US Elections 2012 Part I: The Primaries/Caucus

[Urzu 7]

Originally Posted by Bri

I'm not sure the Bush administration was naive. They used the tragedy of the 9-11 attacks to successfully further neo-conservative goals. I doubt they believed they could end terrorism or even desired to end it.

For example:
The UN's influence has been diminished due to US unilateral operations.

Terrorist threat can be used as an excuse for first strike warfare

The establishment of military bases in strategic places in Central Asia.

Waging a war on credit and tax cuts made it harder for future governments to pursue social policy.

While these things do not necessarily benefit the US as a whole, they set up the stage for future realpolitik .

You know, you are right. Man, I hate the GOP. The GOP is evil. That isn't an overstatement.

[ganbaru]

Originally Posted by mangamuscle

What could be more amurrican than hang them high until they stop that weird little dance?

Firing squad have the advantage to give to some of them a good excuse to use their beloved guns.

Originally Posted by Vexx

Wow, could that self-absorbed bitch be any dumber?

How long before we know her name? <sharpens the verbal skewer tools>

What's really important isn't who she is; how many are like her and how much influence they have are more of a concern.

[Vexx]

Originally Posted by ganbaru

Firing squad have the advantage to give to some of them a good excuse to use their beloved guns.


What's really important isn't who she is; how many are like her and how much influence they have are more of a concern.

The thing is, she insulted all of her staff, people she depends on, business vendors.... and there's a fair description of her car so that kind of narrows it down.

House chef: "Gosh, Ms. Dumber-than-rocks, I guess the lettuce that was picked by people not making minimum wage had e.coli.... imagine."

[Urzu 7]

A New York City donor a few cars back, who also would not give her name, said Romney needed to do a better job connecting. "I don't think the common person is getting it," she said from the passenger seat of a Range Rover stamped with East Hampton beach permits. "Nobody understands why Obama is hurting them.

Yeah. Uh huh. Okay, lady. If only you knew how negative and harmful the GOP has been to America, all in an attempt to make Obama a one-term president. You be the one that needs to be educated better. Stop watching Fox News, while you're at it.

[ganbaru]

Originally Posted by Vexx

House chef: "Gosh, Ms. Dumber-than-rocks, I guess the lettuce that was picked by people not making minimum wage had e.coli.... imagine."

As a cook, I hope than you aren't sugesting someting unprofessional...
As a citizen (even as a canadian one) I do wonder if a idiotthan would end up spicing the soup with Botox would end up with bioterrorist charge ?

[JMvS]

Originally Posted by Urzu 7

At least we can agree that the Bush administrations actions in response to 9/11 (invade who we feel like and bring warfare to their countries, try to terminate all terrorists like roaches) has only led to more jihadist attacks in the world (from bombings to beheadings). Yeah, we've weakened Al Qaeda a lot, but the invasions and the war torn countries has only motivated the jihadists (and increased their numbers) by very much. A Catch 22, perhaps? I'm just certain that the "kill 'em all" approach wasn't the best one. The hundreds of thousands that have died in the middle east, the lives of American and allied soldiers lost, and the trillions of dollars spent on this war on terror, and...and what? Can we just stomp out terrorism? Al Qaeda is weak now, but through our modern day crusades, we have ignited hatred in the hearts of millions, and many of them will commit to terrorism in the future. We can't afford this war on terror for a very long time. So very short sighted and ignorant of the Bush administration. Did they just think we could stomp out terrorism in a few years and then on top of that it wouldn't create more enemies of America in the process? But what could we have done instead? I'm not sure, but I imagine that we could have taken alternatives routes that would have been better and that things could be better today.

Better yet, the last benevolent liberation war, by ricochet, allowed Al Qaeda to seize a self declared independent country in Western Africa, with of course the goal to expand over the whole country if not further.

