 sj |
||
|
||
BS: The Republicans (US)
|
|
|
Subject: RE: BS: The republicans (US) From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity Date: 29 Mar 10 - 01:55 AM Speaking of 'off your rockers'........... Greg F: "Really quite amusing, since the "Extreme Left" in the United States probably numbers a couple of thousand individuals at most. Unless you're one of the brain-dead who characterizes our slightly right-of-center President Obama as a "radical leftist"... " GfS: Okay Greg, explain your post. I'm listening, honestly. As far as DonT, he bitches about ANYTHING, so, I'd rather hear from you. Open ears, GfS |
|
Subject: RE: BS: The republicans (US) From: Don(Wyziwyg)T Date: 29 Mar 10 - 06:50 AM ""As far as DonT, he bitches about ANYTHING, so, I'd rather hear from you."" Says it all really. No decent counter argument? What the hell, I'll just make a snide comment about the poster. No change there then GfS. Don T. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: The republicans (US) From: Greg F. Date: 29 Mar 10 - 09:50 AM GfS- if you truly need it explained to you, there's absolutely no point in my attempting to do so. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: The republicans (US) From: Jack the Sailor Date: 29 Mar 10 - 11:57 AM GfS, Greg T is right, If you think Obama is "radical" or a "leftist" your problem is with the English language. Start with a dictionary and an introductory text on political philosophies. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: The republicans (US) From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity Date: 29 Mar 10 - 02:42 PM All I asked for was an explanation....all I got was NOTHING....except for DonT's bitching as per aforementioned. I'm not entirely disagreeing with Greg. Greg, without lectures on my capacity to understand the English language, elaborate....please. GfS |
|
Subject: RE: BS: The republicans (US) From: Greg F. Date: 29 Mar 10 - 03:31 PM GfS, see Jack @ 11:57 AM above and follow his instructions. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: The republicans (US) From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity Date: 29 Mar 10 - 10:56 PM What then?..Do you think he is a 'moderate'? |
|
Subject: RE: BS: The republicans (US) From: GUEST Date: 29 Mar 10 - 11:06 PM Greg F: (from the Kucinich thread).."Of course it doesn't- but its nothing new. The Right has pisssed and moaned about the same thing with regard to Public Assistance, AFDC, etc. Same old BS." From this thread: "Really quite amusing, since the "Extreme Left" in the United States probably numbers a couple of thousand individuals at most. Unless you're one of the brain-dead who characherizes our slightly right-of-center President Obama as a "radical leftist"... " GfS: I think your rocker is rocking, without you in it! |
|
Subject: RE: BS: The republicans (US) From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity Date: 29 Mar 10 - 11:24 PM OOOOps.....forgot to sign in..... Greg F: (from the Kucinich thread).."Of course it doesn't- but its nothing new. The Right has pisssed and moaned about the same thing with regard to Public Assistance, AFDC, etc. Same old BS." From this thread: "Really quite amusing, since the "Extreme Left" in the United States probably numbers a couple of thousand individuals at most. Unless you're one of the brain-dead who characherizes our slightly right-of-center President Obama as a "radical leftist"... " GfS: I think your rocker is rocking, without you in it! |
|
Subject: RE: BS: The republicans (US) From: Amos Date: 30 Mar 10 - 09:29 AM (03-30) 04:00 PDT Washington -- The Republican National Committee spent tens of thousands of dollars last month on luxury jets, posh hotels and other high-flying expenses, according to new Federal Election Commission filings, including nearly $2,000 for "meals" at Voyeur West Hollywood, a nightclub featuring topless dancers simulating lesbian sex. The RNC spent more than $17,000 on private jet travel in February as well as nearly $13,000 for limousines, according to the documents. The GOP's main political committee also ran up tabs at numerous posh hotels, including the Beverly Hills Hotel ($9,000); the Beverly Wilshire Four Seasons ($6,600) and the W Hotel in Washington ($15,000), and spent more than $43,000 on its controversial midwinter meeting in Hawaii, not including airfare. The disclosures create another spending controversy