2012 Presidential Election Part 4

[ScoobyDoo]

Re: 2012 Presidential Election Part 4

So when that happens is everything still the fault of Congress, especially the Senate? Or will everything magically become the president's fault then?

Nope. It will be the President's fault. Just like it is now. I'm just one lone voice in the wilderness.

 

[Old Pio]

Re: 2012 Presidential Election Part 4

If the Affordable Care Act proves to be reasonably effective in slowing down runaway medical costs and making medical care more accessible, will Mitt insist that it be called Obomney care?

If I had some bread I could make a ham and cheese sandwich. . .if I had some ham. . .if I had some cheese.

 

[unofan]

Re: 2012 Presidential Election Part 4

Keep spouting Obama's talking points Mr. "I'm no supporter of Obama and don't vote for him"

Which of those is incorrect and not a stated policy of Romney's?

Also, since FreshFish is such a fan of the Economist, I'd like his take on this week's special report on income inequality. Especially how it's hurting economic growth, is higher today than it was during the gilded age, and the Economist's call for modern day Teddy Roosevelt-esque populism to even it out.

 

[Twitch Boy]

Re: 2012 Presidential Election Part 4

So some whackadoo just registered octsurprise.com, put up a countdown clock to October 21, and started spewing blurry pictures of documents and cryptic clues on Twitter about having something irrefutable against one of the candidates that could turn the election into a landslide.

I'll laugh my *** off if it's a Rickroll.

 

[mookie1995]

Re: 2012 Presidential Election Part 4

Which of those is incorrect and not a stated policy of Romney's?

Also, since FreshFish is such a fan of the Economist, I'd like his take on this week's special report on income inequality. Especially how it's hurting economic growth, is higher today than it was during the gilded age, and the Economist's call for modern day Teddy Roosevelt-esque populism to even it out.

have they been reading my posts again?!!??!!!?!?

 

[Jimjamesak]

This has been an awesome meme...

 

[Old Pio]

Re: 2012 Presidential Election Part 4

Before anyone takes His Truthlessness' assertions about how he "told the world" Benghazi was a terrorist attack right from the git go, let's take this little stroll down memory lane. I realize it's from Fox, and many of you will react to that like Linda Blair did to holy water, but man up just this once. I promise, if you get through this without crying, the nurse will have a lolly for you on the way out.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=E6OzShia0bQ

Here's the trick bag His Panderness has put himself in: If, as he now suggests, he made a clear declaration right from the beginning (which he didn't) that Benghazi was a terrorist operation, where did all of that guff about videos and "spontaneous" demonstrations come from? If he knew Benghazi was an AQ operation, why all the dissembling? Come on, you can answer that one without any help from me.

"Honey, some of the fellers are really unhappy about that video they've never heard of, let alone seen, and they're going over to the American consulate to demonstrate. I think I'd like to join them, where did you put my RPG?"

 

[burd]

Re: 2012 Presidential Election Part 4

Before anyone takes His Truthlessness' assertions about how he "told the world" Benghazi was a terrorist attack right from the git go, let's take this little stroll down memory lane. I realize it's from Fox, and many of you will react to that like Linda Blair did to holy water, but man up just this once. I promise, if you get through this without crying, the nurse will have a lolly for you on the way out.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=E6OzShia0bQ

Here's the trick bag His Panderness has put himself in: If, as he now suggests, he made a clear declaration right from the beginning (which he didn't) that Benghazi was a terrorist operation, where did all of that guff about videos and "spontaneous" demonstrations come from? If he knew Benghazi was an AQ operation, why all the dissembling? Come on, you can answer that one without any help from me.

"Honey, some of the fellers are really unhappy about that video they've never heard of, let alone seen, and they're going over to the American consulate to demonstrate. I think I'd like to join them, where did you put my RPG?"

You've become old and bitter, Pio. You need a dose of hockey.

 

[duper]

Re: 2012 Presidential Election Part 4

I do have a political agenda, it's just that neither candidate seemed to represent it.... I liked Reagan and I liked Clinton (politically, though I detested his personal habits), I really liked CT Gov Jodi Rell. She was one of the best ever.

I do not think the current version of Romney is a panderer. To me the current version of Romney does seem authentic. If you had decades of experience in sales, you'd be attuned to body language, tone of voice, inflection...he's not faking it this time, IMHO. You can sense genuine passion now, he's not saying what people want to hear, he's saying what he truly believes: he is very good at what he does, and he truly believes that what he is good at is exactly what the country needs right now. In a dual sense of the word, he now seems like a man on a mission. (of course, that raises the question, where has he been hiding up to now, as you say).