Mali: Islamist Militants Claim Control in North

Islamist militants linked to Al Qaeda declared Thursday that they had secured control of Mali’s northern desert, a day after pushing their former Tuareg separatist allies out of the town of Gao in a gun battle that killed at least 20 people. The appropriation by Islamists of a separatist uprising by Tuareg rebels regarded in the West as having some legitimate political grievances will heighten fears that Mali will become a haven for jihadists. Ansar Dine, a local Islamist group, and an allied Qaeda splinter group had already gained the upper hand in the northern town of Kidal and the ancient trading post of Timbuktu after government forces were pushed out in an April rebel advance. The United Nations Security Council has said it would be ready to support military intervention by Mali’s neighbors to help the country take back the north, but it first needs more details of their plans.

BTW, they already started their own Bamyan protocol.

[Urzu 7]

And you know, what can we do? It isn't America's job to go in there and route out Al Qaeda. We just can't afford to wage war wherever they are. Other countries and other armies have to step it up and diminish Al Qaeda's presence in areas of the world.

[ganbaru]

Health care options for young, healthy and broke
http://hosted.ap.org/dynamic/stories...07-10-13-44-31

WASHINGTON (AP) -- They're young, healthy and flat broke - and now the government says they have to buy thousands of dollars' worth of medical insurance. What should tapped-out twentysomethings do?

Well, some may just do nothing. The annual fine for shrugging off the new federal insurance requirement, which is to begin in 2014, starts out at a relatively low $95, depending on income. That would be far cheaper than paying premiums.

But that doesn't necessarily make blowing off the mandate a good idea for the fit and frugal. Millions of young people will qualify for good deals on health care if they take time to sort through the complicated law.

[Vallen Chaos Valiant]

Originally Posted by ganbaru

Health care options for young, healthy and broke
http://hosted.ap.org/dynamic/stories...07-10-13-44-31

If they are flat broke, then they don't pay taxes. This means also then they can't lose any tax rebate. I have no idea what the article is talking about. You can't lose tax rebate that you weren't getting to begin with.

[ganbaru]

Biden: 'Mitt Romney wants you to show your papers, but he won't show us his'
http://www.politico.com/blogs/burns-...ut-128527.html

“When his father, George Romney, was a candidate was for President in 1968, he released 12 years of tax returns because, as he said, ‘One year could be a fluke, perhaps done for show.’

“His son has released one year of his tax returns.

“Making a lie of the old adage: Like father, like son.

“Mitt Romney wants you to show your papers, but he won’t show us his.

“So many questions…”

[Mr. DJ]

"So many questions..."

That nobody should really give a damn about. Stop spotlighting wedge issues you spineless shitbricks!

[ganbaru]

^ And what should we talk about ? The real questions should be more about which one will do the best job ( or at least the least bad) for the next 4 years. To answer this without knowing beforehand the result of their hypothetic term, the only other way to make a bright decision , is to have the clearest image of each candidates. If most of the informations we get from the media is wedge issues then so be it.

At least keep the insult outside serious threads, it's only making you look bad and weaken yours position.

[Ledgem]

Originally Posted by ganbaru

^ And what should we talk about ? The real questions should be more about which one will do the best job ( or at least the least bad) for the next 4 years. To answer this without knowing beforehand the result of their hypothetic term, the only other way to make a bright decision , is to have the clearest image of each candidates. If most of the informations we get from the media is wedge issues then so be it.

While I agree with this, I also get a bit tired of it. What are their plans? Romney has told us what he plans to do on day #1 if he's made president - repeal "Obamacare." What does he want to replace it with? How does Obama propose to deal with the fact that the Republicans in Congress are out to get him? For both Obama and Romney, what are their plans with regard to the economy, our armed involvement in other countries, and the old freedom-trampling bills that were passed back in 2001? What do they want to do with our national infrastructure, our education system, and the obesity epidemic?

I get it, they don't want to talk too much about those, because: voters tend to tune out when it comes to key details; giving specifics makes it very easy for everyone to provide a criticism (even if they don't know what they're talking about); and there's probably no clear plan in place for any of that. That's to a politician's benefit too, actually - the less specific you are, the fewer voters you alienate.

Still, it's ridiculous that politics today had become all about personality and past accomplishments. Those are important, but they're nowhere near as important as giving us a plan, or at the very least, a general goal of what they value and want to accomplish.

