Project Vote Smart (http://www.votesmart.org/election_president_search.php?type=alpha)
Click on a candidate's name to get more info on them.
Among the running you will find George Bailey, Rutherford B. Hayes and HRM Caesar St Augustine De Buonaparte.
Who are you voting for?
Quote from: Julie Marie on June 29, 2011, 08:39:26 AM
Who are you voting for?
far too early to even form an opinion given that prospective candidates that MIGHT be worth a look still have not made a decision...but I know I will not be voting for the incumbent.
For the record, there are 21 Democrats, 26 Independents, 3 Libertarians and a whopping 86 Republicans, a bit over 50% of the total number of candidates.
As for me, I'm kinda likin' Michelle Bachmann. She's wacky, flaky and says the darnedest things.
"It is a brand new, billion-dollar high speed train that is going to go from Disneyland up to Las Vegas. ... Harry Reid, the senator from Nevada, was behind this measure, and it makes us wonder, is he more interested in making sure kids start gambling at younger ages?" –Michelle Bachmann on the House Floor
And if we could get Fred Karger to be her VP, we'd have quite a dashing pair! The country would be hoping Bachmann's good looks could cure Karger of his homosexuality. The White House Soaps!
Obama and Romney, it's going to be excursions in bland as the big-money corporatism candidate takes on big-money corporatism candidate.
(Who in the hell do you think runs this anyway? The Voters? Oh wait, your serious, let me laugh harder.)
Because if the 'Pubs run someone who is NOT Mittens, they are going to be committing suicide given their other choices. Yes, there are some people who can be assured a solid 20% of the vote, (because I think that 20% of the American public is pretty much insane), but that's giving an 80% landslide to the other side, it's electoral obliteration.
So, who else do they have?
Well Obama took care of Trump inside of a week in what is going to go down in Political Science courses as an absolute masterpiece of candidate destruction. And out of the bunch Trump was perhaps the most dangerous one for Obama to have to run against. He was already well known a total media god rock-star business guy, had a huge image already sold, had piles of money at his disposal, has something akin to (but not exactly) like charisma, and could have done a much better job of selling the idea that he should be in control because he know how 'to get things done.' (He doesn't, but image trumps reality in this stuff.)
Gingrich had destroyed himself - or more correctly let his dick do it for him - years ago. T-Paw (what is that like some Minnesota rapper name?) was so boring that even the week they gave him saturation coverage as the 'new front runner' no one even noticed his was on. And Rick Perry sounded like the total 'Pub tool/tard the other day saying that 'Govmunt dun't create any jobs, like no sane person is supposed to notice that HE HAS A GOVERNMENT JOB AND WANTS ANOTHER ONE. Besides, joking or not (and I'm leaning toward not) he's on tape advocating that Texas succeed from the union. Only getting caught with a troop of cub scouts in his bed working on getting their naked merit badge could have done a better job of killing any chance he had at a national election. Ever.
Oh, let me add a personal note here. Hey Republicans. Don't you think that Lincoln weeps with Jesus up there in heaven at the very idea that someone who advocates succession could run for the Republican Nomination for President of the United States? That's like totally, completely and utterly morally vapid. And not only is it morally vapid, it's profoundly intellectually bankrupt. What, don't y'all remember how well that worked out for you late time?
But here's the kicker, they got at least 3, 4 if you count Cain which I don't, candidates who are even more crazy, MORE profoundly intellectually bankrupt, more unelectable on a national level than Perry. Palin, Bachman and Santorum. Pain has enough fans - and rabid ones, truly - to possibly get close to the nomination because of the way the primaries are structured, Bachman is insane, but not stupid and does an incredible job of appealing to a huge number of people in this country who already were believing what she is saying. She's dangerous in a way Palin never could be. Dear Sara is a tool, pretty much a ho who will do anything given enough money and fame, but Bachman operates on a level of wanting, needing and craving power, and them folks is always bad news.
So there you have it. Stay tuned, it's going to be hysterical.
I think they are already well under way to see who can out crazy the other.
Quote from: tekla on June 29, 2011, 09:49:38 AM
And Rick Perry sounded like the total 'Pub tool/tard the other day saying that 'Govmunt dun't create any jobs, like no sane person is supposed to notice that HE HAS A GOVERNMENT JOB AND WANTS ANOTHER ONE. Besides, joking or not (and I'm leaning toward not) he's on tape advocating that Texas succeed from the union. Only getting caught with a troop of cub scouts in his bed working on getting their naked merit badge could have done a better job of killing any chance he had at a national election. Ever.
SOUNDED like a 'tard? He IS a 'tard. <insert gratuitous aggy joke here>
Governor Goodhair will eventually toss his hat in the ring, but there are not enough Aggies that vote that can make up for the rest of us that know he is an idiot (and a closet case...although no cub scouts have been involved). Remember, some of us have been stuck with him as a governor...and that came after having the Shrub for a while.
Well you know because you live there, and me because I loved to read Molly Ivans, that being governor in Texas is - by some weird Constitution deal - largely a ceremonial position, the Lt. Governor, LiteGov as Anne called it, really has the power and the job description to, you know, govern.
Quote from: tekla on June 29, 2011, 10:06:28 AM
Well you know because you live there, and me because I loved to read Molly Ivans, that being governor in Texas is - by some weird Constitution deal - largely a ceremonial position, the Lt. Governor, LiteGov as Anne called it, really has the power and the job description to, you know, govern.
oh, you mean our current Lt Gov, David Do-Nothing, err Dewhurst...
I just hope we don't have the misfortune of foisting Goodhair on the rest of the country the way Shrub was...
Hey, we have an elderly action movie star, ex-Kennedy, Mister Universe who made soft core gay movies when he was young and likes to help out the maid with her work. Let me know, I'll ship him to you.
Funny, I haven't seen anyone mention Ron Paul yet. He would do the most good for our community, and the nation. With his stances on personal freedom, fiscal responsibility, and ardent adhesion to the Constitution; Government waste would be reined in, and personal persuit of happiness would thrive. Not to mention he polled higher than Obama in '08, and can unify a broad sentiment of the nation. Look him up; he is one of the few HONEST politicians in Washington.
Bachmann's husband runs a de-gaying clinic (it does other "Christian" counseling too). I don't know his views towards trans-persons, but I bet it's not good. Now normally I wouldn't care what a spouse said. Unfortunately Michelle has also spoken out very strongly about how horrible gays are - it seems that the two of them are definitely on the same page here.
I'll vote for whoever has made the most compromises to pass middle-of-the-road legislation, rather than standing firm and screaming, while getting nothing done. As far as I'm concerned, anyone currently in congress is disqualified because they've shown that they are completely and utterly unwilling to do their job (witness the current debt talk stuff - neither side will compromise, so they are waiting until last moment to do anything, because that's what the extremes in their bases want). No matter how "right" I was, if I behaved like they did at work (never doing anything I didn't personally want to do), I'm sure I would be fired within a day.
Ron Paul (and for the most part libertarians in general) have always been attractive candidates for me. Paul does have his issues - I used to fully subscribe to many of his policies, but they would only work if the current system was not the way it is. Free market economics only works well in a truly free market, for example. Otherwise it merely unfairly benefits the generally small number of corporations that have arisen as a result of a government-regulated market.
That said, I'm all for rolling back much of the wasteful spending (middle eastern wars) we have and reforming certain programs (medicare/medicaid) to not be so wasteful in a way that doesn't screw over everyone that paid into them. If that's even possible. Paying down the national debt is the issue I currently feel most strongly about because I feel we are screwed if in the long run if we don't start doing so in the next few years. I'm just extremely doubtful of the ability of ANY president to do so, being that they have to go through congress to get anything done. And going through congress can be like herding cats. :P
Romney's LDS affiliation will hurt him but the money the LDS makes sure is funneled his way may counter that. Having an LDS member as president is a scary proposition.
Chris Matthews actually predicted Bachmann will get the nod as the Republican candidate. He cited several reasons and felt sure she would ultimately win. It's going to be who has the best voting power, the LDS or the Tea Party?