One of the most powerful motivators of successful people I know is a sense of stewardship. These people are humble, they believe they have been blessed and have a responsibility to use their talents to their fullest, not for their own gratification, but for the advancement of all humanity with whom they come in contact.

now, if you don't know many people like this, it might sound like bovine fecal matter to you. I've been very fortunate throughout my career to work with some of the best and brightest this country has to offer, and I've lived among people with that attitude first hand.

The best part of a good old-fashioned crock of steaming FreshFish **** is that he includes these fun little escape clauses for himself. If I disagree, then he can just pompously blame my disagreement on my not knowing enough good strong red-blooded Americans.

So Freshy, I'm not old enough to have spent several decades doing anything aside from breathing and yanking my own weiner, but I also feel that I have reason to know a little bit about non-verbal communication. And to me, Romney's non-verbals still say, "I'm full of it up to my eyeballs.

The old line about looking at how people treat their inferiors is a good one. When it comes to politicians, look at what they say in what they consider friendly environs. I am consistently ****ing appalled by what this clown says when he thinks he is safe.

 

[FadeToBlack&Gold]

Re: 2012 Presidential Election Part 4

You've become old and bitter, Pio. You need a dose of hockey.

You've clearly never read Pio's jokes about needing more Crown when DU is losing.

 

[Old Pio]

Re: 2012 Presidential Election Part 4

You've clearly never read Pio's jokes about needing more Crown when DU is losing.

Or winning. Or tieing.

 

[Old Pio]

Re: 2012 Presidential Election Part 4

You've become old and bitter, Pio. You need a dose of hockey.

Become?

 

[ExileOnDaytonStreet]

So some whackadoo just registered octsurprise.com, put up a countdown clock to October 21, and started spewing blurry pictures of documents and cryptic clues on Twitter about having something irrefutable against one of the candidates that could turn the election into a landslide.

I'll laugh my *** off if it's a Rickroll.

I'll be shocked if its not.

 

[dxmnkd316]

Re: 2012 Presidential Election Part 4

So some whackadoo just registered octsurprise.com, put up a countdown clock to October 21, and started spewing blurry pictures of documents and cryptic clues on Twitter about having something irrefutable against one of the candidates that could turn the election into a landslide.

I'll laugh my *** off if it's a Rickroll.

Fark has already destroyed it. It's by the two guys who did the Radiohead LP rick roll.

 

[Old Pio]

Re: 2012 Presidential Election Part 4

Some of the people His Islamistness wants to avoid offending are up to their usual tricks.

http://www.newser.com/story/156010/afghan-woman-beheaded-for-refusing-to-sleep-with-man.html

The last soviet puppet leader of Afghanistan was also named Najibullah. He was hanged by the Taliban.

 

[walrus]

Re: 2012 Presidential Election Part 4

And to me, Romney's non-verbals still say, "I'm full of it up to my eyeballs. .

I'd guess Obama non verbals make you think he is the smartest man in the room?

 

[St. Clown]

Re: 2012 Presidential Election Part 4

I'd guess Obama non verbals make you think he is the smartest man in the room?

Is telepathy considered nonverbal?

 

[FreshFish]

Re: 2012 Presidential Election Part 4

Here's some hope for you Obamaphiles....traditional metrics for past elections contested by a sitting President running for re-election might not apply in this election due to a fundamental shift over the past four years in the relationship between the government and its citizens.

Since World War II, the five incumbent presidents who were re-elected enjoyed an economy where the unemployment rate averaged 5.4% in September of their election year, real GDP growth was 5.9% in the second quarter, and the University of Michigan Consumer Confidence Index in August was 97. Today the unemployment rate is 7.8%, real GDP growth in the second quarter was 1.3%, and the Consumer Confidence Index in August was 74.

Based on these economic measures, President Obama's re-election would seem to be doomed.

But there is a new dynamic at work in 2012. Voter behavior in the past has been based on the performance of the private economy. Markedly different today is the dramatic growth of public-sector benefits.

In 1980 and 1992, only 3% of the American labor force drew disability benefits from the government. Today it is 6%. The number of workers qualifying for disability since the recession ended in 2009 has grown twice as fast as private employment. [emphasis added]

How would Presidents Jimmy Carter or George H.W. Bush have fared on their Election Day if 40% of the Americans who were unemployed had instead qualified for disability benefits? How would voters have reacted in 1980 or 1992 if food-stamp benefits had grown by 65% instead of an average of less than 25% during the first four years of their administrations?

