Convention junkies can obsess details here!

[bronconick]

Re: Convention junkies can obsess details here!

Where was Hillary? Making the world safe for 2016?

Recent tendency is Sec State doesn't attend the convention for the party in power to keep the chain of command available if the thing gets nuked.

[FlagDUDE08]

Re: Convention junkies can obsess details here!

We're not a socialist country and Obama isn't a socialist. No matter how many times you say it it isn't true.

Why are more and more people going on food stamps? Why are government organizations encouraging it by placing numerous PSAs about how to get your food stamps? Why is the government trying to mandate health care? Why are unemployment insurance requirements to actually be looking for work being lifted? Why is energy output being stripped to the brink of the country's failure?

We are becoming a socialist country and Obama is a socialist. No matter how many times you deny it, it is true.

[Kepler]

Re: Convention junkies can obsess details here!

Good speech by the old boy. I too had the same feeling, which is that Clinton should be serving his 5th term right now! Amazing how he can go double his allotted time and nobody cares.

I have noticed a total difference in themes though. The GOP convention was about returning to a past time. Retrying policies that had already been tried before, or bringing social issues back to an earlier era. Maybe that's a winner. We'll find out soon enough. The Dem convention was a lot more about where we're going in the future. Interesting difference.

Nostalgia is the yearning for a Golden Age that "always is and never was." Life was simple when we were children and so we view the past with sepia tones and think it was better. It wasn't. It has always been hard to be an adult. If you actually go back and read what people were saying and doing at any given time life has always been hard. The "innocent time" the GOP hankers for was one where people were terrified every day the world was going to end in nuclear apocalypse, racism was virulent, and gays and women were mocked if they ever stepped out of their assigned social roles. Screw that -- I'd rather try to make the real world better than try and crawl back into a fictional womb.

[FlagDUDE08]

Re: Convention junkies can obsess details here!

Nostalgia is the yearning for a Golden Age that "always is and never was." Life was simple when we were children and so we view the past with sepia tones and think it was better. It wasn't. It has always been hard to be an adult. If you actually go back and read what people were saying and doing at any given time life has always been hard. The "innocent time" the GOP hankers for was one where people were terrified every day the world was going to end in nuclear apocalypse, racism was virulent, and gays and women were mocked if they ever stepped out of their assigned social roles. Screw that -- I'd rather try to make the real world better than try and crawl back into a fictional womb.

Turning into what was behind the iron curtain is not going to be the way. We are not becoming part of a new world order.

[Gurtholfin]

Re: Convention junkies can obsess details here!

Turning into what was behind the iron curtain is not going to be the way. We are not becoming part of a new world order.

Paranoia will destroy ya...

[ScoobyDoo]

Re: Convention junkies can obsess details here!

Why are more and more people going on food stamps? Why are government organizations encouraging it by placing numerous PSAs about how to get your food stamps? Why is the government trying to mandate health care? Why are unemployment insurance requirements to actually be looking for work being lifted? Why is energy output being stripped to the brink of the country's failure?

We are becoming a socialist country and Obama is a socialist. No matter how many times you deny it, it is true.

Thank you Dr. Talking points.

You should have listened to Clinton's speech last night. None of what you've said is true. Especially the welfare to work thing which was massively distorted by Romney and his team.

[FreshFish]

Re: Convention junkies can obsess details here!

There was a good drinking game associated with The Bob Newhart Show: every time a character said "Bob" you had to take a drink. Of course, if they had people visiting, then you'd get smashed quickly ("Bob would you get the door?" "Oh, hi, Bob." "Bob, this is my date, date, this is Bob.")

I had a flashback to that thought when I contemplated Obama's speech tonight. I'll bet y'all that if I had the video resources, I could reconstruct the speech he'll give tonight by splicing together speeches he's already given before. I'd say that the chances that he'll say anything new are about 0.1%; every phrase he utters he's probably used before.





on an unrelated tangent; the Democrats omitted the word "God" from their platform, and when they went to take a roll-call vote to include it, the 'nays' out-shouted the 'ayes' three times. Then the chair ignored the vote entirely to declare the 'ayes' somehow carried the vote, and was roundly booed.