Either way, neither of them is a friend of the LGBT community. Foe is a better description.
I wouldn't be surprised if Biden "retires" from public office and Hillary ends up as VP on the Obama 2012 ticket. It would be the perfect segue to Hillary running in 2016. And I think she'd win easily. But would Biden be willing to go along with that?
Politicians kissing the butt of the uber rich may seem the practical thing to do but in the long run it will hurt them. As the gap between rich and poor widens, a revolution will result. Right now the GOP is worshiping at the altar of the big money, giving them everything they want. The Dems, not so much. And when this country is financially ruined because the uber rich have all the money (which BTW, they don't seem to reinvest like we were told they would) it will be the party that put up the most resistance to handing them all the cash that will emerge. Or maybe the U.S. will just end up a dictatorship.
Quote from: AmySmiles on June 30, 2011, 08:29:14 AM
That said, I'm all for rolling back much of the wasteful spending (middle eastern wars) we have and reforming certain programs (medicare/medicaid) to not be so wasteful in a way that doesn't screw over everyone that paid into them. If that's even possible. Paying down the national debt is the issue I currently feel most strongly about because I feel we are screwed if in the long run if we don't start doing so in the next few years. I'm just extremely doubtful of the ability of ANY president to do so, being that they have to go through congress to get anything done. And going through congress can be like herding cats. :P
That's why I support everyone paying the same percentage for social security and medicare. If I pay roughly 7 percent of my income to Social Security and my employer does the same (as does the employer of the poorest employed person), than the CEO of Citibank should pay 7% of his salary (and so should his employer). As it is, he pays close to 0% (he pays 7% on the first bit, up to the cap, which he well exceeds).
But "no new taxes" means "let's give the rich more money while making the poor pay for more things directly". That's not helpful.
Likewise, I'd support bringing back the tax code that the first Bush inherited from Reagan. I can understand why the rich wouldn't like that though - much more taxes for them under Reagan. But failing that, bring back the code that Bush Jr. supported. If we're out of money, it's stupid to tax less.
Likewise, it's also stupid to spend like there is no tomorrow. You want to save money? There's a simple solution: grow government, not shrink it. There should be less people getting rich off of government. Why are the people paving roads working for private companies? Why don't we just hire the people doing the work directly (heck, it would be good prison labor), without someone making a profit in the middle? The same for military - why doesn't the military do most of the war fighting, why do people get to get rich on war? If you cut out the government contractors, you would cut out a huge chunk of government waste. But the group that claims to want to cut spending seems to have no problem with the wasteful government contracting system. Heck, neither does the side that wants to spend more.
The IRS used to say they obtained $14 that *we* were owed for every $1 spent on auditing. Basically, they got people who owed lots of money to do the same thing we all have to do: pay what is legally required. Of course that got cut this year - congress voted to let the rich get away with less tax auditing, as, apparently, rich campaign donors don't like tax audits.
I used to work for government. I saw us pay $100,000 for a simple web form (from a government contractor) that let people apply for a government program (it printed their application, which was processed just like every other paper application always was processed - it cut out no processes, nor did it streamline anything). The worst part is that the web form never worked, but you paid for it anyhow. I saw a welfare program that was over budget over three times the initial expected cost (another contractor) that, when I asked, "How many lines of code have been written so far for this 9 figure program?" I was told - when it was over budget x3 and two years late - that no code had actually been written yet. But the government was fine with continuing to pay the bills for what appeared to be zero accomplishment by the contractor. But I've yet to see a politician who really wants to correct these types of corruption. The sad thing is that it would be easy to do - the GAO already knows where the waste is, but they are powerless to do anything about it (intentionally so).
I wouldn't be surprised if Biden "retires" from public office and Hillary ends up as VP on the Obama 2012 ticket. It would be the perfect segue to Hillary running in 2016.
She's already said she is retiring from public life when she leaves the Sec of State job. She's always been good to her word. By 2016 she will be 69 years old - so basically the same age as Regan was when he won, and McCain was last time around. I don't see that winning. She can leave now and teach at Wellesley College, which she would dearly love to do. Do fundraisers that would be big money and be a power player in the party. Run some NGO for millions and millions a year.
Tragically perhaps for a lot of us, she's too sane to want it bad enough. And Biden is great. He hasn't run a god damn thing except his mouth - which usually has his foot in it - since he became VP, and that's a welcome return to tradition after the Dick Cheney years.
Despite the whole Palin deal - and how much the press makes of it every four years - the VP never really wins or loses elections.
Quote from: Slanan on June 30, 2011, 08:56:41 AM
That's why I support everyone paying the same percentage for social security and medicare. If I pay roughly 7 percent of my income to Social Security and my employer does the same (as does the employer of the poorest employed person), than the CEO of Citibank should pay 7% of his salary (and so should his employer). As it is, he pays close to 0% (he pays 7% on the first bit, up to the cap, which he well exceeds).
Why should one be expected to pay over the cap? It matters not how much you make over the cap, any benefits later paid are going to be minuscule compared to what one earned when you are in that bracket. If I remember the last worksheet correctly, I can expect to see something like maybe $3K a month from SSI when I reach retirement age. Anything above and beyond the current cap means I have to pay in for something I will never see again and instead goes to someone else...
QuoteBut "no new taxes" means "let's give the rich more money while making the poor pay for more things directly". That's not helpful.
and from my standpoint, when I read comments like that, it smacks of what I have seen on other boards of "well, you make more than enough already so why shouldn't the government ask you for more money?" It is the money I invest that helps keep the wheels going around...
QuoteLikewise, it's also stupid to spend like there is no tomorrow. You want to save money? There's a simple solution: grow government, not shrink it.
we do not need MORE government payroll...as it is, many agencies are way too bloated and that includes the agencies that are not even needed. They could line-item out the entirety of Homeland Security (as an example), to include the TSA, and instantly clear a good chunk of wasted monies.
Government has gotten too large and fat, both payroll wise and employee-numbers wise. We need some fiscal conservatism to whittle it down to size...
QuoteIf you cut out the government contractors, you would cut out a huge chunk of government waste.
I don't necessarily agree with this. I work for a government contractor (I know, I know, but keep reading) and what most people don't understand is that we are forced to abide by government-set wage rates, which are quite a bit larger than they are in the public sector. I've heard on the order of 4x as much. And we don't even make more money for salary than public sector employees. I'm sure if this wage rate problem was dealt with, the cost of many government contracts would also go down. This is the whole reason my company set up a separate division for any government related work, by the way. Because if we had to use government wage rates for our public sector work, we'd never win any bids. Ever.
I'm not voting democrat or republican. I'm voting for a progressive candidate. The following are not my suggestions but food for thouught. Abolish the federal reserve. Have a flat tax for everyone (15%). Abolish the irs. Close most of the military bases because they are not needed (the COld war has been over for over 20 years. Those are a few of my thoughts. GENNEE. 9,84
Hmmmm..... Matthews' pick Bachmann might be a bit challenged by the allegations her husband is a closeted gay. But, if so, he's doing the typical conservative two-step by running an gay curing clinic. So maybe he can avoid the familiar path many gay-hating gays in politics and religion have gone. Or maybe he'll join the ever growing list of outspoken, conservative, anti-LGBT crusaders when he gets caught with his own Rent Boy. That would be fun.
Listen to him. Is he gay or what?
(http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UvwP4vHEc-I&feature=player_embedded#at=76)
I'm voting for Tekla.
If nominated I will not run, if elected I will not... wait, the job comes with that plane don't it? Damn, that's one MoFo perk there ain't it? Air Force One. Where ever I say I want to go...
OK, here's what I do.
My first act as your president will be to declare myself to be a national security risk, mostly because I deeply and sincerely believe that in a democratic nation there should be few to no secrets. So for God's sake don't tell me. Now, having excluded myself from anything, and everything that's important I'm going to use my time and my office to truly engage in a massive goodwill tour those nations that have beaches and tropical, to semi-tropical climates. And countries that have ski resorts.
Aruba, Bimini, Tahiti will be ignored no longer! Arise island nation friends and let's make some of those fancy drinks and get to know each other.