During the past four years, the Obama administration's aggressive promotion of the food-stamp program has increased the number of recipients by 18.5 million. Do these people feel the same level of discontent about economic conditions as the rest of the voting population?

Unemployment insurance that lasted no longer than 55 weeks in 1980 and 72 weeks in 1992 now can last 99 weeks. Does this ease the distress level of the 40% of unemployed workers who have been out of work for more than half a year?

The federal government's 120 means-tested programs today provide $1 trillion of benefits. The spending for these programs has grown 2½ times faster during the Obama presidency than in any other comparable period in American history. To what extent might these benefits not just foster dependency but also make the economy's performance seem less of a deciding factor in voters' choices?

Economic metrics associated with the defeat of previous incumbent presidents in the postwar period—September unemployment when Mr. Carter was running in 1980 was 7.5% and 7.6% for Mr. Bush in 1992—were a product of the economic environment of those times. The question to ask today is whether the old metrics apply in an age of vastly bigger government.

If you are concerned about your well-being and worried about a failed recovery—but getting new help from the government—do you vote for the candidate who promises more jobs or do you support the candidate who promises more government benefits?

 

[FreshFish]

Re: 2012 Presidential Election Part 4

Also, since FreshFish is such a fan of the Economist, I'd like his take on this week's special report on income inequality.

I thought I'd made it pretty clear that "income" inequality statistics are really not what matters nearly as much as wealth inequality. Income inequality statistics in the aggregate typically are badly skewed because individual people's income can fluctuate so dramatically from year to year. Your company has a good year, you get a bonus; your company spins off a division, you get a one-time lump-sum distribution; you get laid off, you get re-hired, you sell your house to downsize and have a big capital gain....Income inequality is a relatively spurious issue in the grand scheme of things.

Wealth inequality, however, is a serious issue. I'm on record as being a supporter of the estate tax, for example, and I'd much prefer we downsize the income tax and implement an annual wealth tax instead (although that does cause some pain for people whose wealth is tied up in illiquid assets like real estate). Lasting economic advancement requires wealth-building, and that's where I think the focus should be. Too much of "concern" about income inequality is driven by envy rather than solid economic analysis.

Wealth redistribution on the other hand has substantial economic data to back up its efficacy. The best examples were in Central America with land reform, and in England after Henry VIII broke from the Catholic Church, and in the US when the western territories were opened to expansion. There is plenty of ammunition to support wealth redistribution as a driver of economic progress.

Satisfied, smart aleck?

 

[Rover]

Before anyone takes His Truthlessness' assertions about how he "told the world" Benghazi was a terrorist attack right from the git go, let's take this little stroll down memory lane. I realize it's from Fox, and many of you will react to that like Linda Blair did to holy water, but man up just this once. I promise, if you get through this without crying, the nurse will have a lolly for you on the way out.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=E6OzShia0bQ

Here's the trick bag His Panderness has put himself in: If, as he now suggests, he made a clear declaration right from the beginning (which he didn't) that Benghazi was a terrorist operation, where did all of that guff about videos and "spontaneous" demonstrations come from? If he knew Benghazi was an AQ operation, why all the dissembling? Come on, you can answer that one without any help from me.

"Honey, some of the fellers are really unhappy about that video they've never heard of, let alone seen, and they're going over to the American consulate to demonstrate. I think I'd like to join them, where did you put my RPG?"

This is a good example of why you and Mittens always end up coming off like idiots. You get caught up in lame debates about semantics and end up getting slapped down publicly for all to see.

Obama called it a terrorist act from the get-go. No amount of spin is going to change the public record. Furthermore, even better was Obama's solemn but forceful condemnation right to Romney's face about how he was the one greeting the caskets with the families, thus making the Mittwit's ridiculous political posturing downright treasonous.

Its really a difference in two forms of leadership. One is the guy who is ultimately responsible for the success and failure in thousands of places around the world where the the fight against terrorists rages 24/7. The other is a panderer and his followers hoping for an overseas incident and sending out false press releases before the bodies have even been identified. When Beirut embassy was bombed, Democrats weren't putting out press releases blasting Reagan's leadership. How far conservatives have come, and its small wonder the GOP is as popular as jock itch right now.