for the RNC and its chairman, Michael Steele, who has come under steady fire from Democrats and some fellow Republicans for his financial stewardship of the organization. The RNC said in a statement Monday that it was investigating the Voyeur West Hollywood expenditure, which it said was "a reimbursement made to a non-committee staffer." The committee also said it was requesting that the money be returned and emphasized that Steele was not at the event. "The chairman was never at the location in question, he had no knowledge of the expenditure, nor does he find the use of committee funds at such a location at all acceptable," the RNC statement said. The committee had more than $22 million on hand when Steele arrived last year, but is down to under $10 million now despite raising $96 million during that time, records show. A previous dustup over Steele's spending habits prompted party leaders to approve new restrictions requiring more oversight and competitive bidding for contracts over $100,000. The Daily Caller Web site, which first noted the new Federal Election Commission filings, also reported that Steele had initially suggested that the RNC should purchase a private jet for his travels after he first took over the job. Steele's spending habits have prompted angry complaints from wealthy GOP donors and party officials, who fear the chairman is making poor financial decisions and undercutting the GOP's attempt to cast itself as the party of fiscal responsibility. "Nothing surprises me," said one former RNC aide, who spoke on the condition of anonymity. "It definitely speaks to the desire for first-class accommodations over there Read more: http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2010/03/30/MN3M1CMTME.DTL&type=politics#ixzz0jfNCeFtx |
|
Subject: RE: BS: The republicans (US) From: Greg F. Date: 30 Mar 10 - 09:44 AM The committee had more than $22 million on hand when Steele arrived last year, but is down to under $10 million now despite raising $96 million during that time, records show. They're simply following the economic example set by the Bush Administration- what's the problem? |
|
Subject: RE: BS: The republicans (US) From: Jack the Sailor Date: 30 Mar 10 - 10:14 AM >>What then?..Do you think he is a 'moderate'? He, like most US politicians, is actually fairly conservative. Again, Start with a dictionary and an introductory text on political philosophies. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: The republicans (US) From: Jack the Sailor Date: 30 Mar 10 - 10:55 AM Hint, Hugo Chavez is is a radical leftist. He nationalized the oil company. Obama isn't trying to nationalize anything. (Before you burst into hysterics, please educate yourself on what it actually means to nationalize a business.) |
|
Subject: RE: BS: The republicans (US) From: DougR Date: 30 Mar 10 - 03:33 PM John P: Your 05 March post: you could easily have been describing the Democratic Party when the Republicans were in the majority. DougR |
|
Subject: RE: BS: The republicans (US) From: Jack the Sailor Date: 30 Mar 10 - 05:16 PM DougR Is it too much to ask that you just quote the snippets you are referring to rather than identifying the whole post by date? The posts are hard to find and half the time when I do, it is not clear what you are talking about. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: The republicans (US) From: DougR Date: 30 Mar 10 - 05:32 PM Yes, Jack, I have noticed that you do have a problem with understanding a few things, however, I usually note a date and time of the post so it shouldn't be too challenging. DougR |
|
Subject: RE: BS: The republicans (US) From: Jack the Sailor Date: 30 Mar 10 - 06:03 PM Is it too much to ask that you just quote the snippets you are referring to rather than identifying the whole post by date AND TIME? The posts are hard to find and half the time when I do, it is not clear what you are talking about. You see you method only works when there is on thing and only one thing in the post. Do you need someone to tell you how to cut and paste and use quotes? |
|
Subject: RE: BS: The republicans (US) From: Greg F. Date: 30 Mar 10 - 06:57 PM Jack- there's this old bit about "teaching a pig to sing...." |
|