And the G8 all have ski resorts (I'm no dummy), except for England. No tropical/semi-tropical beaches either. That's OK, I can catch half of England in the Costa del Sol or Rivera every year.
Quote from: tekla on July 09, 2011, 10:31:03 AM
That's OK, I can catch half of England in the Costa del Sol or Rivera every year.
Ah yes, with the fine grasp of culture and subtle mastery of the native tongue:
"Oi! Pablo! Uno beer-o poor favour!"
Yeah, I love hearing that. As an Ugly American though I never even try. If they want my money, they can say it in English, god knows every time CNN turns on a camera over there you have piles of people speaking English. But I'm a huge, HUGE (like 40 years around the service industry) believer in tips. I tip well, and tip at the start and frequently after that. Funny, their language skills get much, much better.
Quote from: tekla on July 09, 2011, 10:46:08 AM
But I'm a huge, HUGE (like 40 years around the service industry) believer in tips. I tip well, and tip at the start and frequently after that.
Reminds me of Vinnie Antonelli (Steve Martin) in My Blue Heaven: "It's not tipping I believe in, it's over tipping."
He's right. It's easy to party like a rock star, just remember what the Eagles said: They threw outrageous parties, they paid heavenly bills. Cause those two things go together. Last time the crew people went up to Reno we went to this kinda rock dive bar, got the big table and my friend tells the waitress that we're here to party like rock stars and just keep 'em coming as he gave her a fifty to start off with. She went to her boss, gave her other tables to the other girls and went off-duty to become our private waitress. If you want service, it's like anything else, pay for it.
I was scouring on the google site. Michelle Bachman favors limiting government yet her husband used $140 thousand dollars in federal funds for reparative therapy for gay and lesbian folks. GENNEE
Just a warning to be on the lookout for sneaky lies.
(The Bachmann radio clip above quoted this.)
The "American College of Pediatricians" is often quoted by haters.
| Name | Founded | Members | Employees |
| American Academy of Pediatrics | 1930 | 60,000 | 390 |
| American College of Pediatricians | 2002 | ~200 | ? |
The ACP is a (very small) bunch of malcontents who left the AAP over the issue of homosexuality.
Wait! Are you trying to tell me Michelle Bachmann is siding with haters? But she's running for president!
It's so much like picking which bull to castrate next with this house full of clowns running (wrecking) the show. Just pick whoever you hate the most and watch as they wither on the vine under the great American magnifying lens.
Watching our "lawmakers" play the game "Who's gonna blink first" compels me to start a campaign to just vote them all out and start all over. This stalemate attitude the Republicans have adopted is pathetic. It seems they have only two things that are important to them; 1) do whatever it takes to get rid of Obama, even if the entire country suffers in the process and 2) make sure the rich get richer. Nothing else seems to matter to them.
Lets hope voters get wise by the time we're casting votes. I doubt it, but it would really be comforting to see that kind of trend.
See, I keep telling you this whole 1776 Republic thing was a bad move. ;)
Quote from: justmeinoz on July 19, 2011, 07:57:44 AM
See, I keep telling you this whole 1776 Republic thing was a bad move. ;)
Haha, thing is, the party system was never in the plans :/ I believe the founders have already spun out of their graves.
Oh, there's no doubt about that! The Founding Fathers made many statements that would fly in the face of what our politicians are doing today. Maybe we can get Bill & Ted's phone booth time machine and bring them back here and watch them read our elected officials the riot act.
If the USA ends up broke maybe you can get Canada to buy you! Cheaper meds, free health care and better beer!
Na, We buy them as Far western Australia.
But do we want them?
Na
Cindy
We'll let Tekla be the gatekeeper!! Those who miss out get to go to Mexico instead.
Karen.
Sounds good. Julia has a new place for boat people as well.
Cindy
Looks like Bachmann may be out of the running according to an article in today's paper. She apparently suffers sever migraine and can be out of action for days.
I expect it won't be a long wait for the cartoons along the lines of, "You'll have to deal with Iran, I have a headache."
Given her attitudes to gays etc, I am not actually that upset at the misogyny that will no doubt become apparent.
Karen.
Quote from: justmeinoz on July 21, 2011, 06:25:17 AM
Looks like Bachmann may be out of the running according to an article in today's paper. She apparently suffers sever migraine and can be out of action for days.
I expect it won't be a long wait for the cartoons along the lines of, "You'll have to deal with Iran, I have a headache."
Given her attitudes to gays etc, I am not actually that upset at the misogyny that will no doubt become apparent.
Karen.
They say she is under a lot of stress. No doubt she's uptight. If she thinks her present life is stressful, how would she respond to being president?
People who repress their real selves can create a lot of stress for themselves. Maybe Bachmann is lesbian but can't admit it. After all, her husband is gay.
My son gets migraines. Can't actually imagine the Leader of the Free World lying in the dark for 24 hrs talking into a bucket! :o
I'd like to run a book on when anti-gay extremists get caught with a gay lover. Wouldn't be able to offer very good odds though!
Karen.
I'm Reading Howard Zinn's book 'A Young People's History of the United States'. Much of what he writes about I already knew. I recommend the book. Gennee
I like Zinn. He takes the other approach, and you need both (if not more) to get a real understanding.
My vote goes to Charlie Sheen, he seems the most rational of at all
Kate D
He's winning, what more do you need?
For some reason he seems to be popular with a percentage of the female electorate, and will probably get the bartender's vote!
Maybe he can found the Party!Party! Party! Party.
Sorry Charlie, seems like the Republicans already sent in the clowns.
Too late! President Obama already pointed out he thought Donald Trump was running as a joke! (rather than an independent!!)
Maybe you should open a US branch of the Sex Party, Tekla?
Maybe you should open a US branch of the Sex Party, Tekla?
Well our slogan: We're too busy screwing each other to screw you too, should get about 30% of the vote by this point.
Giovanni Gambino. Hey the Mob runs things anyway. Let's make it official. ;D
Seriously, I am voting for the current president. No one else seems to curry my vote.
Quote from: tekla on August 02, 2011, 08:18:18 AM
Maybe you should open a US branch of the Sex Party, Tekla?
Well our slogan: We're too busy screwing each other to screw you too, should get about 30% of the vote by this point.
I think that number is climbing every day.
Ronald Regan works for me. Julie maybe you should run, most anyone would do a better job than obama or old war hungry crazy bush
After watching the latest "Real Time With Bill Maher", I'm leaning toward Dr. Neil deGrasse Tyson (http://www.haydenplanetarium.org/tyson/). He made a whole lot of common sense. At one point he said he had looked at background of all the Senators & Congressmen now in office and almost all had a law background. Then he asked, what about businessmen who know how to run companies? What about engineers? And mentioned others who would be more concerned with making things work and creating real jobs than about law.
So, elect business men to handle running the country, economists to handle the finances, engineers to fix the infrastructure, scientists to improve the future, educators to focus on learning and innovators to open up new avenues. The election criteria being on making the country function and prosper to the benefit of the people. And if there's a point of law that needs clarification, they can hire a lawyer.
I'm in.
There is no money. The USA has borrowed so much it is unbelievable. If not for cash cow China buying our t-bills/bonds USA would already be under. Big old trees fall harded than little trees. USA is one big old tree with zip for roots.
Here is the secret. There never was money. It's all made up. We just agree to it, that's all.
China is a cash cow because we buy all their stuff. We print money, buy stuff from outside the US, our creditors agree we have AAA credit and we get the best interest rates from them, the people we send our money to.
Too big to fail? For right now, yes.
Anyone president elected in the next three or four elections will have their hands full. Maybe we should hand it over to the Tea Party. They seem to have all the answers.
China is a cash cow because they manufacture a lot of ->-bleeped-<-, and we buy all their stuff.
No bailout?
Judging by the events of the last couple of weeks, maybe the question should be rephrased as : "Who would want to be President of the USA?" :laugh: It's beginning to sound like second prize in a raffle.
Karen.
