GOP Nominee 2012 - Pt. 5

The friendliest place on the web for anyone that follows U2.
If you have answers, please help by responding to the unanswered posts.
Status
Not open for further replies.
I really don't miss Rick Santorum. But women all over the US are lost without him-regarding what to do with their lady parts. I hope he's still staying on top of all that, so to speak.
 
I very much hope that Mitt Romney will be the next president, and I expect that if elected he'll do a decent job under the circumstances.
 
Oh, Ricky calls in to our local radio talk show about once a month or so, so yes, he's still on top of it and I can listen adoringly while swooning simultaneously (the political definition of a woman multitasking). And best of all, I don't have to go too long without hearing his honeyed tones. :help:
 
Oh, Ricky calls in to our local radio talk show about once a month or so, so yes, he's still on top of it and I can listen adoringly while swooning simultaneously (the political definition of a woman multitasking). And best of all, I don't have to go too long without hearing his honeyed tones. :help:

Didn't you confess to voting for him? :p I'm jealous, is that show online?

I guess he's temporarily busy with Chick Fil A. After that he can get back to the lady parts.
 
Actually, you can get the show online.:hyper:The host is quite Republican, but hers is the only talk show I know of that actually plays Leonard Cohen bumper music.:heart::heart: so much is forgiven.
 
Can't exactly argue with that segment, no.

He also did a fantastic bit tonight about yesterday's Chick-Fil-A appreciation thing. When the video from tonight's show goes up, I'll share the clip here.

And to those who support Chick-Fil-A's position, he does actually find a point of agreement with you guys, on the whole cities banning the restaurant thing.
 
I think most, if not everyone who has posted on this forum agrees that the Boston mayor was out of line.

I can't help but wonder what would be the response from the right if the situation were reversed and it was some mayor suggesting he wouldn't approve of having say a JC Penny open up in his town. There seems to be much less of an ability for the kind of self-criticism found in the John Stewart video recently posted and among many of the "left-leaning" posters in here and the right. If it happens, I guess I don't see it. Granted it's hard to be self-critical when you are in the minority, but I don't find it happening in the world outside this forum either.
 
^

Agree with that. Don't think it's any business of a mayor of a town to get into organized boycotts of private businesses, aside from withholding licences from people who carry on criminal enterprises and so on.

Loved this blog post about the Chick-Fil-A appreciation day: The Chick Fellatio: stuck in the craw | Owldolatrous Productions

Particularly this part:

If things were reversed, I’d stand up for you.

Please think about this: How would you feel if KFC came out tomorrow and said they were spending money against equality for Asian Americans, or African Americans, or religious people? Really. Think about it. What would you do? How would you feel? How would you feel if, after their announcement, there was a big increase in KFC sales and I was all over Facebook supporting KFC. Please stop reading right now and imagine this. I’m serious.

You can stop now because it’s ludicrous. It would never happen.

Oh, I don’t mean the part about KFC being against some group. That COULD happen. I mean the part about me supporting them. Let me tell you something, and you can damn well believe it: I’d sign on for the boycott IMMEDIATELY.

Why? Well, because I believe in equality for all people, that’s why. But also, personally, from the bottom of my heart: because you are my friend, and I don’t willingly support people who harm you for just being you. How could I? How could I, really? But, more importantly for our purposes, how could you?

Seriously, how could you? What has Chick-Fil-A ever done for you? Sold you some fatty chicken at a ridiculous mark-up? Made you chuckle at semi-literate cartoon cows? You mean more to me than KFC possibly could. If I, in turn, don’t mean more to you than a chicken sandwich from Chik-Fil-A–if my life, my quality of life, and my dignity are such afterthoughts to you that you’d not only refuse the boycott, but go out of your way to support someone who was hurting me? if I let this stand, if I don’t stand up to the bullies and if I let my friends egg the bullies on, what does that make me?

Well, it makes me a Chikin.