Subject: RE: BS: The republicans (US) From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity Date: 31 Mar 10 - 12:58 AM Jack the Sailor: "Obama isn't trying to nationalize anything. (Before you burst into hysterics, please educate yourself on what it actually means to nationalize a business.) Not AIG, not GM, not the insurance companies, not the banks...nope, not nuttin'................. Can you sing, yet? GfS |
|
Subject: RE: BS: The republicans (US) From: Jack the Sailor Date: 31 Mar 10 - 01:06 AM That you for proving my point Saw. You didn't bother to find out what it meant. Yap away! Say what you want. You say idiotic things. You have no credibility. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: The republicans (US) From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity Date: 31 Mar 10 - 01:24 AM Jack the Ass: "That you for proving my point Saw. You didn't bother to find out what it meant. Yap away! Say what you want. You say idiotic things. You have no credibility." GfS: I have no credibility??? You have no comprehension or retention!! SAW, didn't post to you. I did. Credibility?????????? You still can't sing! (Probably dementia) GfS.......AKA Saw, or Rumpelstiltskin, or President Napoleon, or Jim Morrison....or......... |
|
Subject: RE: BS: The republicans (US) From: Joe Offer Date: 31 Mar 10 - 01:28 AM Jack and Sanity: Chill!!!! Thank you. -Joe Offer- |
|
Subject: RE: BS: The republicans (US) From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity Date: 31 Mar 10 - 01:29 AM Okay...but it WAS fun! GfS |
|
Subject: RE: BS: The republicans (US) From: Amos Date: 25 Apr 10 - 12:01 PM Republican Governors Embrace 17th-Century Would-Be Terrorist The Republican Governors Association "has embraced the symbolism" of Guy Fawkes with "a rather striking website," reports Time's Michael Scherer. Fawkes, a Catholic radical, is best known for his unsuccessful attempt to kill King James I by blowing up the British House of Parliament on Nov. 5, 1605. In RememberNovember.com, the Republican Governors Association seems to be embracing the symbolism of Fawkes through a high-quality dramatic video that positions President Obama as King James, the Democratic leadership as the British Parliament, and Republicans as the ones who are fed up and just don't want to take it anymore. Talking Points Memo's Josh Marshall finds this message "completely bewildering" considering Fawkes "tried but failed to pull off a mass casualty terrorist attack." Time | Saturday, April 24, 2010 |
|
Subject: RE: BS: The republicans (US) From: Greg F. Date: 25 Apr 10 - 02:02 PM And when the Repubs and their TeaBagger friends finally manage to encite some demented asshole to actually kill someone (or a bunch of someones) they'll blame it all on thre Democrats, of course. Fawkes, as I recall, was convicted of treason & drawn and quartered. So, the Republicans are now advocating treason? What passes for the Republican Party is getting dangerously close to shouting fire in a crowded theater. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: The republicans (US) From: Amos Date: 25 May 10 - 09:29 AM Bill Maher, American humorist, writes in the Huffington Post: " New Rule: The Republican leadership in America must produce their birth certificates! Not because I doubt they're Americans, I just want to make sure they're not eight-years-old. I mention this because a major talking point on Fox News and hate radio these days is that, after a year and a half of Obama, it's time to bring the "adults" back into power, so they can rein in our deficit, defeat terrorism, and focus on America's real enemy: cleaning ladies in Arizona. But I must protest the premise, because conservatives are the ones who tend to believe in magical ideas, like: America is never wrong; you can defeat terrorism militarily; and lower taxes will somehow fix the deficit. And I'm not even mentioning the stuff about how Jesus used to fly around on a pterodactyl and just hated it when homos ate wedding cake. Now, am I saying there are no adults in today's Republican Party? Absolutely not, there are -- but like a lot of parents today, the adults let their kids cow them. And silence them. And rule over them. Rush Limbaugh is a child, a primal scream of a man, but he gets his way because he's the fat bully on the playground; and Glenn Beck is the weepy kid who's always crying because he's insane and you don't know what he's going to do and who he's going to take with him. For example: to solve our debt crisis, a bunch of Republican senators suggested a bipartisan debt commission, which is the adult thing to do. But when