The 2012 Elections Thread - Page 39

Nobody would show up to a Colbert debate.   They'd be too scared to.

I know.....but I can dream....

 

Dream on, VTRan. Dream until your dreams come true.

I'm trying....just call me George Orr

 

Don't dream it. Be it.

 

 

Is there a media outlet that they would come to that is willing to pull a bait and switch?

 

"Tonight's debate will be moderated by Cokie Roberts. However, due to unforseen circumstances, Ms. Roberts will be replaced by guest moderator, Stephan Colbert."

Have you guys forgotten that Colbert is a candidate as well? He should have been on that stage with the rest!

This escaped my notice earlier. Thanks to Joe. My. God.:

...actually, he dropped out on his show tonight.

Now the question is...will be able to get his SuperPAC back from Jon Stewart ??

:)

hahahahaha....

how about a Mission: Impossible style latex mask 'reveal'....?

 

This should be fun:

 

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/01/24/mitt-romney-tax-returns-released_n_1225247.html

 

 

 

 

I wonder how many jobs those investments via his blind trusts created. 

I love it when the GOP itself has to point out the inequities of income and taxation. . Indeed, this should be fun.

You know I didn't realize how much the candidates really depend on zingers to rile up the audience until they were taken out of the equation.   The result are these carefully designed crowd pleasing lines that I'm sure the candidates practiced in the mirror falling flat time and again.   Out of all the candidates, Newt suffered the most especially when going after the media.   To me, it made for a more substantive debate and dare I say made it classier.   Of course Newt wants the Jerry Springer crowd back for the next one.....

 

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/01/24/newt-gingrich-brian-williams-debate_n_1227436.html

 

 

 

The media doesn't control free speech?   What a tool.   Does he whoop and hollar at church?   Or does he heckle Opera singers?   It's a presidential debate for Christ's sake.   The crowd last night should be the norm, not the exception.

Newt's argument makes him look weaker as a candidate than he probably thought it would. The media isn't going away any time soon. You've got competing applicants for the same job you want on the stage with you. Debate them.

 

I want to see his tax records from 10-15 years ago...I bet there's all sorts of interesting monetary gymnastics going on there...

 

I also have a real problem with the fact that Romney gave more money to an organization who thinks that the garden of eden is in Missouri than he paid in US taxes.

The tax exempt status of the majority of these 'churches' really need to be looked at with a fine tooth comb...if a religious leader even mentions a politician or political stance on something, BOOM, you lose your exemption. Don't like it, tough...it's either one way or the other.

IMO, the tax exemption should be revoked for all religious organizations.

 

The Church of Mormon did stop using electric shock therapy to torture gays until they swore their sexual orientation had changed in the 70's, so progress is being made, but I think I'm going to vote against the church's political candidates every chance I get just to be sure.

So, here's this: 

 

 

 

 

I heard this video mentioned on NPR...

 

Correlation of course does not equal causation, but L to the OL at the implication nonetheless.
Soon-to-retired Massachusetts Democratic Congresscreature Barney Frank recently said that he didn't think he had lived nearly a good enough life to be rewarded with a possible Gingrich nomination.

ETA: This post, in its original iteration, was a nonsensical late-night shitshow. It's better now.
Edited by Reasor - 1/25/12 at 1:44pm

Just amazing.

I'm not getting Romney's front runner status at all.   It can't be so simple as him looking like a president can it?   Because the man is a textbook definition of an empty suit.

I just figured he was the front runner by default due to money and supposedly the best chance to beat Obama. Now the base is starting to delude itself into thinking one of their own might be able to take down the President. Should be an interesting new few months.

 

This election cycle has really revealed, IMNSHO, how much the party leadership and the media shape the narrative. Romney's been considered the de facto candidate/front runner because...."they" say so. And up until NH or SC, it's what the base has been fed and has been hearing. That Romney's the "best" chance of beating Obama in the GE, though no convincing, concrete reasons for that position are given. Just "because." I've also heard that the right tends to give the nomination to the person who's "earned" it - i.e., last time's runner up. McCain was it last time, so Romney, simply by dint of having gone through it and being the best known AND least crazy (which leaves out Ron Paul*), is the one they're saying is the "best" qualified.

 

I also think the GOP has wanted Romney because, like Dubya, they view him as very malleable and controllable. The party wants a predictable, controllable candidate. Romney's their willing, eager bitch. (From what I've read, once Dubya got into office, all appearances of malleability went out the door. Much as we joke about Darth Cheney, I've read even Cheney got pissed because Dubya so often went his own, disastrously wrong way.)

 

 

 

*I like some aspects of Paul's policies or ideas. But the guy's fucking nuts, too.

To be fair, Romney IS the most moderate candidate, at least in theory, which is what wins general elections, and until recently he was the only candidate who hadn't shoved his foot into his mouth. And the others are/were a bunch of obvious duds; to their credit, many on the right have correctly identified Newt as a guy who just cannot win, barring a satanic miracle. Romney stands a slightly better chance, and in fact, if OWS hadn't steered the conversation towards economic disparities in the last few months, his corporate shark background wouldn't be as big a deal.

So this happened at the Arizona Airport today.....

 

 

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/01/25/jan-brewer-obama_n_1232367.html

 

 

 

For any Arizona Chewers, you have my condolences.

Why people would vote for Jan Brewer just confuses me completely and utterly.

