Hatrack River
Home   |   About Orson Scott Card   |   News & Reviews   |   OSC Library   |   Forums   |   Contact   |   Links
Research Area   |   Writing Lessons   |   Writers Workshops   |   OSC at SVU   |   Calendar   |   Store
E-mail this page
Hatrack River Forum Post New Topic  Post A Reply
my profile login | register | search | faq | forum home

  next oldest topic   next newest topic
» Hatrack River Forum » Active Forums » Books, Films, Food and Culture » Republican Presidential Debate

   
Author Topic: Republican Presidential Debate
Danlo the Wild
Member
Member # 5378

 - posted      Profile for Danlo the Wild   Email Danlo the Wild         Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
We're screwed.

We will be in a full on depression when/if the election
rolls around in 2012, 15 months away.

So Obama is out, the Republican nominee will be in.
And these guys are a joke.
You can't go back to 1984 or 2000
to solve today's problems.

Trickle Down Economics is a failure.

Posts: 377 | Registered: Jul 2003  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Danlo the Wild
Member
Member # 5378

 - posted      Profile for Danlo the Wild   Email Danlo the Wild         Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
I like Ron Paul a lot, but he's got 0% chance of winning.

Rick Perry or Mitt Romney.

I bet Rick wins.

Posts: 377 | Registered: Jul 2003  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Lyrhawn
Member
Member # 7039

 - posted      Profile for Lyrhawn   Email Lyrhawn         Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
Romney's answer on why gay marriage should be a federal issue, but why everything else on earth should be a state-by-state issue is highly entertaining.

Gay marriage can't be decided on a state by state basis, because the gays will move all over the country and spread like the plague! Lovely.

ETA: The debate is telling in a number of other ways as well. Most of their silly anti-Obama attacks will be eviscerated by Obama in a one-on-one debate between any of these candidates and Obama. The Obama bashing is annoying, but hardly unexpected, and it's no worse than what Democrats said about Bush in 2008 or 2004 during their primaries. A lot of it is pretty thin though. It's hard to say he has no ideas when all his legislation keeps getting blocked.

ETA2: Holy crap, the exchange between Pawlenty and Bachmann was fire and brimstone! Even in primary debates you don't normally see punches thrown like that. She totally destroyed him too. The irony is that all the stuff she attacked him on would have made him a better candidate than her in the general election. Oh well, he never really had a chance anyway.

Posts: 21490 | Registered: Nov 2004  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Danlo the Wild
Member
Member # 5378

 - posted      Profile for Danlo the Wild   Email Danlo the Wild         Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
I've got the hand it to FOX, they didn't throw up any softball questions. Their questions were so hard the audience was booing them. I loved it when they asked Newt about his staff quitting and he was like "I'm not here for mickey mouse games, i wanna save America!"

For the record, I think Obama sucks. And I voted for him. Re-Appointing Ben 'the evilest man on the planet' Bernanke, appointing Timothy 'goldman sachs' geithner, the turd that is Obama care. Libya? Come on, Obama is George W. Bush the 3rd.

Posts: 377 | Registered: Jul 2003  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Lyrhawn
Member
Member # 7039

 - posted      Profile for Lyrhawn   Email Lyrhawn         Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
From what I saw of it, I sort of agree. Some of their questions were goofy political infighting ones about namecalling in the campaign. But, on the other hand, they didn't shy away from reasking the same questions over and over until the candidates actually answered them.

I was mildly impressed by that. They also forced a lot of them to confront statements they've made, and controversies surrounding them.

Posts: 21490 | Registered: Nov 2004  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
odouls268
Member
Member # 2145

 - posted      Profile for odouls268   Email odouls268         Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
Obama doesn't need to be bashed. His track record is public knowledge after all.


I didn't have a dog in the fight in 2008, so I wrote in someone. 2012 does not hold the same fate.

Posts: 2525 | Registered: Jul 2001  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Blayne Bradley
unregistered


 - posted            Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
I agree, I felt the questions were pretty good.
IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Samprimary
Member
Member # 8561

 - posted      Profile for Samprimary   Email Samprimary         Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
If you want to have more fun reading a synopsis than what the debate itself offered, here.

http://swampland.time.com/2011/08/12/what-you-missed-while-not-watching-the-iowa-gop-debate/

Posts: 14237 | Registered: Aug 2005  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Lyrhawn
Member
Member # 7039

 - posted      Profile for Lyrhawn   Email Lyrhawn         Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
Very entertaining. [Smile]

I used it as a guide to watch specific bits of the debate too, which ended up being really interesting.