I miss Pat Paulsen (http://www.paulsen.com/pat/) :-\
(https://www.susans.org/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.ichloe.com%2Fimages%2Ftea-party.jpg&hash=728fa6d4d52b79305c5481cf65971b99882635a8) :-\
Pat Paulsen, better than most of the Republican candidates. But would you want Rick Perry for President? Bush 43 screwed this state (Texas) and this country up! Want another Republican Texan to do even more damage? Perry held his little rally in Houston Saturday telling Evangelicals "he's one of them", pretty scary!
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/44043951?ocid=ansmsnbc11 (http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/44043951?ocid=ansmsnbc11)
Quote from: Julie Marie on June 29, 2011, 09:18:54 AM
For the record, there are 21 Democrats, 26 Independents, 3 Libertarians and a whopping 86 Republicans, a bit over 50% of the total number of candidates.
As for me, I'm kinda likin' Michelle Bachmann. She's wacky, flaky and says the darnedest things.
"It is a brand new, billion-dollar high speed train that is going to go from Disneyland up to Las Vegas. ... Harry Reid, the senator from Nevada, was behind this measure, and it makes us wonder, is he more interested in making sure kids start gambling at younger ages?" –Michelle Bachmann on the House Floor
And if we could get Fred Karger to be her VP, we'd have quite a dashing pair! The country would be hoping Bachmann's good looks could cure Karger of his homosexuality. The White House Soaps!
to be fair though, most of the known names on that list among Republicans are not, in fact, actually running (Chris Christe for instance)
the list appears to be an effort to make sure they name everyone who has not expressively stated they are not running (and then some - because Christie keeps saying he''s not running)
As for me, I'd been in the Gary Johnson camp but i have to admit that
HRM Caesar St Augustine De Buonaparte certainly sounds tempting...
http://www.museumofhoaxes.com/hoax/weblog/comments/1277/ (http://www.museumofhoaxes.com/hoax/weblog/comments/1277/)
Read the comments lol
Quote from: SandraJane on August 08, 2011, 12:06:23 AM
But would you want Rick Perry for President? Bush 43 screwed this state (Texas) and this country up! Want another Republican Texan to do even more damage?
Obviously enough Texans thought "you da man!" when they voted him in for governor. And that's why he's able to do what he's doing today. That any politician, especially one like a state governor, would host a religious rally is evident where this country is today. Where's the Tea Party protesting separation of church and state?
At "The Response" rally Perry even teamed up with the hate group, The American Family Association in sponsoring the event. There's no doubt the Republican party is filled with phobes but some of these people take it to extremes. Yet there they are, the herds of mindless sheep, following the wolf in sheep's clothing to the slaughter.
Even though Michael Moore is often over the top, I think he got it right when he pointed to Reagan busting the air traffic controller's union (http://www.michaelmoore.com/words/mike-friends-blog/30-years-ago-today) as the starting point where the transfer of wealth, and the beginning of the end for the middle class, began. Now you have millions of desperate people who are looking for salvation from having to work twice as hard to make less money just to survive. Our country seems unable to help them so they turn to god. That's not working out so well either.
No doubt the US citizens are still too blind, too uneducated, and still too lazy, to do their homework and make the right decision for themselves and their country. The evidence of that is everywhere. So the thinking citizens will be strapped with more of these blood sucking politicians until we hit bottom. Then, maybe enough voters will wake up and vote them out.
So sad but true, and though your comment feels like salt being rubbed into a wound, the evidence is there for all to see! One day the USA will get back its SP AAA+ credit rating, just not today!
One day the USA will get back its SP AAA+ credit rating, just not today!
The way the nation is split, and with the extreme hatred of the right wing for America and American values, coupled with their 'we had to destroy the village in order to save it' mentality, I doubt we'll see it in our lifetime, if ever at all.
Who knows, immortality might be right around the corner! Remember "Contract on America? :laugh:
Quote from: gennee on July 31, 2011, 09:21:29 AM
I'm Reading Howard Zinn's book 'A Young People's History of the United States'. Much of what he writes about I already knew. I recommend the book. Gennee
I always looked up to Howard Zinn. You will never see the whole of something until you've look at it from all angles. The minute you mute or stop listening to dissidents is the minute you've stopped being intellectually honest.
It was sad to see him go.
Quote from: tekla on August 06, 2011, 01:45:47 PM
Here is the secret. There never was money. It's all made up. We just agree to it, that's all.
Shhhhh! You'll ruin EVERYTHING!
a lot of this thread is unintentionally hilarious.
Why not? Overseen by fools and idiots.
Quote from: SandraJane on August 09, 2011, 03:42:21 AMOverseen by fools and idiots.
Oh, not at all. They are clever, cunning and making fools and idiots of everyone who actually believes them... and votes for them.
Make no mistake, these are intelligent people who know exactly what to say, when to say it and how to say it. They analyze the herd, identify their prey and promise them the world. And when we buy the snake oil they are selling, it feeds their inflated egos and compels them to continue feeding on the prey.
In the wild, the prey know to run from their predators. In human society, the prey walk right into the lair, thinking they will find Nirvana.
People forget old adages like, "if it sounds too good to be true, it probably is", and "there is no free lunch."
Applies world wide, hence the last couple of Federal election results here.
I mean, the difference between a credit rating of AAA and AA+ is stuff all really. You'd think it was the end of the world.
Karen.
Quote from: justmeinoz on August 09, 2011, 08:05:13 AM
I mean, the difference between a credit rating of AAA and AA+ is stuff all really. You'd think it was the end of the world.
Investors lost over one trillion yesterday. For some of those, it probably felt like the end of the world.
Our share market and dollar both dropped on the news of the US fall, but then came back up to higher than before the fall. There was no concrete reason for people to do this, just following like sheep. It would have made more sense for our market and dollar to rise against the US, surely?
Our PM Julia Gillard, and Opposittion leader Tony Abbott are flying to a politician's funeral. Abbott says, " I could throw a $1000 cheque out the window now and make someone happy." Gillard says, "I could throw ten $100 bills out the window and make 10 people happy." The pilot turns to the co-pilot and says, "Listen to them will you, trying to out do each other on the way to a funeral. I could throw them both out and make 23 million people happy."
Quote from: tekla on August 09, 2011, 01:34:43 AM
One day the USA will get back its SP AAA+ credit rating, just not today!
The way the nation is split, and with the extreme hatred of the right wing for America and American values, coupled with their 'we had to destroy the village in order to save it' mentality, I doubt we'll see it in our lifetime, if ever at all.
IMO
The way the nation is split, and with the extreme hatred of the left wing for America and American values, coupled with their "we are entitled to not work and be matained" mentality. The end of the "freebies" is at hand.
One day the USA will get back its SP AAA+ credit rating, just not today! True, but soon after some changes are implemented.
Kate D
Quote from: Julie Marie on August 09, 2011, 08:00:14 AM
Oh, not at all. They are clever, cunning and making fools and idiots of everyone who actually believes them... and votes for them.
Make no mistake, these are intelligent people who know exactly what to say, when to say it and how to say it. They analyze the herd, identify their prey and promise them the world. And when we buy the snake oil they are selling, it feeds their inflated egos and compels them to continue feeding on the prey.
In the wild, the prey know to run from their predators. In human society, the prey walk right into the lair, thinking they will find Nirvana.
Ouch! But I think its their handlers that are the intelligent ones. You have such flowing prose in saying such horrible things...autograph my book please!
"Entitlements"... sticks in my craw. Social Security is an entitlement. Really? You mean all that money that the government took on my behalf all those years and that I'm now hoping to get back as a return on my investment is an "entitlement"? BULL! Same goes for Medicare. I ran the numbers and I figure with conservative investing I'd have almost $400K in my account, enough to pay me more than SS is willing to and enough to buy better health insurance than Medicade and Medicare will give me.
Politicians are spinning the truth on this one because they won't admit they blew our retirement money when they should have been investing it. And the media is buying it. SS & Med aren't the problem, the people who spent our money on their pet projects are.
I agree Kate, there are some people who are leeches but the majority of people want to work, want to earn a decent wage and want a government that puts its citizens ahead of the politician's agenda.
