2012 Presidential Election - The Day after the Aftermath...

[FlagDUDE08]

Re: 2012 Presidential Election - The Day after the Aftermath...

Why is the Washington Post complaining about Obama not trying to reach a consensus (or at least the blogger)? http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/right-turn/wp/2012/12/14/boehner-is-trying-obama-is-not/

Obama doesn't have to compromise! He's never been in it for his party. He has only been in it for his personal beliefs. This is why people voted for him, and is why Romney would have won in 2008, but did not win in 2012. This is also why I no longer associate myself as a Republican. The GOP is so concerned with portraying an image and getting their candidates to fit into that mold. Look at how many political commercials were sponsored by the GOP committee and were not associated with any candidate. The biggest fundamental difference between the two parties is whether the candidate shapes the party or the party shapes the candidate. That's how a guy like Reagan became so popular. The GOP thought he couldn't win against Carter, but somehow received the nomination, and lo and behold, the GOP shaped their agenda around him.

 

[Rover]

Re: 2012 Presidential Election - The Day after the Aftermath...

Aren't most flu shots free if you have insurance (the point of the ACA)? Why would you be using HSA dollars for that?

Moving on, the "Reagan template" for winning elections passed its expiration date in November 1992. Reagan ran on ideas such as massive tax cuts for the wealthy, rolling back civil rights legislation, and a strict anti-abortion stance. Aside from rolling back civil rights (something to his credit the old boy abandoned once in office) this is the same platform as Bush I/Dole/Bush II/McCain/Romney that has gotten outvoted 5 out of the last 6 elections.

Next, Reagan was an extraordinary communicator who still inspires a cult like worship a decade after he died. Asking the upcoming group of clowns who will contest the GOP nomination next time around (think Ryan, Perry, Bachmann, Huckleberry, etc) to emulate that is akin to hoping Ronbo rises from the grave and starts taking back America all by himself...

 

[FlagDUDE08]

Re: 2012 Presidential Election - The Day after the Aftermath...

Aren't most flu shots free if you have insurance (the point of the ACA)? Why would you be using HSA dollars for that?

Moving on, the "Reagan template" for winning elections passed its expiration date in November 1992. Reagan ran on ideas such as massive tax cuts for the wealthy, rolling back civil rights legislation, and a strict anti-abortion stance. Aside from rolling back civil rights (something to his credit the old boy abandoned once in office) this is the same platform as Bush I/Dole/Bush II/McCain/Romney that has gotten outvoted 5 out of the last 6 elections.

Next, Reagan was an extraordinary communicator who still inspires a cult like worship a decade after he died. Asking the upcoming group of clowns who will contest the GOP nomination next time around (think Ryan, Perry, Bachmann, Huckleberry, etc) to emulate that is akin to hoping Ronbo rises from the grave and starts taking back America all by himself...

Rover, I'm going to give you one shot at this... we've recently had some pretty good discussions, but you seem to be slipping back to your anti-knuckledragger mantra...

I don't think you understand that I made absolutely NO point about what a specific person's or party's views on topics are. The only thing I said was that Obama's supporting party went into the background, let the candidate take the charge, while the party (and media, in the case of BHO) provided the background support needed to make sure people heard the message. This was clearly evident in the first debate. Romney ran as himself. Obama was left in the tracks after it. With the later debates, though, you could tell that the GOP was kicking in, because Romney's message was starting to change. I believe the term commonly used is flip-flopping.

Once again, I made absolutely no point that candidates should be emulating someone else. That candidate that they are emulating has already served his term. What I am saying is that the candidate needs to run as himself and the party needs to support that. If the candidate happens to draw inspiration from a past leader, that's understandable; I'm sure all of us draw inspiration from others, otherwise why would people use quotations?

 

[Rover]

Rover, I'm going to give you one shot at this... we've recently had some pretty good discussions, but you seem to be slipping back to your anti-knuckledragger mantra...

I don't think you understand that I made absolutely NO point about what a specific person's or party's views on topics are. The only thing I said was that Obama's supporting party went into the background, let the candidate take the charge, while the party (and media, in the case of BHO) provided the background support needed to make sure people heard the message. This was clearly evident in the first debate. Romney ran as himself. Obama was left in the tracks after it. With the later debates, though, you could tell that the GOP was kicking in, because Romney's message was starting to change. I believe the term commonly used is flip-flopping.