 

Not the "I hate Mexicans" part, which you know isn't all that surprising. But Jesus, even the most sociopathic Cartel white-person torturer* has got to be less goddamn shrill.

 

 

*Not certain if this is an offical position in the operations.

 

Didn't Arizona Chewers establish, last year when Gabby Giffords was shot, that pretty much the entire state is bugfuck insane?

Arizona just passed a law prohibiting aborted fetuses from being used in any food products. So there you go.

Hey, I don't know about you, but I'm goddamn sick of finding baby legs in my chili. Good on Arizona!

I won't exactly drop dead of shock if that particular piece of legislative insanity turns out to have its origins in some good ol' down home country corporate slander, akin to the meme Amway started about the "satanic symbolism" on the bottles of their rival, Johnson & Johnson's products.

I think that was Oklahoma.

if you live in OK and voted for this moran....go into the bathroom, look at yourself in the mirror.....then, as hard as you can, slam your head into the mirror.

 

 

 

 

My fault, I was thinking of the sharia law ban and banning animal/human chimera law in Arizona (which are both almost as equally loopy).

Goddammit, Oklahoma, where am I supposed to get my Soylent Chili now?!

Look away, look away, look away, Ron Paul supporters.

 

http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2012-01-26/yet-another-in-the-endless-season-of-debates-rick-moranis.html

 

I miss Rick Moranis....

So Gingrich played the space card in Florida yesterday and promised a moon base by the end of his second term.  When Kennedy promised the moon, it was poetry.  When Gingrich promises the moon, it sounds like a Bond villain.

Speaking of which, this may be ancient but it was new to me this week: Supervillain or Newt?

 

I got 7 out of 10. That'll teach me to give Newt the benefit of the doubt.

Newt's campaign has admitted that his claim at the second South Carolina debate, that ABC's interview with second wife Marianne was a one-sided hit job, was a bald-faced lie. Gingrich didn't offer anyone to rebut Marianne's claims other than his daughters, and they were not rebuffed by ABC in producing the news piece. Marianne's claim remains unchallenged by any real cross examination.

In an attempt to redeem himself by performing some useful service for his country, Newt has delivered a hilarious tirade against Mitt Romney while campaigning in Florida. Arguing against the likelihood of a predatory venture capitalist and tax dodge winning the election during a recession, Newt said, "he tries to think the rest of us are too stupid to put the dots together and understand what this is all about."

This came as part of a larger indictment against Romney for foolishly thinking he could obscure his own history in the digital age. The synchronicity with this recent post made me feel dirty, briefly, for having ideas that Newt has also. As Trav McGee's link points out, Newt is also arguing against the viability of his own candidacy, but honest introspection doesn't appear to be a tool in Newt's arsenal.
Edited by Reasor - 1/26/12 at 9:47am

Newt's motivation ?

 

 

I love how Newt feels there's money for a moon base but when it comes to socialized medicine for America, we have to think of the deficit.   A moon base would be several times more expensive than providing affordable health care for America.

 

I agree with you on space exploration and the spin offs that have developed because of it.   My problem is the sheer hypocrisy of how the deficit no longer matters when building a fence along the entire Southern part of the United States or invading Iran or building a base on the moon.   But do for America what other industrialized countries have done for their citizens more than 70 years ago?   That's where they draw the line?    And also, can you imagine how much money would be freed up if consumers no longer had to spend hundreds a month on medicine or mortgage the house to pay for life saving surgery?    The only reason you and I don't have that right now is because the Insurance Industry has deep pockets.

 

So let's explore space.   I'm all for it.   But let's not pretend that affordable Healthcare for all Americans wouldn't have economic benefits as well.
 

 

Newt and Romney mentioned their "plans" for the "Space Coast" in the debate. It's so transparently a pander to Florida that I think it's counterproductive.

 

I'm saddened that Americans are no longer inspired by our explorations into Space. When George W announced an initiative to go back to the Moon and eventually to Mars, he was laughed at. Seems we'd rather watch Star Trek than make it happen.

You know, I've been playing a lot of Grand Theft Auto IV lately, and this sounds EXACTLY like one of the "news" stories they had in that game. That is unbelievable...

 

I agree that leaders should dream big. Getting out of Afghanistan, socializing health care, moving toward energy independence and perhaps abundance through solar and wind power, and enshrining equality in marriage and employment are the least of my expectations. Those are short term goals. I want a leader who'll inspire people to seize the future. While I wait for that guy or gal to come around, I'm not going to settle for someone who wants to do away with child labor laws. Child janitors working on the moon base would still be better off in school.

But Reasor, it's the Fucking Moon!

 

I would love to have the America my parents had in the 60's.   Yes there was a lot wrong with it in terms of the Vietnam War and social injustice (just to name a few) but I loved that our leaders weren't afraid to dream big and do impossible things.   I want that back.

Like I said, when Kennedy talked about going to the moon, it felt like a call to our collective imaginations, an evocation of our spirit of adventure and discovery.  Coming from the less-than-eloquent W and the less-than-appealing Gingrich, it sounds like "Hey neato, I want me a spaceship!"  And Gingrich saying it in Florida is pandering of the highest order.

 

I agree that all the Obama initiatives that Reasor lists are indeed "big". But they aren't BIG or inspiring (with the possible exception of Alternative Energies). And they aren't really "outward" or "forward" looking in the same way as the Moon program.

 

Here is what Dynamotv and myself are missing: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ouRbkBAOGEw