Now if it's socialism you're fearing...
Real Time With Bill Maher, New Rules-Socialism 7/29/11 (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rxzE8x2pnK4#)
Quote
"Entitlements"... sticks in my craw. Social Security is an entitlement. Really? You mean all that money that the government took on my behalf all those years and that I'm now hoping to get back as a return on my investment is an "entitlement"? BULL! Same goes for Medicare.
Nah. it was a tax - just like all the rest of them. They just dressed it up in a prettier outfit to make it easier to sell.
I don't care whether it's called an entitlement now or not, but if you are still deluding yourself into thinking that it was "insurance" that you have coming because you paid into your "account" then you will believe all sorts of other lies as well.
It was just a tax with a pretty name - whatever it might have been intended to be. Once they started spending it on anything else, it lost that virtue.
I think it got invested in the stock market. Same as mine in Oz, worth jelly beans.
Cindy
Quote from: Tammy Hope on August 10, 2011, 03:28:50 AM
Nah. it was a tax - just like all the rest of them. They just dressed it up in a prettier outfit to make it easier to sell.
I don't care whether it's called an entitlement now or not, but if you are still deluding yourself into thinking that it was "insurance" that you have coming because you paid into your "account" then you will believe all sorts of other lies as well.
It was just a tax with a pretty name - whatever it might have been intended to be. Once they started spending it on anything else, it lost that virtue.
It doesn't matter to me what anyone else calls it, when I talk to my local politicians, I'm calling SS & Med a return on my investment. No way am I giving them an out.
When SS was enacted you would get a check when you retire, for the full amount you put in, plus interest. Soon Uncle Sam decided on doing payments. Before you know it a pile of money was there and one day SS became totally self sustaining. Yep! Invested properly, we'd never have to add another penny to it and we could go on paying retirees indefinitely.
Then someone saw the pile of cash. An elected official who couldn't find the money to pay back his campaign supporters? A corporate big wig who felt he had a better use for the money so he twisted the arm of a local politician? Maybe lots of people. Whoever saw it first, the vultures started circling. Arms were twisted. Elected officials were "reminded" they were "lawmakers" and bills were passed opening the floodgates of the Social Security cash pile.
They called it borrowing, but they never intended to pay it back. Politicians know it's easier to be forgiven than it is to get permission. So they took. And they know it's easier to spin a story than it is to be forgiven. So they spun. And the spin turned into the "truth" that "The Social Security System is breaking us."
Yeah, I guess it is, now that it's been raided all those years and stripped of all its value, by the same people we just keep electing.
So I will keep saying SS & Med are a return on my investment. And everyone who has had even a penny taken out of their check for SS or Med should say the same thing. It's time to unspin the spin. Let the politicians figure out how to squirm out of that.
I agree with that statement, politicians have been robbing our social security funds for too long. They need to quit lying, admit why it is in trouble and find a way to fix it, without penalizing those receiving these funds.
I paid into Social Security for 50 years, I expect to receive my funds now, we have not been given an increase in two years now, because politicians claim there hasn't been inflation. I'd like to see a politician live on the money I receive monthly.
There shouldn't be anyone running for president. But there will always be those people who love to make fools of themselves.
And then complain when a news publication points out the fact. They all have an excuse, w/o solutions.
Quote from: Julie Marie on August 10, 2011, 01:21:12 PMI'm calling SS & Med a return on my investment. No way am I giving them an out.
Good luck with that.
Quote from: Sarah Louise on August 10, 2011, 01:26:56 PM
They need to quit lying
And especially good luck with THAT.
Quote from: Julie Marie on August 08, 2011, 08:21:52 AM
No doubt the US citizens are still too blind, too uneducated, and still too lazy, to do their homework and make the right decision for themselves and their country. The evidence of that is everywhere. So the thinking citizens will be strapped with more of these blood sucking politicians until we hit bottom. Then, maybe enough voters will wake up and vote them out.
Though the American people occasionally rise up at the polls to vent their discontent with "Capitol Hill", business resumes as usual. Ask someone if they voted in the last election, any election, and the response you get is "it doesn't matter". That's why things by and large remain the same. Nowadays we have the ability to monitor to some extent what's going in our government through the Internet, we don't see everything but there's enough information to stay informed.
Money talks...Obama proved how much money one can raise by going directly to the people and letting them give what they can, something Hillary Clinton didn't realize until it was too late. But people get caught up in the day to day things of living and the rest is just 6 O'Clock News. Once again, did you vote? One vote doesn't make a difference but many do.
Any people anywhere, being inclined and having the power, have the right to rise up, and shake off the existing government, and form a new one that suits them better. This is a most valuable - a most sacred right - a right, which we hope and believe, is to liberate the world.
Abraham Lincoln Its about action...and money, do ya have enough money to take action or enough action to get take the money?
Do you know where your Voter's Registration card is?
Has SS stopped issuing checks? Nope. Mater of fact it's been working exactly as designed - and more so - for over 60 years now.
There is this bump going on as the last vestiges of the old way of thinking get on their (medicare provided) Rascal scooters (because they are too fat to walk anymore) and go out and do the Tea'tard thing. But they are dying, one or two at the top election cycles and they will be all but gone and so too will their antiquated values.
And I think it's all going to work out in the end, largely because people who like to work are working at it. Is there going to be a level of sacrifice required? Yes, and I think a lot of people (enough anyway) are going to be willing to make it. I'm pretty much content that no matter what I'm not really going to retire (I don't want to either) and it's going to be necessary for most of the Baby Boomers to skip that (well those of us who do work) or push that retirement deal way out and balance the system. That's fine, I took a lot of my retirement when I was in my 20's and could still enjoy the things in life I really like. (Why the hell would I want to retire at a point in my life where my dick has already retired before me?). The other groups that's going to have to bite it are people who are now about 25-35 who are not (perhaps ever) going to get real jobs because of the non-retirement deal (i.e. - I should be rights be training my replacement now, when I'm about 55, so that in 10 years they can have my job, but it's not happening) - and because of the Baby Boomer reality, which is that they have been the most productive generation ever, which sounds weird, but is true.
Quote from: tekla on August 11, 2011, 09:28:15 AM
The other groups that's going to have to bite it are people who are now about 25-35 who are not (perhaps ever) going to get real jobs because of the non-retirement deal (i.e. - I should be rights be training my replacement now, when I'm about 55, so that in 10 years they can have my job, but it's not happening) - and because of the Baby Boomer reality, which is that they have been the most productive generation ever, which sounds weird, but is true.
That's the very sad truth... I'm going to be 34 next month and only once have I had a job that paid over $30k and none of my jobs had room for growth. It also didn't help that many in my age group graduated college in the midst of the dot-com bust and the 2001 recession. Got my first degree in June 2001, weeks after the three biggest companies in my field shut their doors and put a few thousand seasoned professionals into the job market. I was turned down for an $8/hour job, because the person who wound up getting hired was someone at the company I did my internship with, who was previously making $250k/year. My age group got skipped. Our ships never came in. Out of all my long-time friends, only three are currently employed, two in jobs that don't pay living wages, and one who actually makes a living because he's almost 20-year military. We really got skipped. By the time the jobs returned, we were out of work long enough to be obsolete.
So I did whatever crap jobs I could and decided in 2007 to go back to school for another degree so that I could find a job and make some money. I graduated last December. Been unemployed since state law forced me out of my $12/hour job in May. This is working out like a house on fire... :(
Know where your Voter's Reg Card is?
Quote from: SandraJane on August 11, 2011, 12:51:46 PM
Know where your Voter's Reg Card is?
On the top of a stack of papers sitting next to the arm of my couch. :laugh: Like really! I know exactly where it is. Saw it this morning as I was getting ready to go, actually. I haven't missed a single election since I became eligible to vote in '96.
