Mitt Romney is currently trying to overtake Rudy as my least favorite Republican presidential candidate. Why, you ask? Because he went off on Obama about supporting age appropriate sex ed. That is dumb in itself. Here's what pisses me off though, as with everything Romney, HE SUPPORTED WHEN HE RAN FOR GOVERNOR!!!
Jerkass nom. is in.
Now I gotta get Wilco tix to set up a pretty kickass weekend September 13-16.
UPDATE: Operation Kickass Weekend is moving along nicely. Eighth row at Wilco. Flying to Florida the next morning to watch the Vols beat the Gators. Nice.
12 comments:
i got wilco sec 1 gg seats 1-2...i'm stoked!
we all know romney is not the best at playing the political sway game in that he did embellish the fact that obama only wants to educate kindergarteners on the "innappropriate touch" and "where babies come from" by saying obama supports sex-ed for kindergarteners.
romney did the whole sex-ed for kindergarteners is bad, "we need zero sex-ed for kindergarteners." in the traditional sense, i agree in that no 5 year old needs to know about condems, etc. but that's not what obama was talking about and i totally agree with obama on the "inappropriate touch" and "where babies come from" via public schools. also romney supporting age appropriate sex-ed like he did in 2002 when he checked yes on a question doesn't conflict with what he's saying now...his age limit for traditional sex-ed is probably the same as obams's (although there actual positions are prob drastically different in that lately romney's been doing the whole abstinance thing like a lot of the other republicans)...the only difference is that romney by saiyng zero sex-ed for kindergarteners is saying there should be no explaining the "inappropriate touch" and "where do babies come from" to 5 year olds via public school system. it's all a big fuss over nothing if you ask me...slow day in news...
evil, find another jerk-ass nomination, or get romney on something else...
Well, it's an honor just to be nominated.
I do love how you seem to make excuses for republicans though. Do you not see a pattern? They lie and distort. Obama said he was for the same thing that until a few months ago he was for. He attacks him and distorts his position. That is jerkass.
He's also switched his position on choice and gay marriage. Oh, and he thinks we should torture people, which is completely jerkass.
Drogba is down with torturing people!
"I do love how you seem to make excuses for republicans though."
Glad to evoke the "love" in your thinking. No excuses really, because all politicians are pretty crafty, no matter which side you play for.
"Do you not see a pattern?"
Yes, a pattern of deceit and crafty misleading statements on both sides, pretty much all the time...that's the system we're delt in US politics (all parties included).
I guess I just try to look at things objectively as possible. I throw out the generalizations (party politics) and just deal with what's specifically on the table. And in this case there was a gross misleading statement by Romney although not false, was not really totally the truth...and that my friends is what we call "playing the political game" in the USA. Let's confuse the uneducated who can't read between the lines and sway them to "our" side. I'm all for pointing out the truth and lies in politics (holding politicians responsible while educating the public) but after that, I don't care which team you play for because in our short country's history of dems vs reps, both teams seem to cheat equally as much. I guess I'm the true moderate, not because of my political views, but because I distrust both parties equally. Or maybe that makes me Canadian? I'm not sure...eh? By the way everyone should drink more Molsen!
u2clay is all over it, except for the Molsen part. If you are ever in Canada, Rickard's Red is the way to go.
I call bullshit. You say that both parties have an done stuff. Bullshit. Name it. I can fill these pages everyday with shit Republicans do. Hell, another one gets indicted just about everyday. Name the Democratic equivalent to Watergate. Name the Democratic equivalent to Iran-Contra. Name the Democratic equivalent all the shit W is doing right now. (Torture, illegal wire taps, misuse of the justice department, Iraq, Katrina, etc.) You can't.
If you say Whitewater or Monica, so help me God, I wll ban you. Whitewater was nothing. Nothing. They spent millions of taxpayer dollars investigating it and do you know what they found out? That Bill Clinton got a blow job from Monica. Who gives a shit? You're the big one about plans. Well, Bill Clinton had a plan. He used it and this country was a lot better off when he left it then when he got it. He gave us an economy that worked for the average American. He balanced the budget. He made us loved around the world. I could care less if he got a damn blow job. The guy should have been gettin his salad tossed for all he did for this country.
You believe in the right wing talking point that both sides do it. Well, they don't. Both sides do not believe in authoritarian government. Both sides do not believe in running up huge debts for us to pay off later. Both sides do not both believe in destroying the government. Only one side does.
That side has been in control of the Presidency for what will be at the end of W's term 28 out of the past 40 years. In the mean time this country has gone backwards on everything that is important to the average working family. Meanwhile, the top 10% of American families have done great. Why is that? Because that is what the Republican party's policies are all about. Helping the rich and getting the poor to come along based on "values" issues. It's a load of shit and you have bought it.
BTW, if you don't believe me, read The Agenda by Bob Woodward. I know you hate that sometimes you might have to read a book to learn something, but trust me it's worth it. It's amazing. You see that people thought about a policy to help America. They got it passed and... IT WORKED!!!
"You say that both parties have an done stuff. Name it."
