Round 3 by kpo

Quote:
Originally posted by kpo:
Predictions for tonight's debate?

I predict no clear winner in this one.

Megan Kelly will be hot, Barrack Obama will be cold.

H

Hero...must be right on all of this. ALL of the rest of us are wrong. Chrisisall, 2012

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Monday, October 22, 2012 2:37 PM

MAL4PREZ

1. There won't be any sound bite as good as "binders full of women". It's just not possible to top that. Prove me wrong, Mitt. I dare you.

2. There's going to be some serious fireworks of disagreement between Mitt and July Mitt and May Mitt and let's not even talk about the severity of dissonance with February Mitt.

3. Mitt will tell us 20 times how he's going to fix EVERYTHING, but he will never say how he actually plans on doing any of it.

4. Obama will do a lot of braying about his foreign policy successes, but sadly won't do enough calling out of Mitt's failures.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Monday, October 22, 2012 3:40 PM

Gettin' old, but still a hippie at heart...

Quote:
disagreement between Mitt and July Mitt and May Mitt and let's not even talk about the severity of dissonance with February Mitt

Mmmmm....better get out the

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Monday, October 22, 2012 4:04 PM

Keeping order in every verse

Who is the chairman in this debate, and what is his background?

With the grace of age, commander, we learn to accept.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Monday, October 22, 2012 4:39 PM

"We'll know our disinformation program is complete when everything the American public believes is false." -- William Casey, Reagan's presidential campaign manager & CIA Director (from first staff meeting in 1981)

Quote:
Originally posted by MAL4PREZ:
1. There won't be any sound bite as good as "binders full of women". It's just not possible to top that. Prove me wrong, Mitt. I dare you.

"Horses and bayonets" - The president's rejoinder to Mitt's claim about our "smaller" navy and air force - we have fewer horses and bayonets, too!

http://www.facebook.com/HorsesandBayonetsForAll?ref=stream

2000 likes in the last 20 minutes.

Quote:

4. Obama will do a lot of braying about his foreign policy successes, but sadly won't do enough calling out of Mitt's failures.

Oh, I think he's done quite a job of calling out Mitt's failures.

"I supported Bush in 2000 and 2004 and intellegence [sic] had very little to do with that decision." - Hero

"I was wrong" - Hero, 2012

Mitt Romney, introducing his running mate: "Join me in welcoming the next President of the United States, Paul Ryan!"

Rappy's response? "You're lying, gullible ( believing in some BS you heard on msnbc ) or hard of hearing."

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Monday, October 22, 2012 4:43 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by peacekeeper:
Who is the chairman in this debate, and what is his background?

With the grace of age, commander, we learn to accept.

Bob Schieffer is an American television journalist who has been with CBS News since 1969, serving 23 years as anchor on the Saturday edition of CBS Evening News from 1973 to 1996; chief Washington correspondent since 1982, moderator of the Sunday public affairs show Face the Nation since 1991, and, between March 2005 and August 31, 2006, interim weekday anchor of the CBS Evening News. As of 2011, he is one of the primary substitutes for Scott Pelley.
Schieffer is one of the few journalists to have covered all four of the major Washington national assignments: the White House, the Pentagon, United States Department of State, and United States Congress. His career with CBS has almost exclusively dealt with national politics.

- From the Wiki

He's moderating tonight's debate

"I supported Bush in 2000 and 2004 and intellegence [sic] had very little to do with that decision." - Hero

"I was wrong" - Hero, 2012

Mitt Romney, introducing his running mate: "Join me in welcoming the next President of the United States, Paul Ryan!"

Rappy's response? "You're lying, gullible ( believing in some BS you heard on msnbc ) or hard of hearing."

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Monday, October 22, 2012 4:46 PM

MAL4PREZ

Quote:
Originally posted by Kwicko:
Quote:
Originally posted by MAL4PREZ:
1. There won't be any sound bite as good as "binders full of women". It's just not possible to top that. Prove me wrong, Mitt. I dare you.

"Horses and bayonets" - http://www.facebook.com/HorsesandBayonetsForAll?ref=stream

2000 likes in the last 20 minutes.

Yep. That was pretty good. Not quite up to the level of the binders though. That was just priceless, even more so because Mitt did it to himself. By saying something so stupid, and also having it be part of a big fat ole lie.

Quote:
Quote:

4. Obama will do a lot of braying about his foreign policy successes, but sadly won't do enough calling out of Mitt's failures.

Oh, I think he's done quite a job of calling out Mitt's failures.