Yeah, so suddenly it is cause for anger, ridiculous or not.

But I’m not going to stop being Facebook friends with anyone over this issue.

Instead, I will remain. And, when you see my face with my partner’s in my profile, maybe you will examine not simply what your opinions are about gay people, or gay marriage, or the first amendment, even; maybe you’ll examine not merely your opinions but your values. What is friendship to you? What is loyalty? How important are human life and dignity to you? Are they more important than fitting in with your social group? Are they more important than loyalty to a corporate brand, or a political party, or some misguided church teaching?

That’s why we’re so angry. This is personal for us. There are times in your life when you have the opportunity to stand up for your friends. When you let that opportunity pass, your friends notice. It doesn’t mean we can’t be friends, but it diminishes you, and it diminishes the friendship. That’s how it is, no matter what the issue or what the venue.

So stand up. Stand up for us. Do the right thing. You don’t have to agree with us on everything, but repudiate Chick-Fil-A. Unlike them on Facebook. Withdraw your support for them. Join us in the boycott. If you can’t do that, then please ask yourself whether I’m your friend.

Another great one, from a Christian POV here:

http://matthewpaulturner.net/blog/5-reasons-why-the-church-failed-yesterday/

Yesterday’s hoopla surrounding CFA did nothing to prove that Christians don’t hate gay people. Oh I know that most Christians will say, “I don’t hate gay people!!”
But did supporting CFA Appreciation Day prove that?

Trust me, I understand that most people who ate chicken sandwiches at CFA yesterday did not do that as an act of hate. I get that. And that’s cool and all, but did the act of going out of your way to CFA prove that to be true? Do you think that the GLBTQ communities believe you? Would you, if you were gay, believe you?

Now before you answer that, remember that yesterday’s CFA Love Day was just one action in a long line of many. Because let’s face it: Christians go WAY out of their way to “hate the sin”–i.e., by voting against gay marriage, voting against civil unions, voicing their angst about gay people adopting children (just to list a few). Is it possible that Christians lose the ability to truly “love the sinner” because they’re so busy “hating the sin”? Do Christians put anywhere near the energy into “loving the sinner” as they do “hating the sin”?

All I know is that the GLBTQ communities are becoming quite used to feeling unloved by Christians. And with good reason.

How many times do we hear Christians say something like, “I don’t hate gay people. I may not agree with their lifestyle. But I don’t hate them… ”

If you were gay, would you believe that? Think about it. Would you feel loved by somebody if they included rules, context, and/or explanations about your lifestyle every time they spoke about how much they don’t hate you? Only when talking about gay people do Christians feel the need to preface their “love” or “non-hate” with some variation of “I don’t agree with your lifestyle, but…” Christians don’t talk about any other group of people like that–only gay people.

So, I want to believe Christians when they say “I don’t hate gay people.” But sometimes proof of that is necessary. And yesterday did not prove that. Honestly, yesterday proved little more than how shallow Christians can be sometimes.

Not only did supporting CFA Appreciation Day declare that Christians believe that an issue is more important than people, that declaration was made by the mass consumption of junk food. That fact doesn’t need a punch line. It is a punch line.

Yes, on some level, yesterday was successful. I’m sure that today CFA feels really loved. And I’m sure Mike Huckabee feels loved, too. And I’m sure lots of people, many Christians included, feel great pride for supporting the cause. But there’s also a large group of people, good people, people you might disagree with, that today, feel really unloved.

If it’s true that Christians don’t hate gay people, today would be a really good day to prove it.
 
:giggle:

gawker.com

Mitt Romney Once Called Blaming President for Job Market 'Poppycock'
election 2012
Aug 2, 2012

If a U.S. President takes office during a time of severe economic turmoil, it's not fair to blame him for the recession or lack of job creation. Well, as long as he's a Republican.

In 2004, then-Massachusetts governor Mitt Romney defended President George W. Bush, who was facing attacks on his economic record by Democratic candidate John Kerry.

