Slap Shot
I got nothing
Re: 2012 Elections: Corndogs for everyone!
What a shock that Don Quixote can't see the forrest for the trees.
What a shock that Don Quixote can't see the forrest for the trees.
USCHO Fan Forum
This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!
-
The USCHO Fan Forum has migrated to a new plaform, xenForo. Most of the function of the forum should work in familiar ways. Please note that you can switch between light and dark modes by clicking on the gear icon in the upper right of the main menu bar. We are hoping that this new platform will prove to be faster and more reliable. Please feel free to explore its features.
- Status
Re: 2012 Elections: Corndogs for everyone!
I don't think that Obama has tried to reset America's values on issues like abortion, creatiionism and morality overall...nor is he on his third wife after cheating for several years (at the same time as the Lewinsky incident) and leaving one as she was suffering from cancer.
Obama did not in fact work to make Iraq a reality working on the Defense Policy Board at the Pentagon just prior to the invasion and continously fought against setting withdrawl deadlines.
Also, I don't think Obama had 84 ethics violations filed against him while in office...nor did his party try to boot him out after 2 years of his 'leadership' and only remained because of a successful a threat to hand over that leadership to the opposiing party.
No, next to Gingrich, Obama is not a joke.
I don't think that Obama has tried to reset America's values on issues like abortion, creatiionism and morality overall...nor is he on his third wife after cheating for several years (at the same time as the Lewinsky incident) and leaving one as she was suffering from cancer.
Obama did not in fact work to make Iraq a reality working on the Defense Policy Board at the Pentagon just prior to the invasion and continously fought against setting withdrawl deadlines.
Also, I don't think Obama had 84 ethics violations filed against him while in office...nor did his party try to boot him out after 2 years of his 'leadership' and only remained because of a successful a threat to hand over that leadership to the opposiing party.
No, next to Gingrich, Obama is not a joke.
dxmnkd316
Lucia Apologist
Re: 2012 Elections: Corndogs for everyone!
It sounds like we agree! Gingrich and Edwards would both be horrible choices for president. Seems a large share of conservatives don't feel that way...
John Edwards? Is that you?
It sounds like we agree! Gingrich and Edwards would both be horrible choices for president. Seems a large share of conservatives don't feel that way...
dxmnkd316
Lucia Apologist
Re: 2012 Elections: Corndogs for everyone!
I like Huntsman now that Pawlenty is out of the race.
I can't help but think Tim saw the writing on the wall and saw how much of a clusterf*k this was going to become and decided to duck out early. I'll bet the GOP wishes they had a half decent candidate like tPaw now after the ringmaster, one of the elephants, the bearded lady, and the clown have been kicked out of the circus.
I like Huntsman now that Pawlenty is out of the race.
I can't help but think Tim saw the writing on the wall and saw how much of a clusterf*k this was going to become and decided to duck out early. I'll bet the GOP wishes they had a half decent candidate like tPaw now after the ringmaster, one of the elephants, the bearded lady, and the clown have been kicked out of the circus.
ScoobyDoo
NPC
Re: 2012 Elections: Corndogs for everyone!
Obama has made a lot of stupid mistakes. No question. But having the party of purity leaning Gingrich and Romney is just too ridiculous to let stand. It's a farce of all farces.
Obama has made a lot of stupid mistakes. No question. But having the party of purity leaning Gingrich and Romney is just too ridiculous to let stand. It's a farce of all farces.
Re: 2012 Elections: Corndogs for everyone!
I heard a piece from South Carolina where they were asking the supposed hard core, God fearin' Christian conservative population about whether Newt's 3 marriages disqualified him for their vote, and one guy responds: "um, no. It doesn't bother me. I'm on my 3rd marriage myself".
I heard a piece from South Carolina where they were asking the supposed hard core, God fearin' Christian conservative population about whether Newt's 3 marriages disqualified him for their vote, and one guy responds: "um, no. It doesn't bother me. I'm on my 3rd marriage myself".
walrus
Wind up workin' in a gas station
Re: 2012 Elections: Corndogs for everyone!
The party of purity, TF, you're probably right. Compare getting agendas through though, Newt or Obama, who has had more success?. Who got Budgets passed? I wouldn't vote for Newt if he was the last man standing and I doubt he can beat Obama but he is a skilled politician.
