|
|
I just want to say that the DNC made a GREAT call by bumping Biden with Clinton -- who out-wonked the Republican's best wonk.
|
I thought he laid down the Bin Laden card quite well.
|
On September 07 2012 10:48 MinusPlus wrote:Show nested quote +On September 07 2012 10:46 dvorakftw wrote:On September 07 2012 09:25 screamingpalm wrote:On September 07 2012 09:24 JinDesu wrote:
First Scarlett Johansson, now Eva Longoria.
DNC, you have my vote. Good work, aiming for my libido! Hahha, the benefits of having a strong women's issues platform. :D And by strong women's issues platform we mean - ABORTION! Even for minors who haven't told their parents! Oh and free condoms. Oh come on.
That is another method of birth control but I don't think it's recommended.
|
On September 07 2012 10:53 Leporello wrote:
I thought he laid down the Bin Laden card quite well.
Strange, makes me side with Romney there lol.
|
On September 07 2012 10:53 Leporello wrote:
I thought he laid down the Bin Laden card quite well.
Yeah I think that was the strongest part of his speech, overall I think it's shaping up to be a success.
|
On September 07 2012 10:53 dvorakftw wrote:Show nested quote +On September 07 2012 10:48 MinusPlus wrote:On September 07 2012 10:46 dvorakftw wrote:On September 07 2012 09:25 screamingpalm wrote:On September 07 2012 09:24 JinDesu wrote:
First Scarlett Johansson, now Eva Longoria.
DNC, you have my vote. Good work, aiming for my libido! Hahha, the benefits of having a strong women's issues platform. :D And by strong women's issues platform we mean - ABORTION! Even for minors who haven't told their parents! Oh and free condoms. Oh come on. That is another method of birth control but I don't think it's recommended.
Aha, I almost edited to make sure you caught that =P
And no, they don't recommend it; the GOP only teaches abstinence and feelings of shame and remorse.
|
LOLOLOL
"Republicans say they had the courage to make the tough calls, but they didn't have the courage to tell them what calls they'll make."
So what tax loopholes would Romney close?
|
On September 07 2012 09:43 screamingpalm wrote:Show nested quote +On September 07 2012 09:35 sevencck wrote:On September 07 2012 09:26 JonnyBNoHo wrote:On September 07 2012 09:22 sevencck wrote:On September 07 2012 09:14 JonnyBNoHo wrote:On September 07 2012 09:02 sevencck wrote:On September 07 2012 08:47 JonnyBNoHo wrote:On September 07 2012 08:31 sevencck wrote:On September 07 2012 08:15 JonnyBNoHo wrote:On September 07 2012 07:13 sevencck wrote:
[quote]
Agreed. There are probably a number of other factors involved, but this election will be much closer than it should be. It's totally baffling.
[quote]
If I'm going to be totally honest, there is far more ignorance and stupidity on the side of the republicans. In fact, there are even some subtle currents of anti intellectual pride associated with that party. I realize ignorance and stupidity will impact an election return, but it can't possibly be enough to account for a 50:50 result that really shouldn't be so close. Mitt Romney is practically made of wood, and in a nutshell Paul Ryan seems to want nothing more than to disassemble all social services. I don't see how this can compete with Obama to the extent that the return is close to 50%. There's lots of stupidity in the Democratic party as well. Case in point - some supporters of the Democratic party try to paint the other side as being a bunch of brainwashed morons. Can you believe it? I mean really, how stupid can people be? Perhaps. But then again, when people are parroting the things they've heard from the Republican candidates or Fox News -- things that are demonstrably either distorted or completely false -- without personally examining their validity, I don't know of many other words that fit the bill quite as well as brainwashed. Nevertheless, I will concede there is some definite goofiness on the left in the U.S. as well, I just feel like the right has so much more. Have you seen Chuck Norris's latest gem? 1000 years of darkness? Really? Right back at you with the Democrats. How many times have they repeated blatantly false, or massively exaggerated claims like "the rich pay lower taxes than their secretaries" or blaming everything bad as "Bush's fault". Except that those arent demonstrably false as facts. Blaming everything bad as Bush's fault is a point of contention, it isn't a fact, but democrats aren't categorically wrong for contending it, since the problems Obama is trying to fix are those that were created when Bush was in office, and since it is more subjective anyway. Nor are they wrong to mock a scenario where the rich pay lower taxes than their secretaries. With what Paul Ryan