Once again, I made absolutely no point that candidates should be emulating someone else. That candidate that they are emulating has already served his term. What I am saying is that the candidate needs to run as himself and the party needs to support that. If the candidate happens to draw inspiration from a past leader, that's understandable; I'm sure all of us draw inspiration from others, otherwise why would people use quotations?

I'll mention Reagan and Clinton one more time in the context of you seem to be seeking a candidate who will stake out positions popular with the electorate but perhaps not with the party faithful and then upon gaining the nomination the party (in this case the GOP) will allow that candidate to set the agenda as we saw happen in 1980 and 1992.

I'm in complete agreement that the GOP needs this and quick. The problem IMHO is that in my lifetime I've never seen such an ideologically inflexible party. Even going back to the Ginrich era guys like Jeffords and Chaffee were allowed to head committees and faced no primary to knock them off. In fact, the only incumbent I ever remember getting primaried was Bob Smith in NH because he was a sure loser in the general election.

So back to your point, the GOP certainly needs a candidate who speaks more to where the country is on immigration, or same sex unions for example and take everybody else with them. What I wonder is if that person would make it to the convention? My sense is they wouldn't, as none of the people I can see running next time around have that kind of clout.

So in conclusion, for me there's a fundamental difference in the operation of the two parties which has nothing to do with one being better than the other. In the GOP, unlike with the Dems, there's a lot of money to be made by being a flamethrower. There is no left wing counterpart to the potential of becoming a Fox news instant celebrity or making a fortune selling inflammatory books. If there was, perhaps Dems would act the same way but the CNBC crowd (Maddow/Mathews/Schultz) aren't to my knowledge ex-pols where you have Huckleberry, Palin, Rove and Dick Morris cashing checks to play hard right ideologues on TV. If you're a GOP officeholder and you see the fame and money Michelle Bachmann is raking in, would you be able to resist the urge to play that same game? And what if a Presidential candidate came along and did advocate a more moderate or more honest form of conservatism even to the point of saying the govt shouldn't decide who marries who. Would you support them and get ripped to shreds by the Limbaughs of the world or would you say screw it, its not worth my career?

Too many non-elected people have too much money to make and throw around by keeping the Republicans as far right as they possibly can even if that's detrimental to the party's long term health. I liken it to the Operation Rescue people. If Roe v Wade was ever overturned, they'd all have to go out and find real jobs. In that context, how bad do you think they really want to see that happen?

 

[FreshFish]

Re: 2012 Presidential Election - The Day after the Aftermath...

Aren't most flu shots free if you have insurance (the point of the ACA)? Why would you be using HSA dollars for that?

you wouldn't. however you do purchase children's tylenol once your child does have the flu, for example.

Moving on, [another anti-Reagan rant with very little connection to what actually did occur]

Clearly you did not actually live through the Carter Presidency or the Reagan Presidency and so whatever "knowledge" you may have of those years comes from stuff you read, not stuff you experienced first-hand. It is really hard to describe how bleak and hopeless things appeared in 1979 and 1980 if you weren't actually a grownup then.


(although we are still wondering whether / if the day you become a grownup will ever arrive......you seem to be enjoying your prolonged adolescence tremendously! )

 

[FlagDUDE08]

Re: 2012 Presidential Election - The Day after the Aftermath...

you wouldn't. however you do purchase children's tylenol once your child does have the flu, for example.

Clearly you did not actually live through the Carter Presidency or the Reagan Presidency and so whatever "knowledge" you may have of those years comes from stuff you read, not stuff you experienced first-hand. It is really hard to describe how bleak and hopeless things appeared in 1979 and 1980 if you weren't actually a grownup then.


(although we are still wondering whether / if the day you become a grownup will ever arrive......you seem to be enjoying your prolonged adolescence tremendously! )

In the religion of fascism, they judge being a "grownup" by if you unconditionally succumb to their ways.

 

[Rover]

you wouldn't. however you do purchase children's tylenol once your child does have the flu, for example.

Clearly you did not actually live through the Carter Presidency or the Reagan Presidency and so whatever "knowledge" you may have of those years comes from stuff you read, not stuff you experienced first-hand. It is really hard to describe how bleak and hopeless things appeared in 1979 and 1980 if you weren't actually a grownup then.