Obama was pretty aggressive, good on him! Still missed some shots. My god, why didn't he call Mitt out re the govt funding that saved the Olympics? He had a wide open shot there. He did well with the bayonets and "Apology Tour" though. Quite well. Mitt looked a fool.

Overall, I thought Obama came off quite strong and well-informed. Mitt just kept repeating the same hollow platitudes over and over.

Why couldn't O have been like this in the first debate?

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Monday, October 22, 2012 4:49 PM

Keeping order in every verse

Here's my view on that last debate.

1. Both candidates said pretty much the same thing.
2. Both candidates believe in pretty much the same thing.
3. Both candidates have Israel's back and would support them if attacked.This scares the rest of the Western world shitless.
4. Romney pretty much agreed with everything Obama said.
5. Romney has a painted on, disingenuous smile and seems very generic in his answers.
6. Obama seems much more clued in and deflected romney's answers easily.
7. Romney, to me, seems as though he has already conceded defeat.
8. If I was an American, and basing my vote, purely on the eloquence and content of this particular debate, I don't see how Obama can be touched.I think a second term is inevitable.
9. I just don't like Romney. He seems a bit of a bumbling yes man.
10. I don't much give a fuck. It's your election.
11. can I please have a binder full of women???

With the grace of age, commander, we learn to accept.

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Monday, October 22, 2012 4:53 PM

"I supported Bush in 2000 and 2004 and intellegence [sic] had very little to do with that decision." - Hero

"I was wrong" - Hero, 2012

Mitt Romney, introducing his running mate: "Join me in welcoming the next President of the United States, Paul Ryan!"

Rappy's response? "You're lying, gullible ( believing in some BS you heard on msnbc ) or hard of hearing."

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Monday, October 22, 2012 4:54 PM

It's funny, because the GOP keeps claiming that Obama's a "socialist", yet here was Mitt claiming that we could work with China as "a partner, not an adversary". So he's comfortable cozying up to communists?

"I supported Bush in 2000 and 2004 and intellegence [sic] had very little to do with that decision." - Hero

"I was wrong" - Hero, 2012

Mitt Romney, introducing his running mate: "Join me in welcoming the next President of the United States, Paul Ryan!"

Rappy's response? "You're lying, gullible ( believing in some BS you heard on msnbc ) or hard of hearing."

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Monday, October 22, 2012 4:58 PM

DALEK!

I do not fear God, I fear the ignorance of man.
A warning to everyone, AURaptor is a known liar.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Monday, October 22, 2012 5:02 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by m52nickerson:

I do not fear God, I fear the ignorance of man.
A warning to everyone, AURaptor is a known liar.

And that was no gaffe, because he's said the same thing before.

Can the man not look at a map, or is he just not interested in any country that he can't hide his money in?

This statement is like saying that Mexico is Canada's route to the sea, or the Texas is Florida's route to the sea.

So is Mitt really that ignorant of geography, or does he just thing the rest of us are?

"I supported Bush in 2000 and 2004 and intellegence [sic] had very little to do with that decision." - Hero

"I was wrong" - Hero, 2012

Mitt Romney, introducing his running mate: "Join me in welcoming the next President of the United States, Paul Ryan!"

Rappy's response? "You're lying, gullible ( believing in some BS you heard on msnbc ) or hard of hearing."

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Monday, October 22, 2012 5:58 PM

Instant polls are saying Obama won by more than a 2-to-1 margin. CBS, Reuters, CNBC.

"I supported Bush in 2000 and 2004 and intellegence [sic] had very little to do with that decision." - Hero

"I was wrong" - Hero, 2012

Mitt Romney, introducing his running mate: "Join me in welcoming the next President of the United States, Paul Ryan!"

Rappy's response? "You're lying, gullible ( believing in some BS you heard on msnbc ) or hard of hearing."

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Monday, October 22, 2012 6:06 PM

1KIKI

Goodbye, kind world (George Monbiot) - In common with all those generations which have contemplated catastrophe, we appear to be incapable of understanding what confronts us.

I didn't watch, I listened which gave me a different experience. I thought Romney sounded like a used car salesman who was trying to make up for a lack of facts with fast talk and slogans.

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Monday, October 22, 2012 6:45 PM

Romney's line 'attacking me is not an agenda' was a great line perfectly delivered early enough to make an impression before people tuned out. It has the added benefit of putting a resounding final spin on all four debates.

In a debate like this Romney has to show a general grasp of the issues and avoid obvious mistakes on world conditions. He did that.

Obama was left defending failed policies. The line 'there is nowhere in the world that American influence hasn't declined in the last four years' left Obama reeling. He has one success. One. The United States has been pushed back on every front and his agenda is more retreat. Time to nation build at home he said. It's a great line but against the tide of world events it symbolizes four years of failure and the looming end of America as a superpower.

