Jump to content

The Politics Thread


Toups

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 45.8k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

  • Vee

    6816

  • DRW50

    5988

  • DramatistDreamer

    5521

  • Khan

    3458

Top Posters In This Topic

Posted Images

  • Members

Moments like last night are when I start to believe those who feel that this has been set up for Romney all along and everyone else is just doing a dance to make him seem more statesmanlike. It's all so contrived.

I did laugh at this.

http://www.cbsnews.c...ghts-in-debate/

That's one of the most cynical and hollow answers I have ever heard from a politician.

I wish they'd asked him about this:

http://thinkprogress...ible/?mobile=nc

Edited by CarlD2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

It's been said that all the candidates are tip-toeing around Ron Paul, because they fear if they treat him like an outsider, and don't give him the respect he wants, that he'll go for a third party run, ensuring Obama's re-election. Opinions on this? I know many in the Republican party are scared to death of Ron Paul, and see him as a loose cannon.

And one comment on the debates the other night, I am STUNNED at how the more "moderate" candidates stood there and when asked about gay marriage, extolled the virtues of "Seperate but equal". Romny baically said that Oh yes... make sure they can have these rights, and those rights, but make sure all these fags know there place, and stay there. Marriage seems like this badge of pride to them as if to say "I can be maried and you can't, so I'm better than you". I would dearly LOVE for a candidte to come along who is VERY fiscally conservative, and VERY socially liberal, and see what happens. I bet they'd roll into the white house like a sonic car hop on her skates. and did you notice how Newt lost his temper with all the gay rights questions? I wonder what Candace is thinking right now

Edited by alphanguy74
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

Candace probably has said to herself "Darn. Those exes weren't wrong after all."

They all, excepty for Huntsmann, have shoved themselves so far to the right just to win the Repub. nomination, they are destroying their chances in the general. Obama might just win for no other reason that the alternative is so far over the top voters wouldn't DARE elect that person.

Gay rights? Everyone should have have the very same rights under the law. Some republicans always say "keep Big Government out of our lives.", then, spend all their time sticking their noises into everyone's lives, so they don't have to say they have not one solution for what really matters in this country to Americans.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

I cannot disagree with one word you wrote above, Alphanguy. The only thing that bothers me is that the mainstream media (which some here believe is conservatively biased) never seems to give Obama, Biden, or any other Democrat anywhere near the same amount of heat for opposing gay marriage. And I am deeply disappointed that many leaders in the homosexual community seem to give mainstream Democrats a free pass on this issue. With all due respect to the gay community, the Democrats are taking their votes completely for granted. (I can certainly understand why gays and lesbians would prefer the Democrats as the lesser of two evils. What I cannot understand is why they usually don't embrace the Green Party or some other party that fully supports gay marriage, as opposed to sticking with the Democrats. As a contrast, if you look at the Tea Party, they have constantly threatened to bolt from the GOP if they do not adhere to their agenda.)

This is an interesting topic. I used to believe that a Paul third-party candidacy would ensure Obama's re-election, but now I am not so sure, given that many of his supporters are young people who are solidly anti-war (a key group that voted en masse for Obama in 2008). One reason why Huntsman will do so poorly in the NH primary is because he was hoping cross-over Democratic and Independent voters would choose him; instead, most of them are flocking to Paul. Though this is somewhat off-topic, Huntsman made a key mistake by not running to the right of Romney in the GOP primary; Huntsman certainly could have done so by touting his recording in UT (and contrasting that to what Romney did in MA) and stating that he has always been consistent on guns and abortion.

Edited by Max
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

Huntsman's mistake was running at all. He never had a chance. He is not a flame-thrower, he has little record or organization, and he worked for Obama. I truly have no idea why he believed he would have a chance.

As for Paul, I don't think he takes voters from Huntsman. Paul is just a bit crazy, in his own way, and he says a lot of things many people feel but are often not said out loud by either party, especially regarding Israel.

Edited by CarlD2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

It's really a shame that Ron Paul is a white supremacist, jew hating radical, because a lot of the things he says make sense and I give him credit in that he truly believes what he says. He is absolutely right in that the country has been brainwashed into thinking that if we do not have a billion times more bombs than the rest of the world combined we are weak. He is right that there is no reason why we have 25,000 troops in Germany and another army in Japan, and who is paying for them? He is right that the war on drugs leads to racist results, and he is right that chickenhawks have no business sabre rattling. And while every other republican talks about strict constructionism, no one is stricter than Ron Paul. His one failing is when it comes to abortion, and suddenly he forgets he is for states rights.