The people of America recognize that the slowdown in jobs that occurred during the early years of the Bush administration were the result of a perfect storm. And an effort by one candidate to somehow say "Oh, this recession and the slowdown in jobs was the result of somehow this president magically being elected..." people in America just dismiss that as being poppycock. And they recognize it as that.

Mediaite has the clip, which also includes a Romney statement that "could easily be the title of an Obama campaign strategy memo."

Every indication is that the economic policies adopted and pursued by this president are creating jobs at a very high pace. And so the people of America have to ask, "Do I stay with the president, who is rebuilding the economy, who is creating jobs, or do you want to stop mid-stream and find someone new?"
 
I think most, if not everyone who has posted on this forum agrees that the Boston mayor was out of line.

Indeed. I just wanted to make that extra clear, in case people still aren't convinced.

I can't help but wonder what would be the response from the right if the situation were reversed and it was some mayor suggesting he wouldn't approve of having say a JC Penny open up in his town. There seems to be much less of an ability for the kind of self-criticism found in the John Stewart video recently posted and among many of the "left-leaning" posters in here and the right. If it happens, I guess I don't see it. Granted it's hard to be self-critical when you are in the minority, but I don't find it happening in the world outside this forum either.

Exactly. To be fair, I do think some here would still disagree, but I also definitely think that the right (and I'm talking in a general sense, not directed at anyone here) would be showing some hypocrisy if the situation were reversed. No question.

Looks like yesterday's bit on the topic is split into two parts, so here's both of them:

Part 1:
Fast Feud Nation - The Daily Show with Jon Stewart - 08/02/12 - Video Clip | Comedy Central
Part 2:
Fast Feud Nation - Chik-fil-A Appreciation Day - The Daily Show with Jon Stewart - 08/02/12 - Video Clip | Comedy Central
 
My understanding is that Eastwood has always been more on the conservative side. :shrug:
 
Sometimes it's nice to know that even people who follow American electoral politics for a living ( :yikes: ) blow a gasket on occasion.

(This piece is about the election in general; nothing specific to the GOP.)


The American Conservative, August 6 (Michael Brendan Dougherty)
I look back longingly on the verbal calamities of four years ago. It felt like they might mean something. When Sarah Palin said the one could see Russia from Alaska, I thought: “This woman makes crap up when she has no idea what to say.” When Obama asked what a “ball-hitch” was or said that Hillary’s voters were “clinging to their guns and religion,” I thought: “This man belongs to a distinct social class." But this campaign season has been so much worse. These “gaffes” are useless.

I was in the Nashua, New Hampshire ballroom when Mitt Romney said “I like being able to fire people.” I was kneeling between the tables about 10 yards from him. It was rather clear he was making a commonplace observation about the free market. The Chamber of Commerce audience loved it. Not a single person gasped or gave a screwy look to one another when he said it. I thought Romney had accomplished much that morning. But in the back of the room, where most of the media was, the remark was tweeted quickly and instantly declared a gaffe.

More recently, Barack Obama was making an entirely banal point about society and government, that no entrepreneur can claim to have built his business all by his lonesome. “You didn’t get there on your own,” he said. I don’t have to recount that.

There is this weird assumption on the part of the media that if a candidate can be hurt if their comments are misconstrued, then it is the solemn duty of the media to misconstrue those remarks. This news coverage is justified in passive constructions. “The Obama campaign opened itself up to attack,” or “The Romney remark could reinforce a negative image.”

Then the defensive partisans charge in: “Let’s put the remarks in context.”

The charging partisans of the other side: “Let’s put them in some other broader context, like our nation’s unemployment problem, or its history of racism, or in contrast to an obscure Federalist paper quote I can recall.”

