
Didn't he send one to Congress this year? you know, the Congress that has vowed to make him a 'one term President'?
Quote from: erfalf on October 22, 2012, 09:12:48 AM
I'm referring to the relentless attack on the Romney/Ryan tax plans. They are always criticized for not "paying for" their tax cuts.
Romney is the one that claims his tax plan will be deficit neutral, and Romney is the one who has provided the numbers that thus far do not add up. Why do you think that he should be immune from criticism when gobbledygook comes out of his mouth? If he would like to avoid criticism, he could produce some numbers that meet the criteria he has claimed his tax plan will meet or he could walk back/modify his claims about it.
Looks like they've tied up the election in order to sell more commercial time and to strengthen news audience numbers.
I'm assuming this is all entertainment based now.
FOWARD!!! This cannot be legit.
(https://pbs.twimg.com/media/A50uBwOCMAAhoAz.jpg)
Figures they would wear those shirts at a Biden rally...
WSJ Headline (referring to Romney): "A Perfectly Plausible President"
Really? Plausible? Talk about damning with faint praise.
Kinda noticed it was like crickets in here since last night from the usual suspects. Aside from the a/v guys and their zingers that is.... ;D
Quote from: nathanm on October 23, 2012, 04:44:20 PM
WSJ Headline (referring to Romney): "A Perfectly Plausible President"
Really? Plausible? Talk about damning with faint praise.
Maybe "Plausibly Deniable"....
Quote from: Hoss on October 23, 2012, 04:51:42 PM
Kinda noticed it was like crickets in here since last night from the usual suspects. Aside from the a/v guys and their zingers that is.... ;D
They're probably afraid of that angry face Obama flashed last night.
Quote from: nathanm on October 23, 2012, 04:57:53 PM
They're probably afraid of that angry face Obama flashed last night.
Can't be worse than this one!
(http://bookmoo.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/10/romney-ermahgerd-thermb.jpg)
Quote from: Hoss on October 23, 2012, 05:12:42 PM
Can't be worse than this one!
Nah, that's just dear old dad.
Howard Dean's evil twin?
Quote from: Hoss on October 23, 2012, 04:51:42 PM
Kinda noticed it was like crickets in here since last night from the usual suspects. Aside from the a/v guys and their zingers that is.... ;D
Nothing worth responding to.
Just read NBC has it tied, Rasmussen has Romney up four over Obama, ABC has Romney up one over Obama, PPP (Democrat) has Romney up 2 over Obama, and we know how Gallup has it. Even CBS post debate focus group was more favorable to Romney. I guess there is something else for Ol Joe to laugh about.
There's always Nate Silver (Via Ace):
QuoteNate Silver just emailed to say Obama's odds of winning improved to 640%, which means that, in addition to winning the election, Obama now has a good shot of being crowned King of the Third French Empire and the next Celebrity Apprentice.
However, if the world was voting for president, Obama would win...
Quote from: Red Arrow on October 23, 2012, 08:40:41 PM
Nothing worth responding to.
I tend to agree. Besides, I was busy last night just watching these polls rolling in that are just devastating. No matter what the debate outcomes are, Romney just keeps on improving. I read today that Obama is pulling out of Virginia (B&B laugh), North Carolina, and Florida. Romney has a four point edge in Colorado too. Man, I would be getting real nervous I was a dem...
I guess if you keep telling yourself something enough you believe it whether or not it's logical.
Keep in mind, that you can lose the popular vote and still win the election (2004 ring a bell?).
http://fivethirtyeight.blogs.nytimes.com/
Oh, that's right. Nate's an uber lib'rul.
Quote from: guido911 on October 23, 2012, 08:53:27 PM
polls rolling in that are just devastating
The snap polls? You mean the ones that all showed Romney losing by a significant margin, bouyed only by the fact that white men will not abandon him? Or the state polls that have looked exactly the same as they have for the past week that continue to show Obama with a small but stubbornly persistent lead in enough swing states to hit 280EVs?
I'd let you go on in your delusion, but I don't want to you have a breakdown on election night.
Also, don't believe everything you read on the Internet.
Quote from: nathanm on October 23, 2012, 04:57:53 PM
They're probably afraid of that angry face Obama flashed last night.
I kept expecting a drone attack to take out Romney during the debate
Obama inches a bit closer in the Gallup poll today. Time for the left to talk again about how great this poll is.
I wonder if Obama has a business card for Allied Moving & Storage in the top drawer of his desk?
Quote from: carltonplace on October 24, 2012, 08:37:29 AM
I kept expecting a drone attack to take out Romney during the debate
That is what happened (http://www.theonion.com/articles/obama-takes-out-romney-with-middebate-drone-attack,30055/?ref=auto). ;)
Quote from: nathanm on October 24, 2012, 06:15:00 PM
That is what happened (http://www.theonion.com/articles/obama-takes-out-romney-with-middebate-drone-attack,30055/?ref=auto). ;)
Haha...that is great!
(http://o.onionstatic.com/images/18/18501/16x9/635.jpg?6982)
Knock me over with a feather.
http://www.politico.com/news/stories/1012/82860.html?hp=f1
Quote from: erfalf on October 25, 2012, 08:53:30 AM
Knock me over with a feather.