The US is a war mongering country more than any other. No one likes to admit it, but there has not been a decade since the 1930s when the US was not somewhere establishing dictatorships, overthrowing governments and being overseas killing people. The 40s was correct, there was a world war on (that psycho Ron would not have fought), but the 50s on out has been an American crusade to establish an empire. Korea, Viet Nam, Lebanon, Nicaragua, El Savaldor, Iraq, Grenada, Iraq again, Kuwait, Afghanistan, Libya...how is it possible for one country to never be invaded but be perpetually at war? Eisenhower told us the answer: beware of the military/industrial complex. There is just too much money to be made from war for the arms makers to allow us to get out of it. Ron Paul is also right when he warns us why empires collapse. Rome, Britain, the Soviets...they all fall down eventually and if the US keeps on spending it will too.

Obama should co-opt some of Ron's talking points to get the military budget cut. If you can get by on 30,000 nukes, you can get by on 15,000.

Edited by quartermainefan
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

This f*cking sucks. Though I am not at all surprised, Huntsman should now drop out. There's just no spinning this horrendous showing.

I have explained earlier why Huntsman (despite popular belief) is more conservative than Romney. The fact that he failed to campaign this way in a GOP primary is astounding.

Edited by Max
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Unfortunately, your content contains terms that we do not allow. Please edit your content to remove the highlighted words below.
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.



  • Recent Posts

    • Unrelated, sort of, but he looks absolutely nothing like Amanda Setton or Dominic Zamprogna so it's kind of hilarious they decided to make Gio their kid.  It's very clear this was not the original origin story for Gio when they cast him. He is a very handsome guy though. 
    • I tend to agree, although going back to OLTL, Frank has so often cast guys who are meant to be attractive yet come across as cold and dead, I'm surprised he managed to get one who has a bit of a pulse.
    • For all I care, the boy can parade around in a g-string.  It won't make this show suck any less.
    • AMC was about a decade later so things may have changed by then, although maybe they never approached her anyway. She joined Santa Barbara in 1985, when they didn't seem interested in bringing back Hope. SB ended in late 1992, so JFP could have asked her back, but I doubt she did. For as much as JFP clearly had some use for Rick Hearst given that she hired him on GH and kept him around as often as she could, I don't think she ever used Alan-Michael well. I can't see Elvera as Delia, but she could have worked well as Faith - she had a glimpse of a strong personality alongside warmth, which only one Faith ever managed (Catherine Hicks).
    • IIRC, FC reruns aired for awhile on Lifetime, way before the network became the Women in Peril Channel, lol.
    • PAM!! YES!!! You have jogged my memory. She worked at Cedars. She's mentioned in a write-up of Tim's history in the show. It says she was a nurse, but I seem to remember she was a secretary at Cedars, working for either Ed or Sarah. (It's almost 50 years ago, so I definitely could be wrong). I'm certain she was an unwed mother. I recall reading an interview with the actress, Maureen Silliman (I looked it up, that's her correct name, LOL). She started on the show just before the Dobsons started writing it. She was shocked to get a script that said her character had been pregnant since she hit town. I remember a scene where she told Tim she was going to leave SF for a better job for her daughter's sake (really, I think she was upset he was serious about Rita). I don't remember them getting married and leaving town, but according to "Who's Who in Springfield" that's how the characters were written out. Mattson did All My Children for several years, so she might have been persuadable. Here's an interesting factoid I recently learned on these message boards: Elvera Roussel was in the running to play Delia on RH when the show first hit the air. How wild is it that Mattson played Delia for a while? (Though from what I saw of her performance, she was miscast). It's hard to know if Roussel would have been a good Delia. You'd think she would have been better suited to playing Faith Coleridge, but who knows? She didn't get to show a whole lot of range as Hope.
    • If I were to do an EON reboot, I think I would start at the beginning, with Mike Karr leaving the police force in order to begin a new career as an attorney, and dealing with his wife, Sara's, crooked family.
    • I don't know if it was the writing or performance but I felt like we finally got to see the real Ted. Especially the way he talked to Martin when confronted, felt like a completely different person. He felt darker and like a total liar who was mad he got caught. I expected him to be remorseful and want to apologize to each and every family member who he came into contact with but he seemed like he didn't care. It completely changed how I view him and it makes me wonder if this is the direction they're going to take Ted in with the recast.
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use and Privacy Policy