[Greyeagle]

Re: Convention junkies can obsess details here!

The most impressive part of Clinton's speech was how he successfully staked a claim for the political center by listing his accomplishments working with Republicans. Didn't hurt he subtly was able to fold Eisenhower, Reagan, and possibly a few other Republicans (there was a football game on and it was a long speech so I was clicking) into the speech.

While Clinton's speech rallied the troops is was most definitely aimed at the undecided. He really can give a hell of a speech.

[FlagDUDE08]

Re: Convention junkies can obsess details here!

Thank you Dr. Talking points.

You should have listened to Clinton's speech last night. None of what you've said is true. Especially the welfare to work thing which was massively distorted by Romney and his team.

Then why, when you are on unemployment, are you no longer required to submit proof of submitting two job application forms each week, whether paper or electronic?

[ScoobyDoo]

Re: Convention junkies can obsess details here!

Then why, when you are on unemployment, are you no longer required to submit proof of submitting two job application forms each week, whether paper or electronic?

Those exceptions were asked for by Republican Governors. You'll have to ask them.

[FlagDUDE08]

Re: Convention junkies can obsess details here!

Those exceptions were asked for by Republican Governors. You'll have to ask them.

Which specific cabinet members or governors (if unemployment insurance truly is a state issue, fund provision bullying does not constitute a state issue) were directly involved in these exceptions? Your "Blame Republicans" rhetoric has been a broken record for the past few years.

[ScoobyDoo]

Re: Convention junkies can obsess details here!

Which specific cabinet members or governors (if unemployment insurance truly is a state issue, fund provision bullying does not constitute a state issue) were directly involved in these exceptions? Your "Blame Republicans" rhetoric has been a broken record for the past few years.

It's been fact checked.

Where it didn't come from is Washington but rather from Utah, Nevada, California, Connecticut and Minnesota.

These states, some with Republican governors, asked the federal government for more flexibility in how they hand out welfare dollars. Their purpose was to spend less time on federal paperwork and more time experimenting with ways to connect welfare recipients with jobs.

The Obama administration cooperated, granting waivers to some states from some of the existing rules.

The waivers gave "those states some flexibility in how they manage their welfare rolls as long as it produced 20% increases in the number of people getting work."

In some small way, the waivers might change precisely how work is calculated but the essential goal of pushing welfare recipients to work -- something both Democrats and Republicans agreed to in the 1990s -- remains the same.

http://www.cnn.com/2012/08/23/politi...are/index.html

But you go on believing whatever the liars tell you.

[FlagDUDE08]

Re: Convention junkies can obsess details here!

It's been fact checked.


http://www.cnn.com/2012/08/23/politi...are/index.html

But you go on believing whatever the liars tell you.

OK, so states asked for the change. That doesn't mean they get it. However, according to the quotation you just posted, paragraph 3, it was the Obama Administration itself, I would assume Ms. Hilda Solis, that granted waivers, meaning that the determination truly is a federal issue.

Also, it said only SOME had GOP representation, which we know in some states is not the same as the National GOP, just as how some Democrats (especially in the south) are not National Democrats but rather Dixiecrats.

[Rover]

Re: Convention junkies can obsess details here!

I have to laugh at knuckledraggers desperately clinging to the change in the Dems platform as some sort of "game changer". What a bunch of wishful thinking. All the coverage today is about Clinton driving a stake in to the hearts of knuckledraggers the world over, showing Ryan to be a lying weasel, McConnell a corrupt partisan idiot and Mittens a dinosaur from an earlier era.

[Gurtholfin]

Re: Convention junkies can obsess details here!

Which specific cabinet members or governors (if unemployment insurance truly is a state issue, fund provision bullying does not constitute a state issue) were directly involved in these exceptions? Your "Blame Republicans" rhetoric has been a broken record for the past few years.

That's not a "blame Republicans" argument. Clearly shows that you're only hearing the talking points.

The Republican governors were working WITH Obama to come up with a solution that they think (and can prove) is more effective.

Polly want a cracker?