Yeah, shame on him for recognizing Romney's plan for a third GWB term and not buying into the far right wing noise about Obama being some kind of leftist.
Quote from: nathanm on October 25, 2012, 03:21:28 PM
Yeah, shame on him for recognizing Romney's plan for a third GWB term and not buying into the far right wing noise about Obama being some kind of leftist.
It hints a little at erf having a sad over it.
Powell is one R I'd vote for as President. I said it before O was even thinking about running. He's a moderate. The loons have taken over the bridge essentially.
Quote from: Hoss on October 25, 2012, 03:24:56 PM
Powell is one R I'd vote for as President. I said it before O was even thinking about running. He's a moderate. The loons have taken over the bridge essentially.
It really is too bad his style of Republican isn't still in charge of the GOP. I blame Falwell for a lot of the crazy breaking through.
Quote from: Townsend on October 25, 2012, 03:27:18 PM
It really is too bad his style of Republican isn't still in charge of the GOP. I blame Falwell for a lot of the crazy breaking through.
Yes. As much as many in the room here who are righties make fun of the term RWRE, when Reagan solicited them for approval he opened up Pandora's Box for them.
Quote from: Hoss on October 25, 2012, 03:29:21 PM
Yes. As much as many in the room here who are righties make fun of the term RWRE, when Reagan solicited them for approval he opened up Pandora's Box for them.
Reagan loved Falwell, Nancy liked the fortune tellers and Sinatra and Watt hated the Beachboys. That was one freaky whitehouse.
Quote from: nathanm on October 25, 2012, 03:21:28 PM
Yeah, shame on him for recognizing Romney's plan for a third fourth GWB term and not buying into the far right wing noise about Obama being some kind of leftist.
FIFY
Quote from: Hoss on October 25, 2012, 03:24:56 PM
It hints a little at erf having a sad over it.
Powell is one R I'd vote for as President. I said it before O was even thinking about running. He's a moderate. The loons have taken over the bridge essentially.
Am I the only one the remembers this guy supported O the last time around. Why is this big news again?
Quote from: erfalf on October 25, 2012, 03:32:49 PM
Am I the only one the remembers this guy supported O the last time around. Why is this big news again?
You made it that way, bucko. At least in here. I don't think anyone was even remotely considering posting it until your 'knock me over with a feather' comment.
Quote from: erfalf on October 25, 2012, 03:32:49 PM
Am I the only one the remembers this guy supported O the last time around. Why is this big news again?
You posted it. The rest of us took it as a small news feature about a wise man making a wise choice. We didn't post it.
Quote from: Hoss on October 25, 2012, 03:24:56 PM
Powell is one R I'd vote for as President. I said it before O was even thinking about running. He's a moderate. The loons have taken over the bridge essentially.
I was of that view until his UN speech making the case for war in Iraq with intelligence he knew to be faulty.
erfalf, shocking that a not-crazy person would endorse the not-crazy person running for President over the crazypants people the Republicans keep putting up.
Quote from: nathanm on October 25, 2012, 04:06:59 PM
I was of that view until his UN speech making the case for war in Iraq with intelligence he knew to be faulty.
Ever see Undercover Brother?
Quote from: Hoss on October 25, 2012, 03:34:45 PM
You made it that way, bucko. At least in here. I don't think anyone was even remotely considering posting it until your 'knock me over with a feather' comment.
It was the headlining story on several websites including CBS and Politico. I didn't make it the headline. I just commented on it. Heck RM started a whole topic for it. I at least realized it didn't deserve that.
Here's a prediction: http://www.theonion.com/articles/i-mean-if-i-lose-to-mitt-romney-ill-probably-kill,30092/
Quote from: Hoss on October 25, 2012, 03:29:21 PM
Yes. As much as many in the room here who are righties make fun of the term RWRE, when Reagan solicited them for approval he opened up Pandora's Box for them.
They only make fun of the term because they can't think of a rational, well thought out reply, so they go "nyah, nyah, nyah, nyah, nyah..."
I really didn't see that much difference in what they would be able to accomplish between Obama and McClain, or until recently between Obama and Romney. (That is very different from seeing a difference in their plans...) Both McCain and Romney could have been reasonably rational, until they were told to pick the VP candidates they were saddled with. Oh, well.
Still would rather have Colin Powell and Joe Lieberman for Pres and VP.
So what do we call today's democratic party? They almost have more in common with neoconservatives. They are interventionist and only pretend to be pro-free market.
Frightening how similar two parties that are portrayed to be so far apart really are. Sure makes for a good show though.
Quote from: erfalf on October 25, 2012, 10:24:58 PM
So what do we call today's democratic party? They almost have more in common with neoconservatives. They are interventionist and only pretend to be pro-free market.
I don't know, the party of not telling people what to do with their bodies (sometimes)? I agree that the two parties are infuriatingly close on many issues, especially when it comes to competitive markets and this insane desire to blow people up all around the world. Perhaps it's because we've allowed social issues to become so important to us, but that's where the primary differences lie, I'm sad to say. Democrats are slightly more willing to curb market excesses, but only slightly. Which is why I find all the "socialist" talk to be rage-inducing. Obama isn't even properly populist (like Teddy Roosevelt, say), much less socialist.