Obama also made two mistakes. One was the accidental misstatement of his own failed policy in Iraq. Again, early enough to make an impression. Two, his constant resorting to petty small attacks and disrespect. Lecturing Romney on the modern Navy. Huge error.

I note for the record that Marines and the Army still use bayonets.

In short Romney did not lose, nor did he win...Obama however lost big...and what was the desperate look all about? Horrible on the split screen.

H

Hero...must be right on all of this. ALL of the rest of us are wrong. Chrisisall, 2012

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Monday, October 22, 2012 7:00 PM

Keeping order in every verse

America's decline as a superpower is inevitable, and has nothing to do with Obama.Just as The Roman and British empires fell to emerging nations, so will the American influence.The Chinese are just waiting to be handed the baton. it sucks, I know, but get used to it. There ain't a bloody thing you can do about it. Welcome to being shat on by someone with a bigger gun than you. It's how Britain has felt for a hundred years or more.

With the grace of age, commander, we learn to accept.

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Monday, October 22, 2012 7:00 PM

1KIKI

Goodbye, kind world (George Monbiot) - In common with all those generations which have contemplated catastrophe, we appear to be incapable of understanding what confronts us.

Given that 9/11 happened on Bush's watch, that he failed to get bin Laden, or get the troops out of Iraq, or on the national front engineered a federal surplus into a deficit and engineering the biggest economic crisis since the Great Depression, you'd think you'd also be extremely critical of his record. I guess having a single set of common-sense standards that you apply equally is too much to ask.

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Monday, October 22, 2012 7:01 PM

Keeping order in every verse

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Monday, October 22, 2012 7:07 PM

DALEK!

Quote:
Originally posted by Hero:
Romney's line 'attacking me is not an agenda' was a great line perfectly delivered early enough to make an impression before people tuned out. It has the added benefit of putting a resounding final spin on all four debates.

In a debate like this Romney has to show a general grasp of the issues and avoid obvious mistakes on world conditions. He did that.

Obama was left defending failed policies. The line 'there is nowhere in the world that American influence hasn't declined in the last four years' left Obama reeling. He has one success. One. The United States has been pushed back on every front and his agenda is more retreat. Time to nation build at home he said. It's a great line but against the tide of world events it symbolizes four years of failure and the looming end of America as a superpower.

Obama also made two mistakes. One was the accidental misstatement of his own failed policy in Iraq. Again, early enough to make an impression. Two, his constant resorting to petty small attacks and disrespect. Lecturing Romney on the modern Navy. Huge error.

I note for the record that Marines and the Army still use bayonets.

In short Romney did not lose, nor did he win...Obama however lost big...and what was the desperate look all about? Horrible on the split screen.

Funny thing is that Mitts said over and over that he would have the same policies. As Bill Maher tweeted, Mitts strategy was saying, "What he just said, but from a white guy."

Only our right wing wingnuts will be able to say that Rmoney won...or even came close.

I do not fear God, I fear the ignorance of man.
A warning to everyone, AURaptor is a known liar.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Monday, October 22, 2012 7:09 PM

DALEK!

Quote:
Originally posted by peacekeeper:
America's decline as a superpower is inevitable, and has nothing to do with Obama.Just as The Roman and British empires fell to emerging nations, so will the American influence.The Chinese are just waiting to be handed the baton. it sucks, I know, but get used to it. There ain't a bloody thing you can do about it. Welcome to being shat on by someone with a bigger gun than you. It's how Britain has felt for a hundred years or more.

With the grace of age, commander, we learn to accept.

Well except China has a worse economy crisis than we do, more debt, and no where near the military power.

I do not fear God, I fear the ignorance of man.
A warning to everyone, AURaptor is a known liar.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Monday, October 22, 2012 11:11 PM

JONGSSTRAW

Quote:
Originally posted by Hero:
Romney's line 'attacking me is not an agenda' was a great line perfectly delivered early enough to make an impression before people tuned out. It has the added benefit of putting a resounding final spin on all four debates.

Obama didn't attack him, he made some valid points about some shifts in Romney's positions. Romney would have better served if he had countered with something better than repeating a response that came off as defensive and whiney.

Quote:
In a debate like this Romney has to show a general grasp of the issues and avoid obvious mistakes on world conditions. He did that.

I disagree. Almost anyone who follows current events in the news can show a general grasp of issues. My mom is 82 and even she could pass that test. Romney did not offer too many solutions to problems except to say he'd do more of what Obama is doing, or he'd have done it sooner than Obama.