You're right though, it sucks and the house is burning! Definitely no trouble with expression. The thread started about who's runnin' for prez, SS, Medicare and burning houses later... :laugh:
Thanks
Quote from: Zoë Natasha on August 11, 2011, 09:47:41 AM
So I did whatever crap jobs I could and decided in 2007 to go back to school for another degree so that I could find a job and make some money. I graduated last December. Been unemployed since state law forced me out of my $12/hour job in May. This is working out like a house on fire... :(
Adding to what Zoe said, the years of a long and enjoyable retirement are just that...long gone. Those of that are lucky enough to be working have seen what little we'd started to save for retirement completely gutted and no apparent hope for recovery. Retirement will come when our bodies are so broken as to prevent working another day. Death probably won't be too far behind that.
Meanwhile, our politicians, that we elected are worth nothing more then their talking points and their soundbites. People have literally been destroyed by this recession, many of who will never recover, and yet the politicians are more concerned about their talking points then they are creating real solutions.
latest Gallup poll (numbers from memory):
Percent who say congress doesn't deserve re-election 76%
Percent who say their own representatives do: 54%
THIS is why you don't see much change.
I'm doing research on every candidate. Where they get their support from? Their voting record? Their positions on issues? I WILL NOT vote for a Democrat or Republican again. I'm looking at REAL progressive candidates.
That and the fact that about 80% of the money for both parties comes from the same sources, corporate American buying both sides, because it's the only smart thing to do.
Do your parties & candidates have to reveal were their money is coming from?
In Oz they are supposed to but 'they' keep the water as murky as possible.
Cindy
The TV news tonight had a story on Michelle Bachmann's statement that women should be submissive totheir husbands. It was all a bit bizarre, and more than a little worrying that the other Republican candidates seemed to think that the question shouldn't have been asked.
Maybe her husband should be running instead?
I would probably consider myself to be somewhere around the Left end of the Republican Party, and all I can come up with in their favour is that if Sarah Palin put the hard word on me I wouldn't say no!
Karen.
Michelle Bachman elevates stupid to a new level. Seriously, she makes Sarah Palin look like a candidate for MENSA.
It's almost this simple to me: If you really want the job, you're disqualified from ever holding it.
Quote from: Cindy James on August 13, 2011, 02:46:29 AM
Do your parties & candidates have to reveal were their money is coming from?
Not any more. Our conservative majority Supreme Court made sure of that. So anyone from anywhere can donate to the U.S. political parties and candidates.
It's funny, because you sure wouldn't get an atheist running for the Republican slot, not a Jew or Hindu either. Nope, the Republican Party back in 1980 asked (begged, pleaded, did everything except get down on their knees and suck 'em) the true believing and feeling left out of it part of the Xian community in the US, which has a huge evangelical segment, a huge fundamentalist segment, a very large Pentecostal/Four-Square segment, and a lot of one-off 'minister by mail' joints in their fold. In the past this group didn't matter much. A huge segment of it never voted, didn't register - they didn't think it was proper to put the Lord into the political sector. The Catholics and the Mormons voted, in large numbers too, as did the main stream Xians your Methodists, Episcopalians, Unitarians, and the like. But the far-right fringe - which has a long standing historical tradition in the United States, it runs deep in the nation's psyche - was always (until Reagan) out in the cold.
America has a problem: It's filled with people who take the Bible seriously. America has a blessing: It's filled with people who take the Bible seriously. How does this blessing coexist with the curse derived from the same source: the Bible? The answer is that the Bible is a curse or a blessing depending on who is doing the interpreting. Sometimes belief in the Bible leads to building a hospital. Sometimes it leads to justifying perpetual war and empire building. Same book—different interpretation.
And the worst seem to have crept out of the woodwork and are attempting to take over. Known as Reconstructionists (also:Dominionism) seeks to reconstruct "our fallen society" along biblical lines. Specificially they seek to apply "the whole Word of God" to all aspects of human life: "It is not only our duty as individuals, families and churches to be Christian, but it is also the duty of the state, the school, the arts and sciences, law, economics, and every other sphere to be under Christ the King. Nothing is exempt from His dominion. We must live by His Word, not our own."
In this vission, all nations on earth should be obedient to the ancient Jewish/Christian version of "God's Law," so that the world will experience "God's blessings." Biblical salvation will then turn back the consequences of the Fall, and we'll be on our way to the New Eden. To achieve this "turning back," coercion must be used by the faithful to stop evildoers, who are, by definition, anyone not obeying all of God's Laws as defined by the Calvinist and Reconstructionist interpretation of the Bible.
Now, given that Sara and Michelle both have ties with such groups, the question is how much is OK, or proper to ask someone about their faith and how much their faith controls their lives. Now - and we know this because they pound this sand up our ass all the time - some of them LOVE talking about it whenever it's convenient and/or it's pandering to the audience with their religious twaddle, but ask them any serious question about it and it's off limits and out of bounds.
As indeed it may well be. Custom tends to prohibit such questions (Kennedy got some, but he's about the only one), there is a strict 'no religious test' for public office part of the Constitution that works against such questions and lines of attack.
Do know this: If that debate had been on MSNBC and Rachel Maddow or Chris Mathews had asked it heads would have exploded. But that it was an 'in' debate (Republicans Only) on friendly ground (FOX) it has opened the door to others asking the question. And that's going to be hard to put back in the bag now the the pubs asked it of themselves.
Oh yeah, we now have Rick Perry running. He's gov of a state that's undergoing like the worst drought in memory. It's real hot and dry. Yet, he denies global warming theory and other scientific solutions and supports having prayer meetings to end the drought. Is anyone going to question him on this 'policy'? (So far no answer to the prayers, Texas is still bone dry. Though perhaps EVEN MORE people are praying for the drought to continue. You never really know with prayer.)
And... Bachmann wins the Iowa straw poll. Gee, there's a shock.
http://news.yahoo.com/michele-bachmann-wins-iowa-republican-poll-004004700.html (http://news.yahoo.com/michele-bachmann-wins-iowa-republican-poll-004004700.html)
It's going to be scary for anybody not of the flock (or those shunned by the flock) if the biggest religious zealots wind up getting through. As a far-left progressive, I've been incredibly disenchanted with both major parties for a long time, and I really don't like the idea of having to once again vote for the lesser of two evils in order to keep the greater evil out.
Please note, I'm not painting people of a religious stripe as "evil." Not by any means. As Tekla pointed out, religion has been used for great things. But the people who boast about their religion and crave power have nothing good to offer anybody who's not like them. And the moment they try to legislate everyone else out of existence because they won (or stole) the gavel, then we'll truly have something to fear.
I'll admit, this crew makes Dubya look as moderate as Colin Powell.
(Obligatory disclaimer: this is strictly my opinion and does not reflect on the rest of the site staff).
Huntsman is pretty moderate. That's why he hasn't a chance.
He was governor when I first moved here and he never once infuriated me. That's not something I can't say about many Republican politicians.
Quote from: Julie Marie on August 13, 2011, 06:52:14 PM
Not any more. Our conservative majority Supreme Court made sure of that. So anyone from anywhere can donate to the U.S. political parties and candidates.
"Corporations are people, my friend."
Quote from: Jen on August 13, 2011, 11:04:07 PM
"Corporations are people, my friend."
If that were true, then they would stop providing umbrella protections that allow CEO's to make decisions that would land you or I in jail for a veeeeery long time. Corporations are more like armored tanks, "But it's a tank! I had to use it that way!"
I'm going to go with the devil I know in this one unless a great business man lies to me like I want him to, because I honestly believe our current Pres. was handed a steaming pile of "nucular 'merucah" to try to clean up. Plus, "he" killed Bin Laden! 8 years...
Mitt Romney said that to a heckler the other day. It's slightly out of context but a good soundbyte nevertheless lol.
Yeah I heard it. Funny stuff :)
It's getting worse then? ::) I am more convinced than ever before that the only thing your (speaking as someone outside the USA) Republican Party has going for it is that Sarah Palin is a bit of a spunk. :-* It is all a bit worrying.
Karen.
Nah, even though all the polls (which this far out don't mean anything a year+ out) have Obama being beaten by a 'generic Republican' all those poll drop to defeat when an actual Republican is put in that slot. For people who watch this, like me, it was obvious that the Rs were not going to really go after him, let this election be a wash, hopefully get rid of the tea party types, and look to 2016.
