Discussion in 'Community' started by GrandAdmiralJello, Aug 15, 2011.
Michelle Bachmann wished Elvis a happy birthday today. Problem is today is actually [link=http://gawker.com/5831410/michele-bachmann-wishes-elvis-happy-birthday-on-his-death-day]the anniversary of his death[/link].
Not to be outdone, Rick Perry suggests [link=http://www.politico.com/politico44/perm/0811/thrust_and_perry_667f648f-2736-43ac-b8ef-d2dae90b739a.html]violence against the Chair of the Fed is appropriate[/link] while accusing him of treason.
[link=http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jonathon_Sharkey]I'm actually rooting for the Vampire. And I don't mean Mitt Romney.[/link]
Well, gee whiz, Jabba-wocky, don't you realize that it's those evil guys at the Federal Reserve Board who are printing all that worthless money?
If printing money is "almost treason", then rushing to war without a good justification is actual treason.
It's impossible for there to be an election campaign in which the politicians running don't make incredibly ridiculously/idiotic statements.
Viva Los Angeles!
Yes, but usually that doesn't extend to trying to do bodily harm to non-partisan members of the self-same government they are running to be a part of.
Hyperbole in political speak? Never!
Viva Los Angeles!
Consider this: Obama's "gaffes" can be counted on one hand. There's the "fifty... seven states" thing from the 2008 campaign trail that people still harp on every time one of these idiots farts something new, and the inexcusable-but-still-rare "Special Olympics" comment from, like, 2009 but is brought up less often by Republicans because **** the mentally disabled, really.
Because we didn't just decide in recent months that maybe using violent rhetorics in politics was not such a great idea?
My favorite gaffe recently (going back to the '08 campaign) was Biden telling someone in the crowd "Stand up Chuck, let them see you!", before quickly realizing that the person was/is confined to a wheelchair. Though it's waned a bit in recent time, I've still got a great interest in politics, and the news/media geek in me is very much excited for this campaign.
Viva Los Angeles!
I lost a good deal of excitement about Obama when he extended both Bush's tax cuts and the Patriot Act. Both were major dealbreaker issues for me. I wish John Edwards hadn't thrown his political career in the toilet.
I'm really tired of choosing between someone who sorta represents the working peoples of the US and a canidate that absolutely scares the **** out of me.
The PATRIOT Act was never going to be repealed. If it were, the Democrats would have done it back when they first had control. They chose to renew it. The Democrats may dislike some portions of the bill, but they like enough to keep the rest. And frankly, I don't think any candidate in the near future or any new Congress will repeal it. I don't see the Tea Party complaining about invasion of privacy from such an Act so I don't think they'll be strong-arming a repeal any time soon. And of course, if they did, Obama would likely go along with it as it couldn't hurt him too much politically to repeal the thing. So another reason no one will touch that act for years.
The Tax Cuts, someone please remind me, but didn't the Republicans sort of force this one a bit too? Weren't there several items that needed to be pushed through before the end of the session (the 9/11 responders bill and the repeal of DADT I thought were the two biggies). Essentially wasn't it something like: Nothing else gets discussed until we deal with the tax cuts? Granted this one wasn't as irresponsible or dangerous as the debt ceiling. But, I could have sworn that being pressed for time, they did cave faster on the tax cuts so they could push through these other items.
Well, I know they caved on something to get the 9/11 bill and repeal of DADT pushed through. But I can't recall for sure if it was the tax cuts or not.
No, Obama changed his mind on that one.
I think it should be a law that a running politician cannot be allowed to mention religion in any manner when it comes to politics. That's all I have to say. Crazy religious nutjobs.
Think that would be unamerican and unconstitutional to put into place.
[link=http://www.theawl.com/2011/08/what-i-learned-in-two-years-at-the-tea-party]2 years with the tea party[/link]
What are you referring to, exactly? I certainly hope you don't mean the unsourced quote from a"Democratic operative alignedd with the White House" (As opposed to all those prominent Democrats opposed to the re-election of their own party's nominee?) who said that the plan was to "kill Romney." Because, you know, that would be pretty stupid grounds for making the charge you just did.
Unconstitutional? Yes, true.
But imagine a world inwhich parties and candidates can only discuss their true stances on things and be held to them with only, you know, the true politics to discuss. But then again we live in a world where it's cooler to see Sarah Palin's alleged sex tape than to actually know anything about her political views.
Thanks Rick, thanks for being from TX (sigh).
[link=http://news.yahoo.com/blogs/ticket/survey-surprising-finding-tea-party-less-popular-atheists-160220531.html]Tea Party is less popular than Muslims, Atheists, Republicans, Democrats, Palin, Obama etc. [/link]
Still sad that Muslims and Atheists are "unpopular." But it sure is saying something that a group from within the country, that's well-known and well-understood and not something "other," is so unpopular.
By examining which respondents became supporters of the tea party, Campbell and Putnam's survey "casts doubt on the tea party's 'origin story,' " they write in the Times.
Early tea partiers were described as "nonpartisan political neophytes," Campbell and Putnam write, but their findings showed that tea partiers were "highly partisan Republicans" who were more likely than others to have contacted government officials.
"They are overwhelmingly white, but even compared to other white Republicans, they had a low regard for immigrants and blacks long before Barack Obama was president, and they still do," they went on.
In addition to being socially conservative, the study found a close tie between religion and the tea party, whose supporters seek out "deeply religious" elected officials.
Atheists more popular than Tea Partiers? I have moved up in the world!
[link=http://www.military.com/news/article/bachmann-would-reinstate-us-gay-troops-ban.html]Oh, and Bchmann would put the anti-gay thigny back into the military[/link]
Me too! Hallelujah!
Sorry, I had to.
I'm personally of the same mind as RidingMyCarousel on the subject of religious talk in political rhetoric. It would be unconstitutional to leave it out but it's certainly not unamerican. Unfortunately, the former technically trumps the latter.