Quote:
Obama was left defending failed policies. The line 'there is nowhere in the world that American influence hasn't declined in the last four years' left Obama reeling. He has one success. One. The United States has been pushed back on every front and his agenda is more retreat. Time to nation build at home he said. It's a great line but against the tide of world events it symbolizes four years of failure and the looming end of America as a superpower.

Whatever Obama was defending, I thought he did a good job defending it. I may not see most things the same way, but Obama wasn't trying to convince me. He was trying to convince un-decided voters who don't keep up with current events. In that regard he did a more than plausible job.

Quote:
Obama also made two mistakes. One was the accidental misstatement of his own failed policy in Iraq. Again, early enough to make an impression. Two, his constant resorting to petty small attacks and disrespect. Lecturing Romney on the modern Navy. Huge error.

Most Americans don't care about Iraq any more, and really have little patience to hear about it now. When the last truck rolled out of Iraq most Americans were damn happy to see it. I thought Obama came off more aggressive than Romney, but so what...it's the last debate, when else you gonna do it? Romney played it strategically safe, and in doing so may have teed off some of the Republican base who were once enthusiastically engaged. Some may decide to stay home on election day because they don't want to vote for a moderate. They don't want Obama either, but Romney didn't make much distinction.

Quote:
I note for the record that Marines and the Army still use bayonets.

Either Obama somehow knew that Romney was going to answer the way he did on the number of ships, or Obama mustered up a very clever and spontaneous retort that Romney wasn't prepared for.

Quote:
In short Romney did not lose, nor did he win...Obama however lost big...and what was the desperate look all about? Horrible on the split screen.

I don't know how Obama "lost big". I watched the debate, I didn't see that. Romney was just ok, certainly not great. Pundits and ideologues are going to be debating this all week, and to me it's boring and fruitless. The election can't come soon enough. I think the current trends and numbers favor Romney to win, but I'm cautious to believe that's possible considering how fast things change from news cycle to news cycle.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Tuesday, October 23, 2012 5:34 AM

Gettin' old, but still a hippie at heart...

Quote:
Pundits and ideologues are going to be debating this all week, and to me it's boring and fruitless. The election can't come soon enough.

Pretty much how I feel. From what I'm hearing/reading and seeing here, Romney pulled out the same strategy he used in the first debate: "Lie about your previous policies and tack to the center". You can't counter that, because a) People who've not been paying attention won't know better, and b) the right won't CARE--he could show up in a clown's suit and dance a jig; as long as he WINS, they don't care about the quality of the man or whether he can do the job or anything else.

The best quote I've heard yet from a pundit this morning: "Will it turn out that etch-a-sketch can really win?" I'm fearful it might. Or that, if it's close, all the various voter-suppression techniques will win it for him. Talk about scared shitless; I just can't believe so many of the American people are THIS stupid; unfortunately that leaves the only possibility for me that there is still THAT much racism in our country. I couldn't believe Bush could win (tho' the way he "won", he actually didn't), or that he could win a second term, but that was nothing compared to so many people being willing to buy into THIS guy's lies!

America's influence hasn't lessened, in my opinion; the world is less SCARED of us and more willing to work with us, which is a good thing. The only way our influence has lessened is that "our" dictators have been overthrown, so we don't know who'll really be in power in the end and we don't have as much control over whoever it will be...yet. I'm sure the righties would far rather have "our" dictators in power and the world afraid of us invading other countries, but if Romney gets his way, I'm sure they'll get what they want.

All in all, it's already obvious the right will claim a Romney victory in the debate and go on and on about how Obama was too aggressive and "picked on him". The sad fact is that if Romney couldn't hold his own with Obama, it will never occur to them what that says about Romney as a President.

I'm just sick of it, sick of hearing about it, sick of not being able to hear about much of anything else on the news, and sick at heart that my country has stooped so low. We are in for bad times if Romney wins, far worse than we've seen yet. Ironically however, if he and the Repubs did nothing at all, we'd most likely continue on this slow road to recovery and the Repubs would get the credit. If, however, they put in place the policies they've SAID they would, we're in deep shit. And if Romney wins, I fear we can look forward to further involvement in Afghanistan, return to Iraq and another war...or two...or...

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Tuesday, October 23, 2012 5:45 AM

Gettin' old, but still a hippie at heart...

PK, "Both candidates believe in pretty much the same thing." No, they don't, but Romney will etch-a-sketch to make it SOUND like he's more moderate, as was obvious by both "Both candidates said pretty much the same thing" and "Romney pretty much agreed with everything Obama said."