Kepler
Cornell Big Red
Re: 2012 Elections: Corndogs for everyone!
I agree with you about that, though my favorite example is him making the guys who plundered the economy his economic team.
I agree with you about that, though my favorite example is him making the guys who plundered the economy his economic team.
Re: 2012 Elections: Corndogs for everyone!
Newtie could be the best of a weak bunch over there no doubt about it. You could easily make the argument that he's the most seasoned for the job. The problem is his downside in a general election is far greater than his upside. He's a very well known politician that the populace has already decided they don't like. A guy like Cain or Perry before their demise held out the possibility that they could grow on the voters the more widely known they became. Gingrich doesn't have that luxury. He is however a skilled campaigner, clearly the best of the bunch to be in this position despite his baggage, and he's from the geographic base of the party which shouldn't be underestimated. I can also see him easily raising money to be competitive as he must still have his big donor contacts from his Speaker days. That's a lot of ammo to win the nomination with. It also gets him a better showing than McCain. What I still don't see is how he appeals to the Colorado's, Nevada's, New Hampshire's and Ohio's of the country. Not only is he giving away the foreign policy issue, he's also the first GOP'er in recent memory who can't even go near making a Mr Morals argument.
Newtie could be the best of a weak bunch over there no doubt about it. You could easily make the argument that he's the most seasoned for the job. The problem is his downside in a general election is far greater than his upside. He's a very well known politician that the populace has already decided they don't like. A guy like Cain or Perry before their demise held out the possibility that they could grow on the voters the more widely known they became. Gingrich doesn't have that luxury. He is however a skilled campaigner, clearly the best of the bunch to be in this position despite his baggage, and he's from the geographic base of the party which shouldn't be underestimated. I can also see him easily raising money to be competitive as he must still have his big donor contacts from his Speaker days. That's a lot of ammo to win the nomination with. It also gets him a better showing than McCain. What I still don't see is how he appeals to the Colorado's, Nevada's, New Hampshire's and Ohio's of the country. Not only is he giving away the foreign policy issue, he's also the first GOP'er in recent memory who can't even go near making a Mr Morals argument.
unofan
Well-known member
Re: 2012 Elections: Corndogs for everyone!
Surely you aren't saying that the guy who literally shut down the government becasue he wasn't going to get his way "got budgets passed"? Right?
Surely you aren't saying that the guy who literally shut down the government becasue he wasn't going to get his way "got budgets passed"? Right?
Kepler
Cornell Big Red
Re: 2012 Elections: Corndogs for everyone!
The funny thing is Newt may not be able to fathom the current GOP Congress, and he may not be able to do anything with them. Newt thinks he's Aristotle crossbred with Machiavelli, just like every failed history assistant professor who didn't get tenure does. Not sure how that would work with the True Believers like Coburn or DeMint or the House Class of 2010 wackos. Obama's whole thing is the art of the possible; he's much more likely to produce results.
Newt went head to head with Clinton and lost. It's an open question whether the plan all along was to lose -- use the Contract to suck in the voters, then say "well we would have passed your agenda but that dastardly president didn't let us." That seems cynical but (1) if your whole basis of running for government is to dismantle government, you're pretty cynical, and (2) given the whole impeachment charade, that GOP group led the league in cynicism.
The funny thing is Newt may not be able to fathom the current GOP Congress, and he may not be able to do anything with them. Newt thinks he's Aristotle crossbred with Machiavelli, just like every failed history assistant professor who didn't get tenure does. Not sure how that would work with the True Believers like Coburn or DeMint or the House Class of 2010 wackos. Obama's whole thing is the art of the possible; he's much more likely to produce results.
Last edited:
Re: 2012 Elections: Corndogs for everyone!
It's rather hyperbolic to assert that Newt's platform is to disband the Federal Government completely, dontcha think?
I don't think that's cynical at all. Both liberals and conservatives at times believe that the government has overstepped its bounds (e.g. the Patriot Act on the liberal side), and running on a platform of scaling back those excesses does not equate to cynicism.
It's rather hyperbolic to assert that Newt's platform is to disband the Federal Government completely, dontcha think?
Kepler
Cornell Big Red
Re: 2012 Elections: Corndogs for everyone!