Romney especially was a blast. Watching their whole discussion on health insurance around the 49 minute mark is just awesome. Replace every mention of health care with gay marriage, and see how much fun you can have! How he can justify that, and then totally argue against it later on is rich.

Rick Santorum at the 53 minute mark just comes right out and says it. Basically he says the country was founded with moral laws and principles, and Constitution be damned, we can't break them by letting the gays marry (he also tossed in a polygamy reference which I assume was a shot at Romney). I love that Uncle Sam has to rush in to defend marriage, but everything else is up to the states. Man, what these guys choose to use government for just floors me.

And I'll re-emphasize, I'm actually pretty impressed with the Fox debate. They really confronted the candidates with some great questions, and at least tried to hold their feet to the fire when the pivoted away from the questions. A lot of it didn't work, because the candidates are just too polished.

I also have to admit, Bachmann really tones down the crazy for the debate. She looked legitimate and presidential. That was a shocker.

Also, man, I hate how disrespectful they are towards Paul. I know he's outside the mainstream for the GOP, but let the man talk. They did the same thing 4 years ago.

Posts: 21490 | Registered: Nov 2004  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
BlackBlade
Member
Member # 8376

 - posted      Profile for BlackBlade   Email BlackBlade         Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
Paul is such an enigma for me. He says things one moment where reason screams, "Yes! Absolutely!" but then less than a minute later he says something and reason screams, "What? Did you just say that crazy idiotic thing I just heard you say?!"

But at least he flat out says what he thinks, he doesn't dance around questions.

I think my favorite moment of the entire debate was a sort of microcosm of the entire Republican party. One fo the candidates indicated they would walk away from a deal that raised revenue $1 for every $10 in spending cuts. The moderator then asked the entire floor if they would walk away from that deal.

The tea party folks shot their hands up and slowly over five seconds, the rest of the hands went up after it became clear you didn't want to be the only one claiming they would raise taxes.

A perfect example of how tea party rhetoric grips the party, all the way to the most moderate.

I also though it was pretty funny to hear Romney try to sidestep passing tax increases and instead digging himself fiercly into the position that he passed a bill that was right for Massachusetts. Revenue increases are always bad, yet somehow I passed a bill that was right for Massachusetts that included revenue increases. Isn't political logic fun!?

Lyrhawn: Yeah I rolled my eyes at the marriage/health care and the federal/state governemnt stuff too. At least Reagan was only mentioned three or four times, and three of those times it was by Gingrich. I remember last election's debates, it was kinda disturbing how much Reagan was being praised, quoted, worshipped, etc.

[ August 12, 2011, 08:08 PM: Message edited by: BlackBlade ]

Posts: 14278 | Registered: Jul 2005  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
BlackBlade
Member
Member # 8376

 - posted      Profile for BlackBlade   Email BlackBlade         Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
Oh and it was fun to hear from S&P in response to Bachmann's statement that their downgrade had proved she was right about the debt ceiling.

For those not wanting to read a news article, here's my translation of S&P's statement.

"Ha! Nice try, thanks for playing! People like you are actually one of the reasons we felt a downgrade was necessary. AAA countries don't seriously consider defaulting."

Posts: 14278 | Registered: Jul 2005  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Lyrhawn
Member
Member # 7039

 - posted      Profile for Lyrhawn   Email Lyrhawn         Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
Yeah, that caught me when she said that. My snap response was something like "uh, that doesn't follow at all, did you actually read what S&P said?" Santorum's response was right. I think she's having real problems backtracking from her extreme positions on this one, however, she has a lot of people that agree with her.

That was a pretty sharp rebuke from S&P. You'd think Obama would seize on it.

Posts: 21490 | Registered: Nov 2004  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Orincoro
Member
Member # 8854

 - posted      Profile for Orincoro   Email Orincoro         Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
"Cain repeats, “I represent growth.” Then he says, “A poet once said, ‘Life can be a challenge, life can seem impossible, but it is never easy when there is so much on the line.’ ” This is bad poetry. In fact, it’s a line from the Donna Summer song, “The Power of One,” which was released on the soundtrack for the “Pokemon: The Movie 2000.”

