Between Barack and a Hard Place: Ultimate US Elections 2012 Thread

[Matt Algren]

I believe you either misread or misinterpreted my original post. Then you blame my reading comprehension level and post an ad hominem attack. Wasn't it Frederick Douglass who said "At a time like this, scorching irony, not convincing argument, is needed."? He'd be proud, because I have both.

I understood your post. You failed to grasp what the huge bolded parts of that article were saying.

It is imperative that we put to rest the argument that the "the vast majority of African-Americans voted yes on California's Prop 8." They didn't, and you need to understand that, whatever side of the debate you're on. It's important because the national organizations behind Prop 8 are on the record as wanting to drive a wedge between African Americans and gays, a wedge that needn't exist. They're counting on animosity between the groups, and it's damaging when anyone, even someone on my side, continues to propagate this untruth.

[CenturianSpy]

I understood your post. You failed to grasp what the huge bolded parts of that article were saying.

It is imperative that we put to rest the argument that the "the vast majority of African-Americans voted yes on California's Prop 8." They didn't, and you need to understand that, whatever side of the debate you're on. It's important because the national organizations behind Prop 8 are on the record as wanting to drive a wedge between African Americans and gays, a wedge that needn't exist. They're counting on animosity between the groups, and it's damaging when anyone, even someone on my side, continues to propagate this untruth.

You clipped my "So now we argue that" in front of my quote. This completely changes the meaning of that sentence. YOU took it out of context AND then assumed I didn't understand the statistics. I understand fully that it wasn't a "vast majority" but still a majority. Most African-Americans DON'T believe in the right for homosexuals to get married (does it warrant the adjective "vast", maybe not). It's NOT a conspiracy from the idiots on the right to drive a wedge. THE WEDGE EXISTS. I might also point out that maybe it's not "animosity" that the GOP is using (even though we know the hate does exist in some, but I believe in fewer every day), but consensus building (and that's how scumbag politicans on both sides of the aisle get you). My point was that the argument is lost because it's a moral one instead of one thought to be another contract between adults. You can not use the word "imperative" to dismiss an adjective. If those professors' report shows anything to us, it is that within the Democrat party we have a fast growing amount of religious minorities who vote "No" on homosexual rights. You will lose if you use your argument. We will lose if you use your argument.

[Iangould]

He was in Washington, D.C. to promote the George W. Bush Presidential Center’s global human rights campaign.

Is he for them or against them?

[Matt Algren]

You clipped my "So now we argue that" in front of my quote. This completely changes the meaning of that sentence. YOU took it out of context AND then assumed I didn't understand the statistics. I understand fully that it wasn't a "vast majority" but still a majority. Most African-Americans DON'T believe in the right for homosexuals to get married (does it warrant the adjective "vast", maybe not). It's NOT a conspiracy from the idiots on the right to drive a wedge. THE WEDGE EXISTS. I might also point out that maybe it's not "animosity" that the GOP is using (even though we know the hate does exist in some, but I believe in fewer every day), but consensus building (and that's how scumbag politicans on both sides of the aisle get you). My point was that the argument is lost because it's a moral one instead of one thought to be another contract between adults. You can not use the word "imperative" to dismiss an adjective. If those professors' report shows anything to us, it is that within the Democrat party we have a fast growing amount of religious minorities who vote "No" on homosexual rights. You will lose if you use your argument. We will lose if you use your argument.

You said:

So we now argue about how the vast majority of African-Americans voted yes on California's Prop 8,

And that isn't true, demonstrably so. The "vast" majority of African-Americans didn't vote yes on Prop8, and the clear implication that race was to blame is based on a clearly, obviously, plainly false premise. Second, the argument isn't about "how" that's the case. Maybe it's about "whether" it's the case, but not "how," because "how" means that it's true, and it isn't.