My whole point is Newt and his little hivemind of Congressmen didn't actually want to disband government at all, they just wanted to run it so they could distribute goodies to their people. That's why Newt's transition into lobbyist / will-write-anything-you-want-for-pay pundit was so seamless.
You make the time-honored mistake that just because your libertarianism is philosophically-grounded and sincere, you think everybody mouthing the words is. 99% of the guys who hitched a ride on that train were just looking for a gimmick. Once in power they did nothing to advance that agenda; they just used the existing spoils system for their own cronies.
His rhetoric was the culmination of Zombie 90's Republican. "Government bad. Mrrrgh. Braaaains."
My whole point is Newt and his little hivemind of Congressmen didn't actually want to disband government at all, they just wanted to run it so they could distribute goodies to their people. That's why Newt's transition into lobbyist / will-write-anything-you-want-for-pay pundit was so seamless.
You make the time-honored mistake that just because your libertarianism is philosophically-grounded and sincere, you think everybody mouthing the words is. 99% of the guys who hitched a ride on that train were just looking for a gimmick. Once in power they did nothing to advance that agenda; they just used the existing spoils system for their own cronies.
FadeToBlack&Gold
Kettle Medallion
Re: 2012 Elections: Corndogs for everyone!
Anyone who thinks Gringrich wants government disbanded is nuts. He wants more government, so he can have more power. Duh.
Anyone who thinks Gringrich wants government disbanded is nuts. He wants more government, so he can have more power. Duh.
ScoobyDoo
NPC
Re: 2012 Elections: Corndogs for everyone!
Well sure. The right wants more of their kind of government and the left wants more of their kind of government. The right is sneakier cause their method of more campaigns as being less.
Well sure. The right wants more of their kind of government and the left wants more of their kind of government. The right is sneakier cause their method of more campaigns as being less.
Last edited:
Re: 2012 Elections: Corndogs for everyone!
You seem to have misspelled *****.
You seem to have misspelled *****.
FadeToBlack&Gold
Kettle Medallion
Re: 2012 Elections: Corndogs for everyone!
Well, there's that too; being a sugar daddy has its perks.
Well, there's that too; being a sugar daddy has its perks.
leswp1
New member
Re: 2012 Elections: Corndogs for everyone!
Driving home the last few days listening to the nonsense (not) happening in the Senate and the House. THe whole- Dems aren't getting anything done and the GOP not compromising but saying the Dems won't compromise. So I was thinking- keep hearing less govt, give it back to the states. Well- so far the inaction has forced this policy but people are complaining there is no funding for education (well, except Tex where they don't believe in that anyway), infrastructure, most State programs. Lots of complaining about loss of jobs occuring (many in local govt/service/education etc.
If less was better shouldn't this be working out? Would love to hear (not sarcastic) how this plan to downsize all this stuff on the Fed level is going to help the States or me as a citizen of one. Seems like the states are hung out to dry with no way to get capital except to cut more jobs or tax more. Neither is 'acceptable' to which ever party. $ don't grow on trees. Where is the money supposed to appear from on the State level? No one could reasonably believe they are going to cut enough waste to cure things. Much of that waste is putting $ into the economy and drives the economy somehow.
Driving 2 hrs back and forth to a conference for 2 days in a row gives one way too much time to think.
THat was before most polititians became overt experts at spinning to the exclusion of governing. The end of compromise.
Driving home the last few days listening to the nonsense (not) happening in the Senate and the House. THe whole- Dems aren't getting anything done and the GOP not compromising but saying the Dems won't compromise. So I was thinking- keep hearing less govt, give it back to the states. Well- so far the inaction has forced this policy but people are complaining there is no funding for education (well, except Tex where they don't believe in that anyway), infrastructure, most State programs. Lots of complaining about loss of jobs occuring (many in local govt/service/education etc.
If less was better shouldn't this be working out? Would love to hear (not sarcastic) how this plan to downsize all this stuff on the Fed level is going to help the States or me as a citizen of one. Seems like the states are hung out to dry with no way to get capital except to cut more jobs or tax more. Neither is 'acceptable' to which ever party. $ don't grow on trees. Where is the money supposed to appear from on the State level? No one could reasonably believe they are going to cut enough waste to cure things. Much of that waste is putting $ into the economy and drives the economy somehow.
Driving 2 hrs back and forth to a conference for 2 days in a row gives one way too much time to think.
Last edited:
- Status