They have lost one of their key issues, 'defense/security', no one trusts them on economic issues, and the worse the economy gets the less social issues matter as those are really champagne problems. No one who needs a job is going to care about gay marriage. Palin and Bachman cant' capture any votes outside of their narrow range of fans, Rick Perry is on video record calling for/joking about (doesn't matter which) Texas succeeding from the Union, which makes him toast outside the South, Mitt is the oldest white guy in line, and in a normal year would get the nod (and I'm still thinking he will) but that Mormon deal hurts, and he's as dull as dishwater. So pretty much Obama gets a walk.
Our real candid GOP candidates caught on film. All the rumors are true! :laugh:
http://veniceforchange.blogspot.com/2011/08/cornography.html (http://veniceforchange.blogspot.com/2011/08/cornography.html)
Quote from: juliekins on August 14, 2011, 10:32:55 AM
Our real candid GOP candidates caught on film. All the rumors are true! :laugh:
http://veniceforchange.blogspot.com/2011/08/cornography.html (http://veniceforchange.blogspot.com/2011/08/cornography.html)
Oh my! What kind of reaction will those pictures cause? They made me blush!
It's almost a photo-journal of her teaching him to give head. "No, no Marcus, you don't bite it, you slide your lips over it..." Her handlers are not ready for prime time, that's' for sure. This is going right up there with Mike Dukakis steering a tank, GHWB in marvel at the grocery store and John Kerry anytime.
Quote from: Julie Marie on August 13, 2011, 06:52:14 PM
Not any more. Our conservative majority Supreme Court made sure of that. So anyone from anywhere can donate to the U.S. political parties and candidates.
Per what decision? I'm pretty sure the FEC has rules about it, but you have to contribute over a certain amount to be detailed.
I remember the dust up 4 years ago when Obama got a ton of money via small donations made but people for whom we had only a name - and a bunch of the names were obviously fake (I believe the most famous was DooDad Pro or something like that).
That's why i find this thread funny - the underlying implication that all would be well if not for right wingers.
Quote from: justmeinoz on August 14, 2011, 05:26:46 AM
It's getting worse then? ::) I am more convinced than ever before that the only thing your (speaking as someone outside the USA) Republican Party has going for it is that Sarah Palin is a bit of a spunk. :-* It is all a bit worrying.
Karen.
Trust me on this - you have to be very careful about your sources if you want a balaned picture of the GOP over here.
Yes, to be very clear, they are ALL (left and right, Rep or Dem) a bunch of grasping, narcissistic, unethical, self-serving slimballs (as a group, there are a few exceptions) but a LOT of your "mainstream" outlets will portray the Republicans in the worst possible terms and the Democrats as mostly good folks with an occasional hiccup here and there.
and almost anything you read HERE about the Republicans will be wildly over-the-top because they are wrong on the equality issues (an understandable emotion - but emotion and not reason, nonetheless)
I'm a "small l" libertarian and haven't voted for a major party candidate when I had another option since 1992 (though I have voted in the GOP primaries since then) so I don't carry a bref for them - but that doesn't mean i can't roll my eyes out of the back of my head at the blind Democrat loyalty/Republican hatred which is rampant in the LGBT community. those of us who have ANY right of center views are as much freaks here as Trans folk are freaks among the (so-called) "normal" population.
By all means, read some left wing sources- HuffPost is great - to find out whats wrong with the GOP, but balance that out with some visits to the Weekly Standard or NRO for the opposite point of view.
And if you want to see how both of them are bad news, visit Reason.com
Quote from: justmeinoz on August 14, 2011, 05:26:46 AM
It's getting worse then? ::) I am more convinced than ever before that the only thing your (speaking as someone outside the USA) Republican Party has going for it is that Sarah Palin is a bit of a spunk. :-* It is all a bit worrying.
Karen.
also, laying aside the equality issue because sadly, the primary voters in the GOP are way behind the curve on that one - the Republicans have an EXCELLENT core of young up-and-coming politicians (judged against the old guard particularly). They are just not quite up to the level of the national stage yet in most cases. i can't vouch for all these people completely - you never know what they might think that they haven't voiced loudly yet, or what might be going on behind the scenes (see for reference: Sanford, Mark) but based on what I know now, keep your eyes on:
(this list is not necessarily my endorsement - it's my surveying those people who will be big hits within the party over the coming decade or so)
Sen Marco Rubio <THE Future star if he stays on track
Sen. RandPaul <much better than his dad, not as nutty
Gov. Nikki Haley <You think Palin is hot...
Gov Bobby Jindal <worse than many on the "too religious" front but otherwise...
Gov Bob McDonnell < Virginia is a good springboard
Sen Mike Lee < I know much less about this guy
Sen Ron Johnson < ditto
Rep. Paul Ryan < the guy who would normally most appeal to moderates but he's getting demigauged big time
Sen. Pat Tomey <when he's on budget and not being tempted to the social issues
Rep. Allen West < hard right loves him which is death around here of course
Gov Scott Walker <vilified for changes he made, but many other governors left and right have made the same choices. He was used as a "hill to die on" by the unions ad he beat them.
Gov John Kasic (misspelled) < made a bad move (from our point of view) on the equality issues when he took office that was totally unnecessary. but that won't hurt him in the party and his economics are popular.
Gov. Chris Christie - I tend to think that, like Gulliani before him, that the national party loves him in the context of the Northeast but wouldn't like him so much on the national stage
That's just off the top of my head - there are others. anyone who tells you the GOP is bereft of appealing candidates for future races is simply not telling you the truth.
Quote from: EmmaM on August 14, 2011, 01:57:55 AM
If that were true, then they would stop providing umbrella protections that allow CEO's to make decisions that would land you or I in jail for a veeeeery long time. Corporations are more like armored tanks, "But it's a tank! I had to use it that way!"
I'm going to go with the devil I know in this one unless a great business man lies to me like I want him to, because I honestly believe our current Pres. was handed a steaming pile of "nucular 'merucah" to try to clean up. Plus, "he" killed Bin Laden! 8 years...
Devil's Advocate: He himself said he should have it fixed in three years - Three years ago.
Quote from: Tammy Hope on August 15, 2011, 02:24:37 AM
Per what decision?
Justices, 5-4, Reject Corporate Spending LimitBy ADAM LIPTAK
Published: January 21, 2010
WASHINGTON — Overruling two important precedents about the First Amendment rights of corporations, a bitterly divided Supreme Court on Thursday ruled that the government may not ban political spending by corporations in candidate elections.
The 5-to-4 decision was a vindication, the majority said, of the First Amendment's most basic free speech principle — that the government has no business regulating political speech. The dissenters said that allowing corporate money to flood the political marketplace would corrupt democracy. New York Times article (http://www.nytimes.com/2010/01/22/us/politics/22scotus.html)
Quote from: Tammy Hope on August 15, 2011, 02:24:37 AM
That's why i find this thread funny - the underlying implication that all would be well if not for right wingers.
All five justices who voted for this are conservative. The facts speak for themselves. We don't need underlying implications. This is not to say Democrats are saints, but the Republicans now
always vote for big money.
Quote from: Tammy Hope on August 15, 2011, 02:33:07 AM
By all means, read some left wing sources- HuffPost is great - to find out whats wrong with the GOP, but balance that out with some visits to the Weekly Standard or NRO for the opposite point of view.
What blows my mind is that the average self-identified "conservative" can only reference talking points. Get into a debate with them and ask for source materials and they stare at you blankly. Sean Hannity is not a source, he's one person's opinion - just the same for Michael Moore.
Future races, sure, perhaps - but you have to win the ones that are about to happen and it's not looking that good (nor should it). You can say ' hard right loves him which is death around here of course' but you're acting like it's just a few of us, when in fact 'hard right' (and then some) is also electoral death in most of the large electoral states.
Jindal, West, Haley no way. Too much racism at the core level in the party still. It's not even subtle on places like FreeRepublic and RedStates, and no one is going to with the R nomination without the support of that element of the party.
