Discussion in 'Political/Religious' started by LithoJazzoSphere, Nov 6, 2008.
That quote made me facepalm so hard I almost had a concussion.
Know your audience.
Change of subject, but I've concluded that there's basically no difference between Obama and Romney so if Romney wins the primary I might not even vote.
As it usually is with the people who end up running, there are marginal differences. Based on those marginal differences I'd vote for Romney. But I would vote for Obama over anyone else running for the GOP. Some of these guys make W look like a genius.
There is one difference, and it is a huge one.
Romney will be forever indebted to the right wing and will always be kissing their asses in attempts to butch up. That means he will be forced to appoint a corporate-owned-and-operated regressive to the Supreme Court, should a vacancy arise (as opposed to Obozo who...has already appointed 2 of them...fuck).
That to me is the one reason I MIGHT vote for Obozo if it is a close election. I'd rather the vacancy arises before November so I don't have to vote for that faggot.
I kind of disagree about Romney being indebted to the right wing. If he gets the nomination he can basically do whatever he wants as long as he is clearly to the right of Obama (not hard to do), since Republicans are so anti-Obama and won't vote for him either way.
I'm going to write-in Steve Albini on my ballot, because why not?
For this election, yes, but in order to win re-election I think he would have to pander to the right wing, so as not to lose votes to a third-party archconservative because he didn't do enough to please the homophobes and militant anti-abortionists.
Yeah I'm just saying, as far as a SCOTUS appointment goes -- which is the most important thing when it comes to Obama vs Romney -- Mitt will necessarily be under a shitload of pressure to appoint a super-regressive. I don't know if I can live with taking a chance by not voting for Obama. Obama has to promise to us this year that he will appoint a 50-years-ahead-of-her-time hyperprogressive.
And then break that promise.
Or you could vote for 3rd party.
To be honest, I actually find the "no exceptions" abortion argument that Rick Santorum presents to be more honorable than a standard pro-life position that says it would illegal except in cases of rape or incest.
Let's ignore that I'm pro-choice (actually, pro-abortion... I think women should be encouraged to have abortions at all times)... My point is that, if we operate under a premise that assumes a pro-life stance, then it's inconsistent to say that "murder" somehow becomes justifiable because a 3rd party (the mother) was raped. A pro-life stance assumes that the fetus is a life separate from the mother's body, so the rape argument really doesn't hold any water. I'm not really sure how someone can take a position that terminating a fetus is murder, but that it's still okay to do it if the mother was raped.
I still think he's a crazy loon, but I give him credit for being consistent on that where the other pro-life candidates in the party are not.
I wouldn't consider the supreme court and who gets nominated to it as a "marginal" issue and on that count alone the difference between Obama and ________________ <--enter Republican here---- are massive enough that there is no way I could vote for a Republican.
I'm talking about marginal issues in policy. And some Republicans are more conservative than others. Romney is definitely the least conservative of the current batch.
"The notion that college education is a cost-effective way to help poor, low-skill, unmarried mothers with high school diplomas or GEDs move up the economic ladder is just wrong." - Rick Santorum
I can't even wrap my head around how factually incorrect this statement is. It's like literally the opposite of factually correct.
Ok I actually did have a concussion that time.
Not to mention the statement flies in the face of the conservative UNIVERSAL philosophy FACT of socioeconomic empowerment through education.
But are they really marginal? I doubt that you'd see a budget that resembles Obama's recent budget from Romney......on Foreign Policy they might be close, but on Domestic I don't think so.
I think a lot of people make this mistake. They assume Romney must be just like Obama because after all, Romney passed Romneycare in MA. The problem with that line of reasoning is when Romney passed Romneycare, Republicans hailed it as great example of what conservative governance can do. They didn't start hating on it until Obamalamadingdongnignog proposed it. Then they had a good politically expedient reason to hate it.
And just for the record I wouldn't piss on Rick Santorum if he were on fire.
Obama's budget proposal was a publicity stunt and everyone knows there's absolutely no way it will happen. Both Obama and Romney have shown that they are able to make bipartisan compromises, which, although to the chagrin of many, is the only way to effectively enact policy when there is significant legislative influence from both parties.
This could backfire badly...I hope.
Why does Noise Creep ignore Ron Paul? What exactly are they afraid of?
Fight fire Santorum with fire santorum.
But is it really a publicity stunt? You know this to be a fact? I wouldn't rush to that judgement so quickly. I agree that Obama and Romney have shown an ability to compromise. How do you accomplish that? You accomplish compromise by starting someplace and negotiating from there. Obama's budget is the starting point. Now the Republicans will do everything they can to get rid of any tax increases on the rich. Negotiation. Same as the payroll tax thing. Obama actually handled that one fairly deftly and the Republicans had to make concessions. Negotiation. It all starts with putting something on the table. If you want to call it a publicity stunt, OK
The end is nigh...
Land of the free.
dave mustaine lol
I'm fine with this if it keeps a pro-slavery, anti-Civil Rights Act proofreader of white supremacist newsletters out of the White House. Politics ain't beanbag.
Great defense of Dr No Evil .
Santorum: the gift froth that keeps on giving frothing. The phrase "skeletons in the closet" doesn't even do this justice. Wow.
How I'll Respond to China's Rising Power
1) Cut taxes for the 1% and raise it on the average working family
2) Start trade war with China
3) Increase spending on defense
4) Declare China a threat to Pacific region
Wow, she hasn't aged that well at all. In the picture with the baby killer abortion doctor she actually looks like she was cute. The "now" picture with Rick the Dick is not flattering at all.
I dunno, she looked pretty hot when Frothy was giving some victory speech. Makeup goes a long way.
Land, free, ect.
Welcome to 1964, pre-Civil Rights Act.
BREAKING: Every Single Bishop Has Condemned the Obama/HHS Mandate!
quick -- what's 180 divided by 70 million..
I'm gonna vote for Santorum because according to the music in that video he probably likes Hliðskjálf and the Ildjarn/Nidhogg albums.
The more shit that falls out of this asshole's mouth, the more I hate him.
But he's right. Women are a constant distraction. We should wrap them up in blankets and not allow them to go anywhere but the kitchen.
THEY are looking at YOU
...at least one of them
yeah, like the republican party would care for some dyke's reporting...
thankfully nobody cares about the opinion of that shithole, the only think worldwhile he's EVER done in his life is hiring marty friendman... everything else is only useful for fertilizers
I'm sure a lot of idiots care about his opinion lol
Separate names with a comma.