Obama agreed to it, immediately seven of them said no -- now they're against it. Because Obama has cooties. Democrats have cooties, so you can't vote with them, or work with them, and compromise is treason. Compare this to England, where they just had an election two weeks ago and, power changed hands -- but the party that lost is working WITH the part that won -- they are not accusing them of being Bolshevik Zulus out to destroy the Magna Carta. Because the English are grown ups, including their conservatives who enjoy a wonderful luxury that conservatives on this side of the pond do not. They're allowed to be sane. They don't have to pander to creationists and anti-intellectuals. Only in this dumb country do liberals and conservatives argue over things like "evolution" and "climate change" and whether "sick people should be left to die in the street." " |
|
Subject: RE: BS: The republicans (US) From: Greg F. Date: 25 May 10 - 10:16 AM Unfortunately, its not humorous at all, Amos. Its the depressing truth. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: The republicans (US) From: Desert Dancer Date: 25 May 10 - 12:40 PM But let's not go overboard about the intelligence of Brits: NYT: Climate Fears Turn to Doubts Among Britons ;-) |
|
Subject: RE: BS: The republicans (US) From: Amos Date: 02 Jun 10 - 02:29 PM Ex-Florida GOP chairman Jim Greer indicted on six felony counts By Matt DeLong Jim Greer, former head of the Florida Republican Party, was arrested Wednesday morning at his home near Orlando, law enforcement officials said. The Orlando Sun-Sentinel reports that at a press conference Wednesday, statewide prosecutor William Shepherd said that "a statewide grand jury indicted Greer on six felony charges: organized scheme to defraud, money laundering, and four counts of grand theft." Shepherd said Greer developed a scheme to take money from the Republican Party. He used the money for his personal expenses. The Associated Press has more details: Greer funneled party money to a company called Victory Strategies that he controlled and concealed his relationship with, investigators said. On Greer's orders, the Republican Party of Florida paid Victory Strategies for campaign work, much of which was never performed. That was in addition to a 10 percent cut of major donations to the party that Greer took along with his top assistant, Delmar Johnson, Shepherd said. Greer got about $125,000 of the almost $200,000 that the party paid Victory Strategies, the statewide prosecutor said. Victory Strategies also received money from a fund Greer had set up for his re-election campaign as party chairman, he added. The St. Petersburg Times has the affidavit (pdf). In April, Greer was named as the subject of a criminal probe concerning "a secret contract that funneled party money to a consulting company he owned," the Miami Herald reported. Greer, a close ally of Gov. Charlie Crist, stepped down from his post in January under pressure from party activists and major donors outraged by lavish spending. Crist said Wednesday that the arrest was "disappointing " but he does not "feel complicit." When asked earlier this year about his support for Greer, Crist responded,"I didn't have a crystal ball. Neither did you." More on Greer's financial scandal from the AP: The Florida Department of Law Enforcement has been investigating Greer since an audit found he awarded himself and his executive director a fundraising contract that paid them about $200,000. Greer owned 60 percent of a corporation set up to raise money for the party and former party executive director Delmar Johnson owned the other 40 percent. That corporation got a 10 percent commission on money it brought in, the audit found. Current party Chairman John Thrasher previously said he was told March 15 that the party may have been the victim of illegal activity after the audit discovered Greer and Johnson's role in the corporation. Thrasher reported the findings to the attorney general's office, which referred the case to state officials. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: The republicans (US) From: Riginslinger Date: 02 Jun 10 - 02:41 PM Finally, the Republicans will get to play the victim! |
|