[ROFL]

Posts: 9658 | Registered: Nov 2005  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
rivka
Member
Member # 4859

 - posted      Profile for rivka   Email rivka         Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Samprimary:
If you want to have more fun reading a synopsis than what the debate itself offered, here.

http://swampland.time.com/2011/08/12/what-you-missed-while-not-watching-the-iowa-gop-debate/

[Cool]
Posts: 32919 | Registered: Mar 2003  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Blayne Bradley
unregistered


 - posted            Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by BlackBlade:
Paul is such an enigma for me. He says things one moment where reason screams, "Yes! Absolutely!" but then less than a minute later he says something and reason screams, "What? Did you just say that crazy idiotic thing I just heard you say?!"

But at least he flat out says what he thinks, he doesn't dance around questions.

I think my favorite moment of the entire debate was a sort of microcosm of the entire Republican party. One fo the candidates indicated they would walk away from a deal that raised revenue $1 for every $10 in spending cuts. The moderator then asked the entire floor if they would walk away from that deal.

The tea party folks shot their hands up and slowly over five seconds, the rest of the hands went up after it became clear you didn't want to be the only one claiming they would raise taxes.

A perfect example of how tea party rhetoric grips the party, all the way to the most moderate.

I also though it was pretty funny to hear Romney try to sidestep passing tax increases and instead digging himself fiercly into the position that he passed a bill that was right for Massachusetts. Revenue increases are always bad, yet somehow I passed a bill that was right for Massachusetts that included revenue increases. Isn't political logic fun!?

Lyrhawn: Yeah I rolled my eyes at the marriage/health care and the federal/state governemnt stuff too. At least Reagan was only mentioned three or four times, and three of those times it was by Gingrich. I remember last election's debates, it was kinda disturbing how much Reagan was being praised, quoted, worshipped, etc.

I think in general the only thing I disagreed with Ron Paul here was his stance on eliminating regulations. The Clean Air/Water acts exist for a reason.

Everything else I can recall off the top of my head made sense.

It really gets me when I talk to Libertarians who insist that the "tragedy of the commons" is some kind of myth that would never actually happen in real life.

IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Vadon
Member
Member # 4561

 - posted      Profile for Vadon           Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Orincoro:
"Cain repeats, “I represent growth.” Then he says, “A poet once said, ‘Life can be a challenge, life can seem impossible, but it is never easy when there is so much on the line.’ ” This is bad poetry. In fact, it’s a line from the Donna Summer song, “The Power of One,” which was released on the soundtrack for the “Pokemon: The Movie 2000.”

[ROFL]

I got a kick out of that when I heard about it.

On the debate, I thought Fox did do a pretty good job with their questions. I thought a couple were bad choices (The Bachman submission question? Really?), but on the whole I was impressed.

As for Ron Paul, the stance I've taken with him for quite a while is a broken clock is right twice a day. That doesn't mean it isn't broken.

Posts: 1821 | Registered: Jan 2003  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Orincoro
Member
Member # 8854

 - posted      Profile for Orincoro   Email Orincoro         Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
Well if this is the barrel of monkeys that is heading the pack in 2012, I don't kwow if I should be happy that they make Romney look like a me ever if a village of idiots, or sad that they make him look so good.
Posts: 9658 | Registered: Nov 2005  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Noemon
Member
Member # 1115

 - posted      Profile for Noemon   Email Noemon         Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Orincoro:
...they make Romney look like a me ever if a village of idiots...

I'm guessing autocorrect decided to fix whatever you were actually writing, there?
Posts: 16059 | Registered: Aug 2000  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
MattP
Member
Member # 10495

 - posted      Profile for MattP   Email MattP         Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
Mayor
Posts: 3272 | Registered: May 2007  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
AchillesHeel
Member
Member # 11736

 - posted      Profile for AchillesHeel   Email AchillesHeel         Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
Oh... I am so voting for this guy.

And somehow, pokemon.