has in mind, there will simply be more tax money available for programs that benefit the rich, and less for programs that benefit the poor. The democrats aren't lying about what they're trying to do, nor do they deny deficit spending. By contrast, the Republicans have made claims about very specific items that are factual in nature that aren't even contextually true, some of which Clinton pointed to in his speech. So yeah, there's a big difference. Everything bad isn't Bush's fault. That's a fact. If you want to argue that everything bad that happens while he's in office is his responsibility then the same standard must apply to Obama as well. Bush took a country with a 300 billion surplus and turned it into a country with the largest national deficit on planet Earth, and racked up virtually unpayable debts in 8 years. It was advised at one point not to purchase U.S. debt since people thought it was unlikely the U.S. was goign to recover. Add to this an economic meltdown due to laissez-faire economic deregulation, and a very unpopular series of military invasions, and you have the Bush presidency in a nutshell. I don't blame Bush for everything that happened, in fact I always defend him against people who claim he's a war criminal. Obama has to take responsibility for his policies, but the mess he was left isn't his responsibility, that's fully on the prior 8 years of Republican government. So again, there's a difference. Obama's policies are a reflection of the mess he's trying to clean up. It's ignorant to claim his policies engender inadvisable deficit spending when he has no alternative if he wants to get the ball rolling. He was in the red when he took office. The economic meltdown had little to do with "laissez-faire economic deregulation" - that's a fact. I have no idea what you are talking about with "racked up virtually unplayable debts in 8 years." Yes, it was. The subprime mortgage fiasco and the failure of the banks was due to massive deregulation. Same as the situation in Iceland where the banks failed. The dismantling of Glass-Steagall which Clinton signed. Those mostly responsible getting rewarded with positions in Obama's administration.
Apples and Oranges. It wasn't dismantled. Part of it was repealed, and it was because Clinton wanted to promote more loans for lower and middle income families, not because he wanted banks to do anything they pleased. The fact that he may have opened up a loophole that was later exploited by a lack of consistent oversight just proves my point. So the housing bubble bursts in 2007, and all the crazy things banks were doing that noone was paying any attention to gets attributed to Clinton back in 1999? Interesting.
Also, it's worth noting that, in "..2003 the House Financial Services Committee held a hearing at the urging of the administration to assess safety and soundness issues and to review a recent report by the Office of Federal Housing Enterprise Oversight (OFHEO) that had uncovered accounting discrepancies within the two entities. The hearings never resulted in new legislation or formal investigation of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, as many of the committee members refused to accept the report and instead rebuked OFHEO for their attempt at regulation."
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Global_financial_crisis_of_2008
Here are some additional worthwhile reads:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_housing_bubble
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Subprime_mortgage_crisis
Pretty hard to argue that the massive deregulation of financial institutions wasn't a major reason for the severity of the collapse.
|
On September 07 2012 10:53 dvorakftw wrote:Show nested quote +On September 07 2012 10:48 MinusPlus wrote:On September 07 2012 10:46 dvorakftw wrote:On September 07 2012 09:25 screamingpalm wrote:On September 07 2012 09:24 JinDesu wrote:
First Scarlett Johansson, now Eva Longoria.
DNC, you have my vote. Good work, aiming for my libido! Hahha, the benefits of having a strong women's issues platform. :D And by strong women's issues platform we mean - ABORTION! Even for minors who haven't told their parents! Oh and free condoms. Oh come on. That is another method of birth control but I don't think it's recommended.
Planned Parenthood includes a lot of other important services though. Hell, I used it myself... getting snipped is a much safer option than my wife getting her tubes tied.
|
On September 07 2012 09:41 farvacola wrote:Show nested quote +On September 07 2012 09:38 screamingpalm wrote:On September 07 2012 09:33 sunprince wrote:On September 07 2012 09:24 JinDesu wrote:
First Scarlett Johansson, now Eva Longoria.