Quote from: nathanm on October 25, 2012, 11:19:29 PM
I don't know, the party of not telling people what to do with their bodies (sometimes)? I agree that the two parties are infuriatingly close on many issues, especially when it comes to competitive markets and this insane desire to blow people up all around the world. Perhaps it's because we've allowed social issues to become so important to us, but that's where the primary differences lie, I'm sad to say. Democrats are slightly more willing to curb market excesses, but only slightly. Which is why I find all the "socialist" talk to be rage-inducing. Obama isn't even properly populist (like Teddy Roosevelt, say), much less socialist.
The two parties do the "Futterwaken Dance", so they keep getting all intertwined.
Making my list and checking it twice!
Quote from: Teatownclown on January 02, 2012, 03:07:25 PM
1) Obummer gets re elected and by December we've gone back to hail our chief POTUS OBAMA as he turns radically left on social issues sending millions of teabaggers scrambling for cover. Michele Obama finally starts speaking her mind again....
2) Joe Biden or Hillary Clinton become the tie breaking vote in the Senate....
3) Congress begins forming new coalitions with each other and with new corporate welfare agents....
4) Governor Christy is picked by Romney as his veep. That will make each party have "hit man" representation.
5) The Wheeper shuffles over to be replaced by even more obstinate Schmoe Kantor.
6) More and more people will agree that paying taxes is patriotic.
7) More and more exposure will show how Nationwide the GOP seems to be trying to limit access to the ballot box.
8 ) God may just turn out to be a particle if a third test of light reveals the same results that Einstein was only %99.9 right....this little known fact will not expose the far right wing to false campaigning...
9) THE OWS MOVEMENT WILL REASSEMBLE ....instead of creating chaos, they will force Republicans to begin to separate from their urge to continue to rape and mug the entire middle class on behalf of corporations.
10) Bradley Manning will go to prison for a long time and remain America's #1 political prisoner.
11) As the economy begins to rock along, the GOP takes credit for any improvement. The EURO likens itself to TP.
12) Things stabilize in the Middle East as Iran's leader falls victim to a strange death. Syria's A$$ad becomes an even stronger ally to Hezbollah and Lebanon. Afghanistan continues to make American's dopie.... POTUS OBAMA uses his masterful foreign policy strokes to dominate the election. "It's the economy" will not be the main issue...
12) Fish start showing up with three heads near Alaska and Seattle....
Better not pout....
I may have been early on #12... :D
I'm sorry but that tree looks dull and uninspired. Like the next four years. :(
Quote from: DolfanBob on December 10, 2012, 10:32:12 AM
I'm sorry but that tree looks dull and uninspired. Like the next four years. :(
It looks bright and inspiring to me. Maybe it is just you.
#12....I was close. Not three headed (YET), BUT take a look: http://www.petethomasoutdoors.com/2012/12/yellowfin-tuna-caught-off-mexico-could-be-world-record-size.html
(http://www.philzone.org/discus/messages/439459/820724.jpg)
I am certain this is due to radiation and comes close to another correct prediction.
Quote from: Teatownclown on December 13, 2012, 03:48:05 PM
#12....I was close. Not three headed (YET), BUT take a look: http://www.petethomasoutdoors.com/2012/12/yellowfin-tuna-caught-off-mexico-could-be-world-record-size.html
(http://www.philzone.org/discus/messages/439459/820724.jpg)
I am certain this is due to radiation and comes close to another correct prediction.
400 pounds is common with these species. What's uncommon is landing one with a rod & reel unless the angler was exposed to radiation and it made him super-human.
You just hate it when I am right with predictions.... ;D
Quote from: Conan71 on December 13, 2012, 04:10:38 PM
400 pounds is common with these species. What's uncommon is landing one with a rod & reel unless the angler was exposed to radiation and it made him super-human.
. . .and holding a tuna like that is also very uncommon, without a wench and cable attached to the tail.
Quote from: Gaspar on December 13, 2012, 04:46:03 PM
. . .and holding a tuna like that is also very uncommon, without a wench and cable attached to the tail.
All that radiation made it erect. ;)
Quote from: Gaspar on December 13, 2012, 04:46:03 PM
. . .and holding a tuna like that is also very uncommon, without a wench and cable attached to the tail.
Yeah, where's the girl?
Quote from: Teatownclown on December 13, 2012, 05:06:28 PM
All that radiation made it erect. ;)
No wonder it got caught. It couldn't swim away. ;D
Quote from: Conan71 on December 13, 2012, 04:10:38 PM
400 pounds is common with these species. What's uncommon is landing one with a rod & reel unless the angler was exposed to radiation and it made him super-human.
The fish got hold of some Colorado brownies and jumped into the boat. ;D
Hmmm, Chumming with Viagra? It just may work. Lots of advantages; the fish would just float up to the top, and they would look bigger in photos too!
I'll need a willing pharmacist.
(http://farm9.staticflickr.com/8343/8271309631_7c438bed9c.jpg)
Now that's me with a stiffy!