As for the wedge, NOM is literally on record saying they want to drive a wedge between gays and blacks. Literally, just so we're clear, means that they said exactly that. From their own internal documents: "The strategic goal of this project is to drive a wedge between gays and blacks—two key Democratic constituencies."

And I just noticed that you called it "the Democrat party." Done.

[Iangould]

That "Is it absolutely certain Hawaii was a state?" line is funny becasue one of the wilder birther theories is that, because there are extremist Hawaiian nationalists who dispute the legality of Hawaii's original annexation by the US, Hawaii is not a state and is indeed not even US territory and therefore Obama is not a natural-born citizen.

That's right: they'd strip several million US citizens of their citizenship and (applying their own claim that Obama's ineligibilty voids all laws he's signed) invalidate every Federal law passed since 1950 and every President elected since then in order to get rid of Obama.

[jmc247]

Is he for them or against them?

His speech was actually about spreading democracy around the world.

Bush Says U.S. Must Support Democratic Revolutions Across World

Former President George W. Bush said the U.S. has a duty to support democratic revolutions throughout the world to foster the spread of freedom, while warning the path forward is never straight or steady.

“Freedom is a powerful force, but it does not advance on the wheels of historical inevitability,” Bush said today in Washington at an event organized by his presidential center to honor dissidents and democratic activists.

Bush, who left the White House in January 2009 after two terms in office, cited the example of the Arab Spring, which he called “the greatest challenge to authoritarian rule since the fall of communism.”

To promote support for democracy activists, the George W. Bush Presidential Center is collecting interviews with dissidents around the world to document their struggles and motivation.

Bush was introduced by Syrian dissident Ammar Abdulhamid, founder of the Tharwa Foundation, which supports democratic movements in the Middle East and North Africa".

Abdulhamid said the interviews help “break the barrier of fear” for democracy activists. “The collection shows freedom advocates are not alone.”

Myanmar opposition leader and Nobel laureate Aung San Suu Kyi also addressed the conference via videoconference. Suu Kyi took her seat in parliament this month after 15 years under house arrest.

http://mobile.bloomberg.com/news/201...oss-world.html

[Iangould]

So basically, he was attempting to claim credit for events (the Arab Spring, the reforms in Myanmar) that happened during Obaam's term in office.

Meanwhile the Obama administration is spending millions on tests for new Alzheimer's drugs, anyone care to speculate on how the Romney campaign will spin that to attack Obama?

[The Once And Forever]

So basically, he was attempting to claim credit for events (the Arab Spring, the reforms in Myanmar) that happened during Obaam's term in office.

Meanwhile the Obama administration is spending millions on tests for new Alzheimer's drugs, anyone care to speculate on how the Romney campaign will spin that to attack Obama?

Obama spent millions trying to force medicine on you!

Medicine that'll probably make you black!

[Spike-X]

"How the hell am I supposed to win this election if he's making it easier for people to remember the mess the Republicans made last time they were in charge?"

[Iangould]

"Obama says there's something wrong with my grandpa. Well I say I love him the way he is. There's nothing wrong with my grandpa."

"Is Obama funding this research because he actually suffers from early-onset Alzheimer's?"

"One of these studies is in Colombia. why is Obama sending millions of dollars to a country that's over-run with Marxist guerrillas and that is a major cocaine producer? Why is he sending medical researcher jobs out of the US?"

Actually the most likely response is: ignore it unless Obama mentions it then if he does accuse him of exploiting Alzheimer's sufferers for political advantage.

[CenturianSpy]

You said:



And that isn't true, demonstrably so. The "vast" majority of African-Americans didn't vote yes on Prop8, and the clear implication that race was to blame is based on a clearly, obviously, plainly false premise. Second, the argument isn't about "how" that's the case. Maybe it's about "whether" it's the case, but not "how," because "how" means that it's true, and it isn't.

As for the wedge, NOM is literally on record saying they want to drive a wedge between gays and blacks. Literally, just so we're clear, means that they said exactly that. From their own internal documents: "The strategic goal of this project is to drive a wedge between gays and blacks—two key Democratic constituencies."