Edit to add.
Curse you Orincoro. [Grumble]

Posts: 2297 | Registered: Aug 2008  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Orincoro
Member
Member # 8854

 - posted      Profile for Orincoro   Email Orincoro         Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
It was member, but mayor is better.
Posts: 9658 | Registered: Nov 2005  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Lyrhawn
Member
Member # 7039

 - posted      Profile for Lyrhawn   Email Lyrhawn         Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
Bachmann barely won the straw poll, just ahead of Paul. No one else was close.
Posts: 21490 | Registered: Nov 2004  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
DDDaysh
Member
Member # 9499

 - posted      Profile for DDDaysh   Email DDDaysh         Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by rivka:
quote:
Originally posted by Samprimary:
If you want to have more fun reading a synopsis than what the debate itself offered, here.

http://swampland.time.com/2011/08/12/what-you-missed-while-not-watching-the-iowa-gop-debate/

[Cool]
[ROFL]
Posts: 1321 | Registered: Jun 2006  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
kmbboots
Member
Member # 8576

 - posted      Profile for kmbboots   Email kmbboots         Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
Good heavens. Were they voting for most delusional?
Posts: 10626 | Registered: Sep 2005  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Lyrhawn
Member
Member # 7039

 - posted      Profile for Lyrhawn   Email Lyrhawn         Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
Yeah, in general she is. On the other hand, for people basing their votes off the debate, she actually came across poised and in control, and not spouting much crazy at all.
Posts: 21490 | Registered: Nov 2004  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
BlackBlade
Member
Member # 8376

 - posted      Profile for BlackBlade   Email BlackBlade         Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
When is it appropriate to start kvetching about Iowa's disproportionate influence on the presidential elections?

edit: This just in Pawlenty is out.

Posts: 14278 | Registered: Jul 2005  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Samprimary
Member
Member # 8561

 - posted      Profile for Samprimary   Email Samprimary         Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Lyrhawn:
Yeah, in general she is. On the other hand, for people basing their votes off the debate, she actually came across poised and in control, and not spouting much crazy at all.

She's like a sarah palin who is many steps better at sitting down and being coached to put away the crazy and stick to a plan.

Sort of.

She's also literally insane and won't be president, but I hope she messes around with the republican primaries quite a bit.

Posts: 14237 | Registered: Aug 2005  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Lyrhawn
Member
Member # 7039

 - posted      Profile for Lyrhawn   Email Lyrhawn         Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by BlackBlade:
When is it appropriate to start kvetching about Iowa's disproportionate influence on the presidential elections?

edit: This just in Pawlenty is out.

I'm thinking about skipping it this year. I thought that after the fiasco four years ago, they might actually genuinely take up primary reform, but that was apparently a foolish notion.

In my opinion, this is the absolute dumbest, worst part of our electoral process, followed closely by the electoral college and private financing.

Way too many issues get totally ignored because Iowa and New Hampshire issues aren't even close to reflecting issues in states where the majority of the population actually lives.

Posts: 21490 | Registered: Nov 2004  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
DDDaysh
Member
Member # 9499

 - posted      Profile for DDDaysh   Email DDDaysh         Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
And I'm still sitting here wondering if Perry has a shot, and whether or not I'll vote for him. I just might....
Posts: 1321 | Registered: Jun 2006  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
James Tiberius Kirk
Member
Member # 2832

 - posted      Profile for James Tiberius Kirk           Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
I figure he does, if he can avoid being outflanked on the right by Bachmann.
Posts: 3608 | Registered: Dec 2001  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Samprimary
Member
Member # 8561

 - posted      Profile for Samprimary   Email Samprimary         Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
How on earth is the outcome of this primary supposed to be anything but Romney? Earnest question.
Posts: 14237 | Registered: Aug 2005  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Lyrhawn
Member
Member # 7039

 - posted      Profile for Lyrhawn   Email Lyrhawn         Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
Perry will run on his jobs record in Texas, call Romney a closet liberal because of his record in MA, and he'll use scare lines to frighten people away from the scary Mormon.

When you chip away at it, there's nothing there, but I can't say I have a lot of faith in GOP primary voters ability to really dig for the truth.

You also have to consider the media cycle and the primary schedule. Bachmann, Paul and Perry are going to clean up in Iowa. Bachmann will probably win it. Romney will probably take New Hampshire, but if one of the others makes a strong showing there, or worse, actually beats him there, then I think he's sunk. It's not going to get any better when he heads for South Carolina, and these things are all about momentum.