"Both candidates have Israel's back and would support them if attacked.This scares the rest of the Western world shitless." Damned straight on both points; only difference is, Obama less so, and if he won a second term, it's possible he'd try to pull us further back from supporting Israel. Somewhat...sigh.

"Romney has a painted on, disingenuous smile and seems very generic in his answers." Pretty much his M.O., and look how well it's working for him! They may have been right in banking on "anyone can beat Obama", given what we've seen.

"Obama seems much more clued in and deflected romney's answers easily." No surprise there; Obama knows what he's doing and is serious; Romney's just saying whatever he can come up with or has been told to and is actually ignorant as hell on most things.

"Romney, to me, seems as though he has already conceded defeat." Not even slightly; he just knows making much of any effort doesn't matter, especially at this point; he's just riding it out.

"If I was an American, and basing my vote, purely on the eloquence and content of this particular debate, I don't see how Obama can be touched." Yes, because you're an INTELLIGENT person; we seem to have a frightening dearth of those in this country currently.

"I just don't like Romney. He seems a bit of a bumbling yes man." Absolutely, and that's what makes him very, very scary--because he won't do what he thinks is right (if he even knows), he'll do what his base and the Tea Party TELL him to...and we've seen how well THAT works... Romney is a PanderPuppy--he has been from day one. Exactly like McCain, he knows this is his last chance, so exactly like McCain, he has done and will do whatEVER it takes; conscience has nothing to do with it.

"I don't much give a fuck. It's your election." As well you shouldn't; it's a farce, it's sickening to watch, and many of us just can't wait for it to be over. The only reason the outside world should give a fuck is because we still have considerable power and the way Romney would wield it should scare the rest of you. That and, if he and the Repubs get in office, the rest of the world's economic problems will only be made even WORSE.

Thank you for an intelligent outsider's point of view; I wish Americans could hear more from those of you outside our hemisphere. For some it wouldn't mean shit, given their own xenophobia and American arrogance, but we'd be a far better country if we heard more from the rest of the world.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Tuesday, October 23, 2012 6:32 AM

JONGSSTRAW

Romney's debate performance indicated to me that he and his people saw the polls and trends and made a decision to try to run out the clock with this last debate. They must have calculated that just a respectable showing would be enough to seal the deal. Maybe they will be proved right.

Then again, maybe that strategy will prove they erred. How many times has a football team with a lead tried to sit on the ball with little time left, only to see their opponent get an opportunity to kick a winning field goal with three seconds left. I remember watching a basketball game when I was a kid when aging player-coach Bob Cousy inserted himself into a game when his team was down by 7 points with less than one minute to play. Cousy was on fire; he was everywhere, he did everything, and he led his team the most improbable comeback victory over the Knicks I had ever seen.

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Tuesday, October 23, 2012 6:57 AM

Quote:
Originally posted by Hero:

I note for the record that Marines and the Army still use bayonets.

Yes, and we still have some horses in the military, too.

But *fewer* than we had in 1916, which was the point Obama made.

Romney was trying to play the game of "more equals better", but it's just not true. Our air force may have been bigger in 1947, but do you honestly think that air force could beat our air force today in a fight? Similarly, give me one modern carrier battle group, and I can beat the entire Japanese Imperial Navy of 1941 with it.

"I supported Bush in 2000 and 2004 and intellegence [sic] had very little to do with that decision." - Hero

"I was wrong" - Hero, 2012

Mitt Romney, introducing his running mate: "Join me in welcoming the next President of the United States, Paul Ryan!"

Rappy's response? "You're lying, gullible ( believing in some BS you heard on msnbc ) or hard of hearing."

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Tuesday, October 23, 2012 7:31 AM

I think it was Bill Maher who tweeted during the debate: Romney won't move heaven & earth to find terrorists; he'll only do that for coal mines.

"I supported Bush in 2000 and 2004 and intellegence [sic] had very little to do with that decision." - Hero

"I was wrong" - Hero, 2012

Mitt Romney, introducing his running mate: "Join me in welcoming the next President of the United States, Paul Ryan!"

Rappy's response? "You're lying, gullible ( believing in some BS you heard on msnbc ) or hard of hearing."

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Tuesday, October 23, 2012 10:50 AM

MAGONSDAUGHTER

I was listening to some local coverage of the election which puts Romney ahead by 1% in the polls after the debate. Is that accurate?

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Tuesday, October 23, 2012 10:55 AM

DALEK!

Quote:
Originally posted by Magonsdaughter:
I was listening to some local coverage of the election which puts Romney ahead by 1% in the polls after the debate. Is that accurate?