DNC, you have my vote. Good work, aiming for my libido! Using popular appeal is a cheap tactic which sidesteps actual policy discussion, and it's no better when the Dems do it than when the GOP does. The whole "doesn't matter who you vote for, just go out and vote" is also disingenous, because the people saying it know that the youth they're mobilizing are overwhelmingly liberal. This kind of populist appeal is what got us into our deficit troubles in the first place; more people voting sounds nice in theory but it just means that more uninformed/self-interested voters... lol yep! Especially with all their efforts to block third party candidates off the ballot and blame them for their own shortcomings. "Go out there and vote... after we monopolize the ballot and demand entitlement to your votes". And the silly voter ID laws and terribly effective gerrymandering are what then?
Which definition of "terrible" are you using in that comment about effective gerrymandering?
|
This speech is like a bad sermon. It is completely unfocused and making way too many points.
|
On September 07 2012 10:57 xDaunt wrote:
This speech is like a bad sermon. It is completely unfocused and making way too many points.
really? i think its doing a decent job of building up obama and highlighting some of romneys weaknesses
|
On September 07 2012 09:55 jdsowa wrote:
John Kerry just called Mitt Romney "out of touch".
My guess, yacht envy.
|
On September 07 2012 10:57 xDaunt wrote:
This speech is like a bad sermon. It is completely unfocused and making way too many points.
Yup. Some good material, but too disorganized. He doesn't have the same charisma that Bill Clinton has to pull this off.
At least he's finally getting specific.
|
On September 07 2012 10:03 farvacola wrote:Show nested quote +On September 07 2012 09:59 xDaunt wrote:
Haha, the end of Kerry's speech where he talks about America already being exceptional under Obama is hilarious. Here's the new slogan for the Obama campaign: Obama, lowering the bar since 2008. Nah, the bar had already been dropped altogether under Bush. On a side note, the veteran issue will play strongly with undecided voters methinks.
It certainly was a big part in the 2004 elections!
|
Gotta admit, that crowd does love Biden.
|
On September 07 2012 10:52 MinusPlus wrote:Show nested quote +On September 07 2012 10:50 dvorakftw wrote:On September 07 2012 09:34 JinDesu wrote:On September 07 2012 09:33 sunprince wrote:On September 07 2012 09:24 JinDesu wrote:
First Scarlett Johansson, now Eva Longoria.
DNC, you have my vote. Good work, aiming for my libido! Using popular appeal is a cheap tactic which sidesteps actual policy discussion, and it's no better when the Dems do it than when the GOP does. The whole "doesn't matter who you vote for, just go out and vote" is also disingenous, because the people saying it know that the youth they're mobilizing are overwhelmingly liberal. This kind of populist appeal is what got us into our deficit troubles in the first place; more people voting sounds nice in theory but it just means that more uninformed/self-interested voters... Well, humorously, I did enjoy the statement from Eva saying "The Eva Longoria that worked in fast food services needed the tax cut. The Eva Longoria that now works making movies does not." Struck home nice and well with my beliefs, thank you very much. Why do none of the rich ostensibly smart people know they can give as much of their earned income to the government as they want? Because if they were giving all of their money away they wouldn't be rich and smart.
But if the government takes it from them... they are? Wait what?
|
On September 07 2012 10:56 screamingpalm wrote:Show nested quote +On September 07 2012 10:53 dvorakftw wrote:On September 07 2012 10:48 MinusPlus wrote:On September 07 2012 10:46 dvorakftw wrote:On September 07 2012 09:25 screamingpalm wrote:On September 07 2012 09:24 JinDesu wrote:
First Scarlett Johansson, now Eva Longoria.
DNC, you have my vote. Good work, aiming for my libido! Hahha, the benefits of having a strong women's issues platform. :D And by strong women's issues platform we mean - ABORTION! Even for minors who haven't told their parents! Oh and free condoms. Oh come on. That is another method of birth control but I don't think it's recommended. Planned Parenthood includes a lot of other important services though. Hell, I used it myself... getting snipped is a much safer option than my wife getting her tubes tied.
exactly,
people don't even mention that you can get STD testing at planned parenthood. Its much more than an "abortion clinic".
|
What's with the intolerance line? Does he just want to draw attention to his "put y'all back in chains!" comment or something?
|
On September 07 2012 11:05 Budmandude wrote:
What's with the intolerance line? Does he just want to draw attention to his "put y'all back in chains!" comment or something?
maybe the "obamas a Muslim" line? i really couldnt tell you
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