(although we are still wondering whether / if the day you become a grownup will ever arrive......you seem to be enjoying your prolonged adolescence tremendously! )

True story. At work they post on the floor when you're having birthday, and one of my co-workers asks me if we're the same age. I told him I have no idea as I don't know how old he is, and he tells me he graduated in 2000!

So, when my co-workers gave me a cake I asked two of the young'uns how old they thought I was (based I assume on looks). One said 32, the other 31.

For the record, as a 40 year old I don't remember all of Carter's Presidency but I do remember Reagan's. His stimulus project of massive defense spending did boost the economy, although it would have been nice if he'd had a plan to pay for it. While Carter was hapless, its odd that he's the last President to try to achieve a budget balance by actually cutting discretionary spending, for which he earned himself a primary challenge from the left in the form of Ted Kennedy and the everlasting ire of Tip O'Neil.

 

[Old Pio]

Re: 2012 Presidential Election - The Day after the Aftermath...

True story. At work they post on the floor when you're having birthday, and one of my co-workers asks me if we're the same age. I told him I have no idea as I don't know how old he is, and he tells me he graduated in 2000!

So, when my co-workers gave me a cake I asked two of the young'uns how old they thought I was (based I assume on looks). One said 32, the other 31.

For the record, as a 40 year old I don't remember all of Carter's Presidency but I do remember Reagan's. His stimulus project of massive defense spending did boost the economy, although it would have been nice if he'd had a plan to pay for it. While Carter was hapless, its odd that he's the last President to try to achieve a budget balance by actually cutting discretionary spending, for which he earned himself a primary challenge from the left in the form of Ted Kennedy and the everlasting ire of Tip O'Neil.

Carter's unpardonable sin, IMO, was boycotting the Olympic Summer Games in Moscow. He compounded the felony by inviting the Olympians to the WH. I'm not a world class athlete, but a grip and grin with Jimmuh and the Iron Butterfly just doesn't seem like an acceptable substitute for what is usually a once in a lifetime chance to represent your country, after a lifetime of work.

 

[joecct]

Re: 2012 Presidential Election - The Day after the Aftermath...

Carter's unpardonable sin, IMO, was boycotting the Olympic Summer Games in Moscow. He compounded the felony by inviting the Olympians to the WH. I'm not a world class athlete, but a grip and grin with Jimmuh and the Iron Butterfly just doesn't seem like an acceptable substitute for what is usually a once in a lifetime chance to represent your country, after a lifetime of work.

Jimmy was a nice guy who was out of his depth. Became just as much a hostage of the Iranians as the people in the embassy (would not leave the White House, would not turn on the National Christmas Tree). Micromanager.

EDIT: I read the NY Times about as much as I read Pravda, but this one caught my interest: http://douthat.blogs.nytimes.com/2012/12/11/poverty-and-perverse-incentives/

 

[5mn_Major]

Re: 2012 Presidential Election - The Day after the Aftermath...

Carter's unpardonable sin, IMO, was boycotting the Olympic Summer Games in Moscow.

Rather low standards.

Jimmy was a nice guy who was out of his depth.

Could have been the right guy at the wrong time. But other less than stellar presidents fit that description.

 

[FlagDUDE08]

Re: 2012 Presidential Election - The Day after the Aftermath...

Carter's unpardonable sin, IMO, was boycotting the Olympic Summer Games in Moscow. He compounded the felony by inviting the Olympians to the WH. I'm not a world class athlete, but a grip and grin with Jimmuh and the Iron Butterfly just doesn't seem like an acceptable substitute for what is usually a once in a lifetime chance to represent your country, after a lifetime of work.

Lesson learned: When volunteering for Habitat for Humanity, don't listen to "In-a-Gadda-da-Vida".

 

[dxmnkd316]

Re: 2012 Presidential Election - The Day after the Aftermath...

Lesson learned: When volunteering for Habitat for Humanity, don't listen to "In-a-Gadda-da-Vida".

<iframe width="560" height="315" src="http://www.youtube.com/embed/0PyBWLALFLQ" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>

.

 

[Old Pio]

Re: 2012 Presidential Election - The Day after the Aftermath...

Rather low standards.