In some national polls yes. State polls still have Obama ahead in the electoral vote.

I do not fear God, I fear the ignorance of man.
A warning to everyone, AURaptor is a known liar.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Tuesday, October 23, 2012 11:31 AM

There's some speculation that Romney could win the popular vote and lose the election.

"I supported Bush in 2000 and 2004 and intellegence [sic] had very little to do with that decision." - Hero

"I was wrong" - Hero, 2012

Mitt Romney, introducing his running mate: "Join me in welcoming the next President of the United States, Paul Ryan!"

Rappy's response? "You're lying, gullible ( believing in some BS you heard on msnbc ) or hard of hearing."

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Tuesday, October 23, 2012 12:13 PM

Gettin' old, but still a hippie at heart...

Yup; national polls don't mean diddly squat in this one, it's ONLY the swing states that count. Dunno what polls say there, but at this point, my guess is it's too close to call anywhere, which I find absolutely astounding. ...aaand, if the right-wing efforts to suppress the vote are effective, Obama's dead meat whatever the American people may actually want.

I think Jong nailed it:

Quote:
he and his people saw the polls and trends and made a decision to try to run out the clock with this last debate. They must have calculated that just a respectable showing would be enough to seal the deal. Maybe they will be proved right.

I agree completely--along with which, they might have figured his tracking to the center MIGHT help swing some undecideds. After all, if you're undecided at this point, you just haven't been paying attention, soooo...

Jong, having been a long-time 48ers fan (before I gave up on football entirely), I'm all too familiar with that play, and it rarely did THEM any good. I hope the same for Romney; like probably the most of the rest of the world, I can't believe it's even this close...but then, the rest of the world didn't believe Bush was possible, either, and we ended up having to apologize abjectly to them THEN, so who knows? Depressing, is the thought.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Tuesday, October 23, 2012 12:13 PM

Gettin' old, but still a hippie at heart...

Friggin' internet...

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Tuesday, October 23, 2012 1:05 PM

DALEK!

Quote:
Originally posted by Kwicko:
There's some speculation that Romney could win the popular vote and lose

Oh boy would the taking heads on the right lose there minds if that happened.

I do not fear God, I fear the ignorance of man.
A warning to everyone, AURaptor is a known liar.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Tuesday, October 23, 2012 1:30 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by peacekeeper:
America's decline as a superpower is inevitable, and has nothing to do with Obama.Just as The Roman and British empires fell to emerging nations, so will the American influencet.

People made the same argument...in 1980.

I note for the record that its morning in America, just like in 1980, just like when fear was all we had to fear even as infamy rained down on our heads...just like the day a tired old man looked through his home made bifocals at a sunburst carved into a chair and saw in that moment the rising sun of a new nation. It's always morning in America, we just forget that every now and then.

H

Hero...must be right on all of this. ALL of the rest of us are wrong. Chrisisall, 2012

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Tuesday, October 23, 2012 1:38 PM

Quote:

Yes, and we still have some horses in the military, too.

But *fewer* than we had in 1916, which was the point Obama made.

History shows the US completely unprepared for war in 1916, but that was ok because the incumbent Democrat President promised we'd not be going to war.

History also shows that in 1940 the US was completely unprepared for war, but that was ok because the incumbent Democrat President promised we'd not be going to war.

I think Obama's point was we need fewer horses because we fly them off our carriers and we don't need bayonets because we have nuclear subs.

Imagine Joshua Lawrence Chamberlin facing another rebel charge up Little Round Top, no ammo, no reinforcements, half the regiment dead, fighting all day and no end in sight and if he retreats the battle, the war, and perhaps all that America could ever be lost forever. For God, for country, for freedom he draws his sword and he shouts "SUBMARINES!"

Maybe we should keep a few bayonets...for special occasions.

H

Hero...must be right on all of this. ALL of the rest of us are wrong. Chrisisall, 2012

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Tuesday, October 23, 2012 3:37 PM

Don't tell me you believe in that 1000 years of darkness crap.

Ladies and gentlemen, the world is flat. Cats and dogs living together and Romney actually cares about everyone making less than a million a year.

Go Mittens!!!!

SGG

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Tuesday, October 23, 2012 3:38 PM

Yeah and Bush actually found WMDs, what's your point?

SGG

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Tuesday, October 23, 2012 3:41 PM

Cuban Missile Crisis...................

SGG

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Tuesday, October 23, 2012 3:42 PM

Sweet Justice...........Payback is a Bitch!

SGG

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Tuesday, October 23, 2012 4:05 PM

Mittens was following orders. He had to appease the far right with the "Might makes Right" portion of the program.