And Nikki Haley? Really, all you can say about her qualification to hold national office is 'she's hot', boy that speaks volumes. Thank's but I prefer Hillary, smart is better than pretty when it comes to government. She needs to find a way out of the South and onto a national, or international stage before anyone is really going to look at her.
Rand Paul has too many views that create high negatives and the most wonderful ability to speak them in a really dumb manner, and though you can get undecided to shift positive, a candidates negatives never seem to go down so I don't think he get's beyond a cult, which is what his dad has, and hey, that's pretty good. And the high negatives are also Palin's problem, she can't overcome her negative ratings.
Ryan is going to get a lot of the blame for the budget screw up, and it was his baby, someones got to be responsible after all. He's all but dead on the national scene unless there is a huge economic miracle in the next month or two.
Rubio perhaps, he seems to avoid the problem of saying too much deerp, and he's sharp. Would poll well among Hispanic voters who the Rs should have, but stupidly lost.
Walker nope, his more a fluke Gov in Wisconsin who slid in due to Democratic bungling and mismanagement, other wise known as 'business as usual' for the Dems. Let's see if he can win re-election. Let's see if he can avoid recall, and win that if it happens. Unions are big, huge complex things and they take some time to get all up and going particularly if you're trying to get them all up and going together. But, BUT, when they do get going they can really rearrange elections. All that election money deal cuts both ways and now the unions are not going to have any restrictions on what they can go do in Wisconsin and Ohio. They have the golden key, money+manpower, and they are going to do everything they can, apply all the knowledge (and there is a lot of institutional knowledge about this in unions) they have accumulated in learning how to win elections to make sure that Walker and the other anti-union governors DON'T become national figures. Because: If you can't win statewide, you sure can't win nationwide. Ahem there Rick Santorum (google it!).
All that social stuff sinks Tomey on the coasts, and you have to carry at least part of them.
Gov. Chris Christie is about the best in the bunch, but I don't see it happening. Too much prejudice in our current culture against fat people. He doesn't come off on TV very well either. And he has health problems. But I could almost vote for a Chris Christie. I wouldn't, but I almost could.
John Kasich, I don't know why, but Ohio doesn't play well outside of Ohio. No one from there in a long, long time has ever got any national traction. Not even John Glenn. Like I said I don't really know, but I've always wondered if they had any of that New Jersey underlying sleaze factor. Some places state government is really so corrupt that you can't really do it with out it touching you somehow. Louisiana too. Also South Dakota for some reason.
And, as cool, now and happening as that list is, and I'd sure put Dick Cheney's daughter on it as well, none of them are running. And what were being offered is not exactly inspiring. My money is still on Romney because he's the oldest white guy in the room who's been waiting the longest and that's who they almost always give it to. Tea party and bought polls and Iowa caucuses aside I'm pretty sure that big money still runs the Republican Party, and big money will out.
Now, since the 'Pubs can't run on their favorite issue - national defense/security - (since O has not cut the defense budget, nor ended the two wars, hell, he went out and got us one against that Quadafffyy guy, and he shot Ossma, that alone is a winner in a lot of places), and everyone seems bored with gay marriage, and because Jesusland is still pretty queasy 'bout that whole Mormon thing and because an election between Mitt and O on economic issues is going to be duller than dishwater, I don't see O losing. And, as I've said, I don't think the real management of the Republican Party sees it any differently.
Quote from: Tammy Hope on August 15, 2011, 02:52:50 AM
Devil's Advocate: He himself said he should have it fixed in three years - Three years ago.
I didn't believe he was going to fix anything this screwed up during his term, heck, it will take more than a decade, I'm sure. I look at that as just a small lie that no one really believed, uttered to help him get into office. This country can't function without fraud, why would I let another empty promise upset me now?
I also think Obama will win again, they will point to the phenomenal job loss that he endured as a result of whatever predicted change in policy that made American entrepreneur's spines turn to jelly at the beginning of his term, and the leveling off we see now, and put him up on a pedestal as though he is the one that stemmed the tide of despondence. Nothing has gone right for a very long time, and the person to set things right won't be any President, people have to get back out there and try like hell to find a way to make a living (we do, after all, have the world's debt to carry).
Quote from: EmmaM on August 15, 2011, 02:11:35 PM
I also think Obama will win again,
He's certainly doing things focused on that effort, like trying to be friends with everyone. And that could be his downfall. If the Dems get any more pissed at him, it could open the door for Hillary to steal the nod, if she's so inclined. You know she has always wanted to be the first female president so I'm thinking that possibility still exists.
With the way things are now, Hillary could get votes from both sides. And if she times it right, I think she could pull it off. I'd certainly vote for her. She's smart, tough, experienced and knows the office well. We all know she wore the pants when Bill was in office. And what she'll never say is a wife should be submissive to her husband.
As for O, if I thought he could grow a set in his second term, I'd feel better about voting for him. But right now the only qualified person I'm seeing that would get the job done that needs to be done is Hillary.
Obama is a "known" quantity, in that you know what to expect of his presidency. Any of the republicans are relatively "unknown" quantities in that you just have no reliable indication of what to expect of their presidencies.
And if she times it right, I think she could pull it off. I'd certainly vote for her. She's smart, tough, experienced and knows the office well.
Eh, she's said she's done with national office after this term as Sec of State. I believe her. She really hasn't lied yet. I really see her wanting to go back to Wellsley or some other place like that and teach and make big money writing her memoirs, doing consulting work and making speeches.
Quote from: tekla on August 15, 2011, 09:27:42 PM
Eh, she's said she's done with national office after this term as Sec of State. I believe her. She really hasn't lied yet. I really see her wanting to go back to Wellsley or some other place like that and teach and make big money writing her memoirs, doing consulting work and making speeches.
I'm allowing for, "It's a woman's prerogative to change her mind." I'll forgive her if she does. But I can certainly understand if she doesn't run. The Republicans have shown they will take this country down if they have to in order to get the presidential seat back again.
From looking at the Australian election, the UK election and the power games in the USA, my addled thoughts that some politicians really want to help their country and their people are getting more and more silly.
I'm now moving to politicians want power, they do not want responsibility, just power.
Cindy
Power is money. Follow the money and you'll find a wealth of answers.
There use to be an altruistic motive.
How did 'we' lose it.
Quote from: Cindy James on August 16, 2011, 03:42:16 AM
There use to be an altruistic motive.
How did 'we' lose it.
It use to APPEAR that they cared. Oh some from small places did care but they soon got into the greed after being in washington DC or whatever countries capital for a few yrs. Times are getting stressful for all people and many are preparing for the future when resources are scarce. Others are stealing from everyone they can while the stealing is good. The internet surely did change a lot of peoples attitudes. Maybe the anonymous hackers will be able to force positive changes as they are trying to do in Fullerton, Calif. SEE VIDEO HERE = http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/08/15/kelly-thomas-anonymous_n_927305.html (http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/08/15/kelly-thomas-anonymous_n_927305.html)
Our dear Warren Buffet has some words for our politicians that, if they listened and did what he says, could make a huge difference in our economy.
Op-Ed Contributor
Stop Coddling the Super-Rich
By WARREN E. BUFFETT
Published: August 14, 2011
OUR leaders have asked for "shared sacrifice." But when they did the asking, they spared me. I checked with my mega-rich friends to learn what pain they were expecting. They, too, were left untouched.
While the poor and middle class fight for us in Afghanistan, and while most Americans struggle to make ends meet, we mega-rich continue to get our extraordinary tax breaks. Some of us are investment managers who earn billions from our daily labors but are allowed to classify our income as "carried interest," thereby getting a bargain 15 percent tax rate. Others own stock index futures for 10 minutes and have 60 percent of their gain taxed at 15 percent, as if they'd been long-term investors.
These and other blessings are showered upon us by legislators in Washington who feel compelled to protect us, much as if we were spotted owls or some other endangered species. It's nice to have friends in high places.
http://www.nytimes.com/2011/08/15/opinion/stop-coddling-the-super-rich.html?_r=4 (http://www.nytimes.com/2011/08/15/opinion/stop-coddling-the-super-rich.html?_r=4)