And I just noticed that you called it "the Democrat party." Done.

Really??! Pointing out a malapropism and grammar error? I guess it is the next illogical step after name calling and pseudo-intellectual bullying.

Of course NOM is trying to drive a wedge. Like I said, scumbag politicians. Still not a conspiracy. Still doesn't mean that the majority of African-Americans do not support legalized homosexual marriage, nor Latin-Americans. As I said before, the wedge is already there. If our argument is that it's not the vast majority, just the majority we WILL lose.

So enough of your verbal "microphone drops". It's not impressing anyone.

[worstblogever]

Nebraska has had a bit of an upset in the GOP Primary Election for the Senate seat to be vacated by Democratic Senator Ben Nelson...

Deb Fisher, a state senator, managed to beat two other candidates who had more backing amongst conservatives within the party, or financial backing. How? Last minute support from Sarah Palin, apparently. So... get ready for Capt. Mama Grizzly to dive in front of whatever camera or microphone she can before Election Day.

Fisher goes on to face Democrat Bob Kerrey, a former two-term Senator, and Vietnam War Hero. The Republican strategists are already ready to paint a picture of Kerrey as an "out of touch liberal".

[7thangel]

this is not how you handle shit

Mitt's Miami vice

The first hint of trouble came early this morning, when Mitt Romney's campaign team told journalists there would be no questions for the candidate today. (One reporter responded, "Isn't that our decision?")

But the problem intensified when the Republican appeared in Miami, and relied on staff and volunteers to physically prevent reporters from approaching a rope line and asking the candidate questions.

As a rule, media professionals don't respond well to heavy-handed tactics that prevent journalists from doing their jobs.

It's worth noting that some reporters were able to work their way to the candidate anyway -- Romney ignored all questions -- but why in the world would the campaign suddenly get so aggressive about shielding the candidate? Perhaps because of headlines like this one, which ran on the Miami Herald's website this morning.



Of course, if I had a private-sector background like this, I might not want to take questions from reporters, either.

In advance of Mitt Romney's fundraising swing through Florida [Wednesday], Democrats are highlighting one of the business ventures of Bain Capital while Romney was in charge: Dade Behring, which, saddled with debt, wound up shuttering two medical technologies facilities in Miami. Some 850 jobs were lost, while Bain walked away with $242-million -- an 800 percent return on its investment

The Dade Behring case has been well-documented, but here's a new wrinkle: The company under Bain's leadership sought and received millions of dollars in tax breaks for creating jobs in Puerto Rico - shortly before closing it's facilities, costing nearly 300 jobs.

The company in 1997 received a $3-million federal tax break aimed to promoting job creation in Puerto Rico. It also received a $4.1-million tax exemption from Puerto Rick in 1997 in the name of job creation. Dade ceased its operations in Puerto Rico in the first quarter of 1998.

Romney can try to restrain journalists, but the questions aren't going away.

it's like they're hoping to get lucky as opposed to trying to win. or maybe they're hoping for a successful swift boat from a superpac, but this isn't 2004.

[worstblogever]

this is not how you handle shit

Mitt's Miami viceit's like they're hoping to get lucky as opposed to trying to win. or maybe they're hoping for a successful swift boat from a superpac, but this isn't 2004.

Romney does his best to deny freedom of the press to do their jobs, and yet, folks on the right claim Obama's the one you have to worry about burning up the Constitution. It might be funny if it wasn't the truth.

[longdecember]

Romney does his best to deny freedom of the press to do their jobs, and yet, folks on the right claim Obama's the one you have to worry about burning up the Constitution. It might be funny if it wasn't the truth.

It is going to start and end with the tax code. I have an IQ that would make most CBR'ers pee their pants. But I dont want to be president. According to the two guys that do: one pays 20% and one pays 14%.

There are many paths a person can take to get to power, but you cant really be a hippocrit to stand solid.