For once, I’d like a pool report to tell the truth: “Candidate X got off the bus and addressed an enthusiastic crowd with the exact same platitudinous crap he said four hours earlier to another equally enthusiastic crowd. There was no sense to it whatsoever, but man, these people really ate it up. And his enemies will twist his words into slightly offensive shapes and make a big dumb boring hullaballoo about it until the nation finally stirs itself to end this thing with their votes.”

And even in wishing this, I’m playing another predictable role in the charade. I can do no other.
 
Last edited:
I think most, if not everyone who has posted on this forum agrees that the Boston mayor was out of line.
a mayor of any major city, much like a CEO of a big company, should be a moral compass
I think an arguement can definetly be made for a mayor to refuse certain business, because he/she feels it goes against what the city "stands for"
not taking care of part of your citizens because of economic reasons might lead to a (mid/) long term disconnect in society

what I read from the Boston situation, it sounded more like a populist reaction to headline news, without any further thought put into it
which might somehow connect this post to the topic of GOP Nominee 2012
 
There seems to be much less of an ability for the kind of self-criticism found in the John Stewart video recently posted and among many of the "left-leaning" posters in here and the right. If it happens, I guess I don't see it. Granted it's hard to be self-critical when you are in the minority, but I don't find it happening in the world outside this forum either.

Sadly, such self-criticism from left-leaning posters as I've seen on here of late is often fraudulent, fatuous and self-serving. Also it's striking, absolutely striking, that from an objective view in spite of holding overwhelming numerical advantage, hardly ever does one see a left leaning poster called out by fellow lefties for trolling or offensive comments.

Try South Park for an example of a right libertarian show that is mocking towards many conservative shiboleths, from over-religosity to the war on terror.
 
original.gif
 
Sadly, such self-criticism from left-leaning posters as I've seen on here of late is often fraudulent, fatuous and self-serving. Also it's striking, absolutely striking, that from an objective view in spite of holding overwhelming numerical advantage, hardly ever does one see a left leaning poster called out by fellow lefties for trolling or offensive comments.

Pot_Calling_the_Kettle_Black_T-Shirt.png
 
Eh? How do you figure?

I exempt you from that comment. I think your posts display a humility and willingness to challenge and be challenged that is mostly lacking in the contributions from the other left wing posters on here. Age may not necessarily bring wisdom!
 
Hello, Ry. Where are you?

I'm in my house in Santa Monica. (1)

Have you been watching the Olympics? I'm in London where we've all been going crazy for the Games.

We see them late at night here, so we watch 'em a little.

Are you a sports fan?

Not really.

Did you see the opening ceremony? This will lead somewhere, this question, I hope ...

Oh, sure. Absolutely.

And what did you make of it?

Well, the whole thing with the beds and the National Health was interesting from over here, as you might well imagine.

Well, that's what I want to ask you about because we read here that there was some criticism of that segment of the ceremony in the US.

Well, I didn't know there was any criticism of it at all. I hadn't heard that. First of all, you can't believe the media. You know that. I know it and you know it. So the propaganda against that concept ... I would take it on the same level as I would take the gun lobby on any notion that following some slaughter like out in Colorado that anybody who says assault rifles should be banned is going to be roundly criticised and called a bad American. So naturally, in this particular year, we can look and see that the leading edge of Republican interference with our way of life is what they call Obamacare. And this is their flag that they hoist. So anyone that comes along with another idea, let alone anything as explicit as this piece in the opening ceremony, the first thing they have to do in the US media, which is pretty much controlled by the corporations, is to discredit it as fast and as hard as they possibly can. And any time you see anybody saying: "Oh, the American people didn't like this, they resented it, etc" ... they're lying.

It's not for your benefit, it's for our benefit. So our population here learns, once again, that anything that's done for the people is wrong.



Ry Cooder: 'Mitt Romney is a dangerous man, a cruel man' | Music | The Guardian
 
Romney announces VP in the morning

NBC says it will be Congressman Paul Ryan. I think that would be a neutral pick. Perhaps a small net negative.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top Bottom