Did anyone notice how he kept bringing every answer back to the economy?
"So Governor Romney should we back Isreal in an attack?" Yes, because the President has failed to turn our economy around in 4 years. 5.4% unemployment, failed policies."
"But you didn't answer the question."
"It's not relevant, tumult."

How many times did he say the word tumult. It's like he learned a new word for the day and was told to use it in a sentence. Good for you Guv'ner. By the way, he did look like a Used Car Salesman...........

"She purrs like a kitten, what was the question again?"

"Foreign Policy Guv'ner"

"Oh that's easy, failed policies....economy"

"What about Syria?"

"Economy, failed policies.....uhhhh.....connection to the sea, Iran nukes bad."

"What about Iran?"

"I love peace, love and soooooooulllllllllll!!!!!!!!"

I'm surprised he didn't break out in song...."I'd love to teach the world to sing in perfect harmony...."

Who was that masked man? Mommy, I'm scared, make it stop.

It was blatantly obvious he was pandering to the undecided voters by claiming peace and love, offering a flower with the left hand, but we know he has a BIG STICK in his right hand behind his back.

I have a question for you 1000-Years-of-Darkness dudes. What makes you think that anyone, Repub or Dem, could ever fix the economy in 4 years, when it took 8 to bring us to the brink?
Ask Mittens that question..............never mind I already know what his answer will be.

SGG

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Tuesday, October 23, 2012 4:32 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by SHINYGOODGUY:
Mittens was following orders. He had to appease the far right with the "Might makes Right" portion of the program.

Did anyone notice how he kept bringing every answer back to the economy?
"So Governor Romney should we back Isreal in an attack?" Yes, because the President has failed to turn our economy around in 4 years. 5.4% unemployment, failed policies."
"But you didn't answer the question."
"It's not relevant, tumult."

How many times did he say the word tumult. It's like he learned a new word for the day and was told to use it in a sentence. Good for you Guv'ner. By the way, he did look like a Used Car Salesman...........

"She purrs like a kitten, what was the question again?"

"Foreign Policy Guv'ner"

"Oh that's easy, failed policies....economy"

"What about Syria?"

"Economy, failed policies.....uhhhh.....connection to the sea, Iran nukes bad."

"What about Iran?"

"I love peace, love and soooooooulllllllllll!!!!!!!!"

I'm surprised he didn't break out in song...."I'd love to teach the world to sing in perfect harmony...."

Who was that masked man? Mommy, I'm scared, make it stop.

It was blatantly obvious he was pandering to the undecided voters by claiming peace and love, offering a flower with the left hand, but we know he has a BIG STICK in his right hand behind his back.

I have a question for you 1000-Years-of-Darkness dudes. What makes you think that anyone, Repub or Dem, could ever fix the economy in 4 years, when it took 8 to bring us to the brink?
Ask Mittens that question..............never mind I already know what his answer will be.

SGG

You got me, SGG - I actually LOL'd reading that!

Romney is the only person besides Bush who could look at the lessons of the Desert Debacle in Iraq and think, "Hey... you know what woulda been handy there? MORE SHIPS!"

"I supported Bush in 2000 and 2004 and intellegence [sic] had very little to do with that decision." - Hero

"I was wrong" - Hero, 2012

Mitt Romney, introducing his running mate: "Join me in welcoming the next President of the United States, Paul Ryan!"

Rappy's response? "You're lying, gullible ( believing in some BS you heard on msnbc ) or hard of hearing."

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Tuesday, October 23, 2012 4:38 PM

MAL4PREZ

SGG -

Good lord, the Mittster was trying soooo hard for fear. I really really wanted O to call him out on that. Mitt went on and on about how the Middle East is rising up in chaos and tumult and darkness and the US economy is crashing to the ground (hello, were you alive and aware in 2008?) and no one has jobs and China is out to get us and the Middle East is out to get us and we're ALL GONNA DIE! ahhhhh!

Couldn't O have said: "Chill the f*** out. We've made decisions in a state of fear, and look where those decisions took us. Let's just stop the madness." He sort of did say that, as he insisted on being reasonable and such. But he could have been more pointed about how hysterical Mitt got.

That was a big disappointment for me. Mitt's attempt to keep the radical conservative American fear alive needed to be smacked down.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Wednesday, October 24, 2012 1:40 AM

Mitt was trying so hard to instill fear that I think he scared himself! Dude was sweating more than Nixon!

"I supported Bush in 2000 and 2004 and intellegence [sic] had very little to do with that decision." - Hero

"I was wrong" - Hero, 2012

Mitt Romney, introducing his running mate: "Join me in welcoming the next President of the United States, Paul Ryan!"