Posts: 21490 | Registered: Nov 2004  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Black Fox
Member
Member # 1986

 - posted      Profile for Black Fox   Email Black Fox         Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
Romney is honestly the better candidate, but don't think that the Christian Right is going to vote for him. There is a reason Perry is courting the Evangelicals.
Posts: 1752 | Registered: May 2001  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Samprimary
Member
Member # 8561

 - posted      Profile for Samprimary   Email Samprimary         Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Lyrhawn:
call Romney a closet liberal because of his record in MA,

http://www.theonion.com/articles/mitt-romney-haunted-by-past-of-trying-to-help-unin,20097/
Posts: 14237 | Registered: Aug 2005  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Anthonie
Member
Member # 884

 - posted      Profile for Anthonie   Email Anthonie         Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Lyrhawn:
They also forced a lot of them to confront statements they've made, and controversies surrounding them.

To at least one of them, "confront statements they've made"
means to make herself look ridiculous and absurd.

Posts: 293 | Registered: Apr 2000  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Samprimary
Member
Member # 8561

 - posted      Profile for Samprimary   Email Samprimary         Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
What I enjoy about Bachmann is that her every statement is so well-thought and reasoned that it raises the bar for what would otherwise be opportunistic, undermining image journalism and ensures a healthy exchange of dialogue via national media. We are all the better — and wiser — for it. Here is a picture of jabba the hutt with Bachmann's eyes.

http://i.imgur.com/G3svX.png

Posts: 14237 | Registered: Aug 2005  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Orincoro
Member
Member # 8854

 - posted      Profile for Orincoro   Email Orincoro         Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
What a scumbag.

I'm reminded of that line that Stu delivers to his ex-fiance at the end of The Hangover... "your just... God you're just a bad person!"

Posts: 9658 | Registered: Nov 2005  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Orincoro
Member
Member # 8854

 - posted      Profile for Orincoro   Email Orincoro         Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
(Post Removed by Janitor Blade.)

[ August 16, 2011, 01:00 AM: Message edited by: JanitorBlade ]

Posts: 9658 | Registered: Nov 2005  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Lyrhawn
Member
Member # 7039

 - posted      Profile for Lyrhawn   Email Lyrhawn         Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Anthonie:
quote:
Originally posted by Lyrhawn:
They also forced a lot of them to confront statements they've made, and controversies surrounding them.

To at least one of them, "confront statements they've made"
means to make herself look ridiculous and absurd.

Ugh that's just disgusting.

Stuff like that make me hope she is the candidate. She'll get torn up, especially if she thinks that not even coming close to answering the questions is fine so long as you're saying something. She needs to look at how Romney does canned answers. It's much smoother. Then again, Romney doesn't have nearly as much baggage when it comes to past statements.

Posts: 21490 | Registered: Nov 2004  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Orincoro
Member
Member # 8854

 - posted      Profile for Orincoro   Email Orincoro         Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
How could she be the candidate? I don't think the Republican machine has an ounce of faith in her. They're *scared* of her and the tea-party, but they'll never get behind her for a run. I doubt a lot of moderate Republicans would want her as a President. She's unfit to represent this country.

And as an aside, you know what bugs me a bit?

Bachman's slogan is "Reclaim America." Now if you want to get all Lit-Crit and semiotic about that- here's what I think: Reclaim America means America is not now under 'our' control. Not now under who's control? Not under the control of Americans -*real*- Americans, with a capital 'A'. So who *is* in control of America, right now? The Other. Who is the other? Democrats, and liberals, and most importantly, a Black Man.

Too much? I don't honestly remember, did Obama's campaign use that kind of language? Do democrats invoke that kind of rhetorical strategy of othering and claiming native status in their slogans? I'd like to see some examples if anyone can remember them.

People get all huffy about "hope" and "change." But the "we" there is decidedly neutral in comparison with the we implied in Bachman's slogan- which is necessarily oppositional. Reclaim "from" something, or someone. As opposed to "change we can believe in," the change affecting *something* not someone.

Posts: 9658 | Registered: Nov 2005  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Lyrhawn
Member
Member # 7039

 - posted      Profile for Lyrhawn   Email Lyrhawn         Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
I just watched the whole David Gregory interview, and it was the worst thing I've ever seen. I don't think she actually answered a SINGLE question in that entire interview. And made some flat-out stupid statements.