Subject: RE: BS: The republicans (US) From: Amos Date: 17 Jul 10 - 07:12 PM The Republicans have a set of dirty little (actually not so little) secrets they don't what you to know -- and certainly don't want you to think about when you go to the polls in November. And the fact is that some of those secrets could provide Democrats with silver bullets this fall. But first let's recall the context. Over the course of eight short years -- between 2000 and 2008 -- the Republicans methodically executed their plan to transform American society. They systematically transferred wealth from the middle class to the wealthiest two percent of Americans -- slashing taxes for the wealthy. They eviscerated the rules that held Wall Street, Big Oil and private insurance companies accountable to the public. They allowed and encouraged the recklessness of the big Wall Street banks that ultimately collapsed the economy and cost eight million Americans their jobs. They ignored exploding health care costs, tried to privatize Social Security, gave the drug companies open season to gouge American consumers and presided over a decline in real incomes averaging $2,000 per family. They entangled America in an enormously costly, unnecessary war in Iraq, pursued a directionless policy that left Afghanistan to fester, and sullied America's good name throughout the world. Their economic policy of cutting taxes for the wealthy and deregulating big Corporations failed to create jobs. In fact, over his eight year term, George Bush's administration created exactly zero net private sector jobs. They inherited a Federal budget with surpluses as far as the eye could see and rolled up more debt than all of the previous Presidents in the over 200 years of American history. And in the end they left the economy in collapse. This was not a disaster that could be remedied overnight. By taking bold action at the beginning of his administration, President Obama and the Democrats in Congress prevented the financial crisis from morphing into a Great Depression -- but the Republicans, some Democrats, and the powerful special interests have done everything they can to throw sand into the gears of change. Most importantly, they have stood in the way of providing enough economic stimulus to launch a robust, widespread economic recovery. But notwithstanding Republican opposition, Obama, the Democrats and their progressive allies have -- after a century of trying -- finally passed health care reform allowing America to end its status as the only industrialized nation that did not provide health care as a right. They are on the brink of reining in the recklessness of the big Wall Street banks. And they have set the stage for massive long-term investments in economic growth and clean energy. But it has been hard to pull the car out of the deep economic ditch and Americans are angry at the slow pace of economic recovery -- and also at the special interests that profited from their economic pain. So the Republicans now have the audacity to argue that President Obama and the Democrats are somehow responsible for the hardships that they themselves created. In effect they want the election to be a referendum on whether the Democrats have mopped and swept fast enough cleaning up the mess that they created. They will do everything they can to prevent America from focusing on the real choice before them in the fall elections -- a choice between going backward to the failed policies of the past that caused this catastrophe and a new direction that will create sustainable, long-term, bottom-up, widely shared economic growth. The real question before the country is whether it is willing to hand over the keys to the economy once again to the same gang that just caused the most serious economic pile up in 60 years. That's where the dirty little secrets come in. It turns out that the leaders of the Republican Party have learned nothing from the reckless escapade that caused so much economic pain, and came perilously close to inflicting mortal wounds on the American economy. They still actually believe -- despite what we have all just experienced -- that by "freeing" big oil, the insurance companies and Wall Street banks of the "burdens" of government accountability, that the plutocrats and the "invisible hand" of the market will lead American into the promised land of economic prosperity. Some of the things they believe are not only dangerous to the economy, luckily they are also politically radioactive. And quite remarkably, many key Republicans are actually willing to say them out loud. Here are a few: ¥ Meet Congressman Paul Ryan.