Could have been the right guy at the wrong time. But other less than stellar presidents fit that description.

You'd be the expert on the low standards "thingy" wouldn't you?

 

[Rover]

Carter's unpardonable sin, IMO, was boycotting the Olympic Summer Games in Moscow. He compounded the felony by inviting the Olympians to the WH. I'm not a world class athlete, but a grip and grin with Jimmuh and the Iron Butterfly just doesn't seem like an acceptable substitute for what is usually a once in a lifetime chance to represent your country, after a lifetime of work.

I do recall that decision and it being widely unpopular IIRC. Olympics shouldn't be used for a political statement despite regular bad behavior by Soviets and their allies both in the games (massive doping) and in the world in general.

 

[FlagDUDE08]

Re: 2012 Presidential Election - The Day after the Aftermath...

I do recall that decision and it being widely unpopular IIRC. Olympics shouldn't be used for a political statement despite regular bad behavior by Soviets and their allies both in the games (massive doping) and in the world in general.

Tell that to the Kremlin. (1984)

 

[FlagDUDE08]

Re: 2012 Presidential Election - The Day after the Aftermath...

I called it... http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2012/dec/14/dem-lawmaker-get-gun-control-obama-must-exploit-sh/

 

[Old Pio]

Re: 2012 Presidential Election - The Day after the Aftermath...

I called it... http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2012/dec/14/dem-lawmaker-get-gun-control-obama-must-exploit-sh/

At least the uber-liberal Nadler is being honest. "Exploit" is exactly the right word. The intellectual dishonesty and world class opportunism of these folks is what sticks in my craw. Neither they nor anyone with a semblance of intellect can actually believe any new law will diminish the liklihood of another Newtown or Tucson or Aurora or Virginia Tech. 30,000 Americans die each year as a result of gunfire. And only an infinitesimal percentage of them die in mass shootings. So go ahead and reinstate your ban on so called "assault" weapons and limit clips to 10 rounds and whatever else you have in mind. Just don't p*ss in my ear that someone who would shoot a 6-year old 11 times is going to be deterred by smaller clips. The only way to prevent the next Adam Lanza is to identify him and drop a net over his head.

 

[geezer]

Re: 2012 Presidential Election - The Day after the Aftermath...

Anyone hear Barry's speech from last night? Dude seemed to be imagining himself at Gettysburg with a stovepipe hat on, or standing on the smoldering remains of 2,000 dead at ground zero with a bullhorn. Looks to be a precursor for some kind of ban on guns to attempt to build a "legacy" for his presidency, but for a guy whose most important policy statement from 4 years in office was the whining, wheedling whimper of "If y.. y.. y... you have... have have a s... s... small business, you didn't built that!!!! You didn't build that!!!", he's going to have to do something he imagines is big and important to be remembered by.

 

[Rover]

Re: 2012 Presidential Election - The Day after the Aftermath...

Disagree to some extent with OP. What needs to happen is all gun sales go through the required background checks, which is the only way to net mentally ill individuals. Now that's not foolproof of course, as they can always resort to theft. But, before they do that its entirely possible they go into the local gun shop looking to buy a weapon or ammo. If the customer is talking to themselves while looking at their choices and then a check comes back that they've got a problem, a quick call to local law enforcement with the person's name and address for them to follow up on might avert a potential tragedy even if they then go and attempt to obtain a firearm by other means.

Its a similar concept to if I own a bar and somebody stumbles in and orders a drink. I refuse because they're already bombed, but then I see them stagger back into a car and peel off. Even though I didn't serve the guy, I'm calling up the cops and having them be on the lookout for the boozer who might plow into someone. Now he may do that before they get a chance to respond, but its far better than doing nothing.

 

[FreshFish]

Re: 2012 Presidential Election - The Day after the Aftermath...

hmm...so Boehner sort of caves and sort of holds his ground too....floated the idea of a 39.6% tax bracket starting with income of $1 million. Current rates extended for everyone below that mark.

weird that the Dems are opposed to means testing for Social Security and Medicare, I thought their whole mantra was "soak the rich" and that's what means testing does, no?


No surprise that the dems are opposed to limiting deductions; since five states account for half of the entire country's itemized deduction for state and local income tax! (that's probably 8 Dem Senators right there....) CA, IL, NY, CT, NJ