[mangamuscle]

Originally Posted by Ledgem

While I agree with this, I also get a bit tired of it. What are their plans? Romney has told us what he plans to do on day #1 if he's made president - repeal "Obamacare." What does he want to replace it with? How does Obama propose to deal with the fact that the Republicans in Congress are out to get him? For both Obama and Romney, what are their plans with regard to the economy, our armed involvement in other countries, and the old freedom-trampling bills that were passed back in 2001? What do they want to do with our national infrastructure, our education system, and the obesity epidemic?

You do realize their answer to this and many other key questions is either:

1. Nothing at all.
2. Lies, lies and more lies, Remember how bush jr said he was not interested in starting a foreign conflict and how Obama said he would close Guantanamo?

That is why the past is REALLY important, because no one can't change it. "Thus, by their fruit you will recognize them." Matthew 7:20

[ganbaru]

Obama Holds Lead; Romney Trails on Most Issues
http://www.people-press.org/2012/07/...n-most-issues/

Mitt Romney stayed at Bain 3 years longer than he stated
Firm’s 2002 filings identify him as CEO, though he said he left in 1999
http://bostonglobe.com/news/politics...UTI/story.html

[Vexx]

Originally Posted by ganbaru

Obama Holds Lead; Romney Trails on Most Issues
http://www.people-press.org/2012/07/...n-most-issues/

Unfortunately, as we see - our "average voter" can agree with Candidate X on every issue and still vote Candidate Y... [example: health care reform - most voters (~80%) support almost every item yet almost 55% are against the act when you call it "Obamacare"].

Mitt Romney stayed at Bain 3 years longer than he stated
Firm’s 2002 filings identify him as CEO, though he said he left in 1999
http://bostonglobe.com/news/politics...UTI/story.html

Okay, at this point -- this man appears to be either brain-damaged or a pathological liar. He's telling falsehoods or mis-remembering about stuff that doesn't even *matter*.

[Vallen Chaos Valiant]

Originally Posted by Vexx

Okay, at this point -- this man appears to be either brain-damaged or a pathological liar. He's telling falsehoods or mis-remembering about stuff that doesn't even *matter*.

It depends. He will get away with it anyway because he is rich and famous, but the issue is that if a normal person did what he did, he would get sued. He is claiming that he isn't really running the company even though he is still named the CEO on legal papers and is the major stock holder.

Problem is, people who invest in his company might well have decided to do so with the understanding that the CEO they thought they had was actually working there. So there is room for civil suit for lying.

There is also the question of whether he was eligible to have been elected for governor if he wasn't technically living in Massachusetts.

[ganbaru]

Originally Posted by Vexx

Okay, at this point -- this man appears to be either brain-damaged or a pathological liar. He's telling falsehoods or mis-remembering about stuff that doesn't even *matter*.

FactCheck.org: Romney 'would be guilty of a federal felony' by claiming 1999 departure
http://www.politico.com/blogs/media/...ny-128733.html
So, it seem than this stuff might matter,even if he would end up only with a slap on the wrist.

[Dhomochevsky]

Originally Posted by Vexx

Okay, at this point -- this man appears to be either brain-damaged or a pathological liar. He's telling falsehoods or mis-remembering about stuff that doesn't even *matter*.

That depends on what his company did during those last 3 years.
Maybe he knows something we don't know yet. Something so bad, that he does not want to be connected with it. You should investigate deeper into that company's dirty laundry.

[Vallen Chaos Valiant]

Originally Posted by Dhomochevsky

That depends on what his company did during those last 3 years.
Maybe he knows something we don't know yet. Something so bad, that he does not want to be connected with it. You should investigate deeper into that company's dirty laundry.

Problem is that he was the majority stock holder AND the registered CEO. It's all well and good to claim he didn't run the company, but he couldn't actually tell you who was, because there was no one else legaly in his place.

It would be like saying you didn't drive the car, but also said there was no one else in the vehicle with you. He had to have broken the rules somewhere. We just don't know which rule.