I'll bet most of it played over just fine with her target audience, but it was moronic to anyone really paying attention and wanting substance from their candidates.

I was especially annoyed by the reference to Electrolux leaving the country. I remember when they packed up their factory in Michigan a few years ago. The governor offered them a several year tax-free exemption, stay in Michigan and not pay ANY state taxes, and they still left for Mexico, because no matter what she offered, she couldn't beat the $1.12 an hour the Mexican workers would make. And Bachmann's answer is to cut government spending? That's a total non-sequitor.

I do love it when Gregory finally nails her down with a binary question, and when she just plain doesn't have an answer that won't sound crazy, she says "All I can say is..." and then pivots to a non-sequitorial part of her stump that has little to do with the question being asked. Oy.

Orincoro -

Sure, but that's been code language for a lot of Republicans, not just Bachmann. Actually, have you noticed that Bachmann has been using Palins' "Real America" language lately? Real America is, of course, that rural part of the country where a small minority of the population actually lives, rather than the urban areas where people increasingly congregate. But that doesn't stop Palin from trying to stroke rural egos by telling them that anyone living in a metrourban area is one step short of an America hating terrorist. Bachmann seems to be borrowing that anthem.

Posts: 21490 | Registered: Nov 2004  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Orincoro
Member
Member # 8854

 - posted      Profile for Orincoro   Email Orincoro         Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
I'm aware that it's a widely used code. I'm offended by it. I am offended at the insult to my intelligence, and at the implications of the language itself. I feel the need to register that offense.


quote:
And Bachmann's answer is to cut government spending? That's a total non-sequitor.
I was agape a few weeks ago at Boehner's "Job-killing spending" language. I mean in what universe does he live in which he works for days to preserve defense spending in order to save jobs, and then turns around and says: "job killing spending." Can he offer an explanation as to *how* spending kills jobs? And social security and medicare spending? REALLY? REALLY REALLY? I mean there's an argument to be made, somewhere, that taxing might hurt some jobs, sometimes, in specific circumstances, despite the money that goes to taxes flowing into programs that *create* jobs at a faster rate (and closer to a livable income) than it prevents them from materializing. But spending *kills* jobs? I guess if the government spent less, people would work for free? I mean WHAT??
Posts: 9658 | Registered: Nov 2005  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Lyrhawn
Member
Member # 7039

 - posted      Profile for Lyrhawn   Email Lyrhawn         Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
Alright then. Preach on, brother.

Yeah, you have to love it when they argue both sides of the argument simultaneously.

I mean, I sort of see what the argument is, and I even agree with some parts of it. By and large I think it would be better if the government spent less on directly employing people and more on investments in research and infrastructure that lead to the private sector hiring people. And I'm even for all that lower taxes stuff, which probably would spur some hiring. I'm sure some of our bloated budget, where we waste money, probably does hurt hiring.

But using that argument to attack things like ARRA makes zero sense, where millions were put to work. I think they know they're wrong, to a degree, it's just a matter of trying to reconcile their iron clad principle with specific exceptions, like protecting defense jobs, or Romney's verbal contortion act regarding gay marriage and health care with regards to states rights. We should start calling the GOP the Grand Omission Party. "I believe in states rights...so long as you omit gay marriage. I believe federal spending kills jobs, so long as you omit defense jobs!" It's a party of principles with specific exceptions for when their principles clash, as they often do.

Posts: 21490 | Registered: Nov 2004  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Orincoro
Member
Member # 8854

 - posted      Profile for Orincoro   Email Orincoro         Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
Yeah. Well, when you beg no ambiguity, you can go to some pretty strange places, and how!
Posts: 9658 | Registered: Nov 2005  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
   

Quick Reply
Message:

HTML is not enabled.
UBB Code™ is enabled.
UBB Code™ Images not permitted.
Instant Graemlins
   


Post New Topic  Post A Reply Close Topic   Feature Topic   Move Topic   Delete Topic next oldest topic   next newest topic
 - Printer-friendly view of this topic
Hop To:


Contact Us | Hatrack River Home Page

Copyright © 2008 Hatrack River Enterprises Inc. All rights reserved.
Reproduction in whole or in part without permission is prohibited.


Powered by Infopop Corporation
UBB.classic™ 6.7.2