[we ask everyone to refrain from long copy/pastes --- here is the link] http://www.huffingtonpost.com/robert-creamer/dirty-little-secrets-the_b_645404.html
Instead, Democrats need to take the offensive and dominate the national conversation by talking about what the Republicans actually believe and what they would do if they win in November. Voters must be offered a stark choice between Democratic and Republican policies in the fall. If they are, "Conventional Wisdom" that keeps predicting a Democratic disaster will be proven wrong, the same way it was when it predicted that America would never elect a tall, skinny African American guy named Barack Obama. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: The republicans (US) From: GUEST,josep Date: 18 Jul 10 - 01:40 AM The biggest mistake by far that the Dems and the White House made was refusing to go after the Bush administration for war crimes and for the stolen money by contractors. I find it so outrageous that they could have stonewalled taking any action that they deserve to get clobbered by the very people they refused to prosecute. Cheney should be dead now. He should have been hounded into his grave by lawsuits and charges and they left him alone even after he started running his mouth last year. I have no sympathy for the dems. Their negligence at bringing charges against the Bush administration and cowing every republican into silence and acquiescence is inexcusable and extremely poor politicking. When you can get the other party by the balls, you don't hesitate--you grab and squeeze. Force them to surrender scapegoats for prison terms and punishments, prosecute them and then let them know it's not enough--you want more. I'm completely disillusioned with both this Congress and this administration. Absolutely no balls. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: The republicans (US) From: Bobert Date: 18 Jul 10 - 07:12 AM Yeah, you got the "no balls" 100% correct... Doesn't matter much where you look or what they have done... They have cowtied to the minority... |
|
Subject: RE: BS: The republicans (US) From: Bill D Date: 18 Jul 10 - 12:31 PM No balls, huh? More like 'good sense'. As much as I LIKE the idea of calling Bush & his cronies to answer for their crimes.... and the various contractors and banks and oil companies and investment firms, etc. to answer for THEIR stupid, greedy practices for theirs... Can you imagine what the news would have been like the last year? Can you imagine trying to juggle the recovery, the war(s), the environment, immigration,the Health Care process, Wall Street reform...etc...etc..ETC!!! while running 4-5 simultaneous special prosecutors and trying to pry enough evidence that would stand up in court out of 10,000 hidey-holes? It would be unlikely that enough votes could be found for conviction, and would have totally distracted from 'getting something done'. Better, as frustrating as it is, to let The Huffington Post, PolitFact.com, Rachel Maddow, Mother Jones...etc., lay out all the evidence of Republican crimes and/or scandals in ways that are not boring hearings and don't tie up Congress with tedious routines that would be continuously stonewalled by procedures and votes. Obama is not stupid.... he reads the papers. He knows what people are saying, but he knows that he had 2 years to get stuff passed before mid-terms, and who knows.... maybe there IS still time after Nov. to have a few investigations. (oh...one of the major targets, Cheney, would have gotten so many reprieves due to his health [and so much sympathy] that they'd bever have completed an investigation and prosecution of him.) |
|
Subject: RE: BS: The republicans (US) From: Bill D Date: 18 Jul 10 - 12:39 PM Oh...and can you also imagine the Republican campaign ads this year if we HAD seen failed attempts to convict the 'suspects'? |
|
Subject: RE: BS: The republicans (US) From: GUEST,Riginslinger Date: 18 Jul 10 - 01:10 PM "Obama is not stupid.... he reads the papers." That's where Will Rogers got all of his information too. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: The republicans (US) From: Amos Date: 18 Jul 10 - 04:58 PM Will wasn't stupid either. And obama reads much more than the papers, A |
|
Subject: RE: BS: The republicans (US) From: Bill D Date: 18 Jul 10 - 06:54 PM (I see that Bobert invented a new verb up there..."cowtied". Is that what they do at Mooooooveon dot org?) Perhaps a cheaper way of getting to the moon? "We don't need no steenkin' rockets... we just cowtie before she jumps." (No, Bobert, I didn't have anything better to do tonight...it's way too hot to mow, so I sit here and mess with folks...) |
|