Rappy's response? "You're lying, gullible ( believing in some BS you heard on msnbc ) or hard of hearing."

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Wednesday, October 24, 2012 3:39 AM

Gettin' old, but still a hippie at heart...

Shiny, you nailed it all the way down the line. As to bringing it back to the economy, if you listened, that's what both he and Ryan have been doing all along...it's the only card they have to play, so they've been riding it to the exclusion of all else from the beginning (apologies for mixed metaphor).

And yes; he pandered to the right just as HARD as he could, and now is etch-a-sketching to the center equally hard. I'm afraid I, however, didn't laugh, because "undecided" voters (who can only be those who haven't been paying attention all along) may ONLY hear the debates and buy his recent bullshit. I'm afraid this sudden switch of theirs during the debates only worries me more, given how close this thing is (which I STILL can't get my head around!).

As to the American Empire, it's been going down for a long, long time now and is definitely going to collapse. Empires take a very long time to fall, and may not look like they're falling until right before the end. It doesn't mean we're doomed or anything, just that our power will be lessened, and it may not be clearly evident for another 50-100 years, who knows? But just 'cuz it hasn't happened yet doesn't mean it's not happening; one only has to look around to see it, unless one chooses to bury one's head in the sand (as most people probably do). "American exceptionalism" is a myth--at least to the degree Americans believe--and we're losing on virtually every front, from manufacturing to inequality of life.

Can't remember if I heard it here or elsewhere, but someone said that the rich don't need the middle class anymore; they used to need "us" to buy their products, but global demand has increased to the point where they don't need us anymore. Ergo, they don't care about wages or our survival and will milk us for everything we've got left. Dunno if that's true or not, but it makes a certain amount of sense. In which case, we is royally screwed!

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Wednesday, October 24, 2012 3:48 AM

DALEK!

Quote:
Originally posted by Hero:
History shows the US completely unprepared for war in 1916, but that was ok because the incumbent Democrat President promised we'd not be going to war.

History also shows that in 1940 the US was completely unprepared for war, but that was ok because the incumbent Democrat President promised we'd not be going to war.

I think Obama's point was we need fewer horses because we fly them off our carriers and we don't need bayonets because we have nuclear subs.

Imagine Joshua Lawrence Chamberlin facing another rebel charge up Little Round Top, no ammo, no reinforcements, half the regiment dead, fighting all day and no end in sight and if he retreats the battle, the war, and perhaps all that America could ever be lost forever. For God, for country, for freedom he draws his sword and he shouts "SUBMARINES!"

Maybe we should keep a few bayonets...for special occasions.

Strawmen are popular around these parts. Luckly I bring a lighter for just such meetings.

See no one is talking abouot reducing the size of the US military so they are not prepard for war, even total war.

Right now the US military is larger and more powerful by a vast amount. So much so it is riddiculus. There is no need for us to be able to take on the rest of the world x3. Being able to beat it twice is enough.

I do not fear God, I fear the ignorance of man.
A warning to everyone, AURaptor is a known liar.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Wednesday, October 24, 2012 6:27 AM

Quote:
Originally posted by m52nickerson:
Right now the US military is larger and more powerful by a vast amount. So much so it is riddiculus. There is no need for us to be able to take on the rest of the world x3. Being able to beat it twice is enough.

China has a much, much larger military. Russia is also bigger and in terms of heavy divisions we are very far behind as a result of Clinton's 50% reductions in the 1990s.

Rather the fielding a 100 million man army or dozens of heavy divisions we use force multipliers based on combined arms tactics and use of advanced technologies. For example, outnumbered five to one our Air Force uses advanced fighters, standoff weapons, airborn controllers, and training to even the playing field. That costs money.

H

Hero...must be right on all of this. ALL of the rest of us are wrong. Chrisisall, 2012

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Wednesday, October 24, 2012 7:11 AM

DALEK!

Quote:
Originally posted by Hero:
China has a much, much larger military. Russia is also bigger and in terms of heavy divisions we are very far behind as a result of Clinton's 50% reductions in the 1990s.

Rather the fielding a 100 million man army or dozens of heavy divisions we use force multipliers based on combined arms tactics and use of advanced technologies. For example, outnumbered five to one our Air Force uses advanced fighters, standoff weapons, airborn controllers, and training to even the playing field. That costs money.

Yes it costs money, just not as much as we are spending now.

I do not fear God, I fear the ignorance of man.
A warning to everyone, AURaptor is a known liar.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Wednesday, October 24, 2012 11:14 AM