Subject: RE: BS: The republicans (US) From: GUEST,Riginslinger Date: 18 Jul 10 - 07:40 PM Good point, Bill, and (Mooooooooooveon dot org) has proven to be an udder disaster. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: The republicans (US) From: DougR Date: 18 Jul 10 - 07:48 PM Amos: You are privy to what the President reads? "He reads considerably more than just the newspapers." While I agree he probably does, and receives up-to-date information we will never hear or see, it would be a bit arrogant of me to make such a statement. Rant and rave about the Republicans as you wish. The proof will be in the pudding and the pudding will be ready on November 2nd. I predicted a disaster of an election for Democrats months ago and I stand by that prediction (regardless of MSNBC, Huffington, etc. etc.) DougR |
|
Subject: RE: BS: The republicans (US) From: Greg F. Date: 18 Jul 10 - 09:27 PM it would be a bit arrogant of me to make such a statement Hasn't stopped you up til now, Douggie-Boy. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: The republicans (US) From: Bill D Date: 18 Jul 10 - 09:32 PM Why arrogant to say what no one doubts? You are fishing for ways to belittle ANYTHING a liberal says...which sure identifies you as parroting the current Republican line. "Throw MORE mud...maybe some will stick." |
|
Subject: RE: BS: The republicans (US) From: Amos Date: 18 Jul 10 - 10:36 PM I've read several discussions he has had with others abut things he has read. He talks about some in his books, also. Nothing arrogant about it at all, Doug. A |
|
Subject: RE: BS: The Republicans (US) From: Bobert Date: 18 Jul 10 - 11:10 PM Listen, ya'll... Ain't 'bout who's right and who ain't... 'Bout PR and spin and knowin' that if 'nuff folks ain't happy in November then, yeah, the Dems lose big time... Up to the Dems (think Obama) to make this about crap that Bush left to be cleaned up... That's purdy much the politics of it all... B~ |
|
Subject: RE: BS: The Republicans (US) From: GUEST,Riginslinger Date: 19 Jul 10 - 07:22 AM When it comes to reading, Obama is a lot like Reagan. He reads a good speech off the teleprompter, but he doesn't do so well acappella. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: The Republicans (US) From: Greg F. Date: 19 Jul 10 - 07:46 AM Not like Reagan at all. Pres. Obama understands what he's saying, and can still remember what he said after he's thru speaking. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: The Republicans (US) From: Amos Date: 19 Jul 10 - 09:12 AM "My Princeton colleague Larry Bartels sums it up as follows: "Objective economic conditions — not clever television ads, debate performances, or the other ephemera of day-to-day campaigning — are the single most important influence upon an incumbent president's prospects for re-election." If the economy is improving strongly in the months before an election, incumbents do well; if it's stagnating or retrogressing, they do badly. Now, the fact that "ephemera" don't matter seems reassuring, suggesting that voters aren't swayed by cheap tricks. Unfortunately, however, the evidence suggests that issues don't matter either, in part because voters are often deeply ill informed. Suppose, for example, that you believed claims that voters are more concerned about the budget deficit than they are about jobs. (That's not actually true, but never mind.) Even so, how much credit would you expect Democrats to get for reducing the deficit? None. In 1996 voters were asked whether the deficit had gone up or down under Bill Clinton. It had, in fact, plunged — but a plurality of voters, and a majority of Republicans, said that it had risen. There's no point berating voters for their ignorance: people have bills to pay and children to raise, and most don't spend their free time studying fact sheets. Instead, they react to what they see in their own lives and the lives of people they know. Given the realities of a bleak employment picture, Americans are unhappy — and they're set to punish those in office. " Paul Krugman, NYT |
|
Subject: RE: BS: The Republicans (US) From: GUEST,Riginslinger Date: 19 Jul 10 - 09:20 AM It's kind of like the disinformation the administration puts out about "job's saved." Some people believe it. But the most insidious claim of all has to be that "most people favor comprehensive immigration reform." They don't, and they certainly wouldn't if they knew what the administration meant by that. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: The Republicans (US) From: Amos Date: 19 Jul 10 - 09:41 AM Interesting sort of arrogance to claim one knows what most people think. It's exactly the error you are accusing them of, too. A |
|
Subject: RE: BS: The Republicans (US) From: Riginslinger Date: 19 Jul 10 - 10:12 AM Maybe, but they're are doing it to mislead the public, and I'm simply warning them to look into it. |