In the last 40 years (of which 28 the Republicans have held the presidency), look up the following federal cases for wrongdoing:
Thomas J. Dodd ‘67
Abe Fortas (LBJ’s nomination for Chief Justice)‘69
LBJ Pentagon Papers ‘71
Governor Otto Kerner ‘74
Richard T. Hanna & Koreagate ‘76
Herman Talmadge ‘79
Abscam mainly Senator Harrison A. Williams (but also including a R-FL Richard Kelly) ‘80
Rep. Dan Crane (R-IL) and Rep. Gerry Studds (D-MA) ‘83
Bert Lance ‘80s & 90’s
Keating Five (including R-McCain) ’80-‘89
Mario Biaggi ‘88
Jim Wright ‘89
Anthony Lee Coelho ‘89
Alcee Hastings ‘89
[Hastings: In 1988, the Democratic-controlled U.S. House of Representatives took up the case, and Hastings was impeached for bribery and perjury by a vote of 413-3. Voters to impeach included Democratic Representatives Nancy Pelosi, Steny Hoyer, John Conyers and Charles Rangel. He was then convicted in 1989 by the United States Senate, becoming the sixth federal judge in the history of the United States to be removed from office by the Senate. The vote on the first article was 69 for and 26 opposed, providing five votes more than the two-thirds of those present that were needed to convict. The first article accused the judge of conspiracy. Conviction on any single article was enough to remove the judge from office. The Senate vote cut across party lines, with Senator Patrick J. Leahy, Democrat of Vermont voting to convict his fellow party member, and Arlen Specter voting to acquit.]
Clark Clifford ‘91
House Banking Scandal ‘92
[House Scandal: Former Rep. Donald Lukens (R-OH) was convicted on bribery and conspiracy charges. Former Rep. Carl C. Perkins (D-KY) pled guilty to various charges including a check kiting scheme involving several financial institutions including the House Bank. Former Rep. Carroll Hubbard, Jr. (D-KY) pled guilty to three felonies. Former Rep. Mary Rose Oakar (D-OH) was charged with seven felonies, but she ended up pleading guilty only to a misdemeanor campaign finance charge not related to the House Bank. The House Bank investigation also led to Delegate Walter E. Fauntroy (D-DC)]
Mary Rose Oakar ‘92
Travelgate ‘93
[I know Hillary was never convicted of anything, but…Independent Counsel Prosecutor Robert Ray cited eight separate conversations between the First Lady and senior staff and concluded: "Mrs. Clinton’s input into the process was significant, if not the significant factor influencing the pace of events in the Travel Office firings and the ultimate decision to fire the employees." Moreover, Ray determined Hillary Clinton had given "factually false" testimony when questioned by the GAO, the Independent Counsel, and Congress about the travel office firings, but reiterated that "the evidence was insufficient to prove beyond a reasonable doubt" that she knew her statements were false or understood that they may have prompted the firings.]
Congressional Post Office Scandal ’91-‘95
1996 United States campaign finance controversy
Walter R. Tucker III ‘96
Gore with improper fundraising ’98
[Gore says he admits making a mistake and takes responsibility and I agree that he has shown a lot more character than some nameless Republicans ;)…He quotes, “I did not know that it was a fund-raiser. I knew it was a political event, and I knew there were finance people that were going to be present, and so that alone should have told me, 'This is inappropriate and this is a mistake; don't do this.' And I take responsibility for that. It was a mistake.” — Gore on NBC's Today show, Jan. 24, 1997.]
Henry Gabriel Cisneros ’95-‘99
James Traficant ‘02
Robert Torricelli ‘02
Sandy Berger ‘05
[Another Democrat who said he was sorry for his wrongdoing…again better than most Republicans but still did something wrong…stealing classified documents]
Bill Jefferson ‘05
There are some more listed here:
http://www.boycottliberalism.com/Commentary/Corruption.htm
--------------------------------
There are too many at the state/local levels to list but one in particular involves a past Democratic governor of Tennessee Ray Blanton who was indicted on charges of selling liquor licenses. He was convicted and sentenced to federal prison.
There I named some. Politicians on both sides have cheated.
"You believe in the right wing talking point that both sides do it."
If that makes Evil think I’m right winged…so be it. I disagree. I think it shows that I speak the truth since I’ve shown that a select few Democrats and Republicans have faltered along the way. It happens on both sides. The degree to which the consequences of each unfortunate political scandal/corruption/allegation/conviction manifest themselves can be debated (but I think that’s a waste of time).
"It's a load of shit and you have bought it."
Yeah...I'm pretty sure, oh, wait, yep I AM right...I never said I bought into anything. Good try though.
I'm not really for or against anyone or anything politically. I am for finding solutions to our problems. If I had the knowledge and desire (of which I don't), I would rather research ways in which to fix our country's problems or try to facilitate meetings where people representing all political views could talk/debate about strategies/plans to fix our problems rather than attacking someone for their political views. Just my thoughts…
Also, I DO read and I’ve told you I was reading (and have finished) a great book by Bernard Bailyn called “The Ideological Origins of the American Revolution.” And I HAVE learned something…one cannot appreciate the effect the American Revolution had then and even today on how we (and the rest of the world) view our political governing system without having read this labor intensive, academically written and well documented book. Go to Amazon.com and look it up.
I might get around to Woodward's book(s) but I'm just not a fan of political books. I read mainly fiction...I only read non-fiction if it's about sports/movies/music or the American Revolution. I know I'm closed minded for not reading more non-fiction but I've read too much non-fiction in my life (namely my science/health care background).
Nice cutting and pasting of right wing talking points to prove my point.
What you've shown is that a select few Democrats have been involved in scandals. What I've shown is that since '68 (Nixon's election) the Republican party on the national level is built on corruption. See the difference?
You have some cute little scandals up there. Cut and pasted from a very great sourse. I'm sure that source is going to be used in countless thesis papers this fall. None of those. I repeat none of them, compare to Watergate, Iran-Contra, or the current administration. Sure you can look at house scandals. And if you want to, I think you may want to look into the K street project and realize that all these Democratic "scandals" were nothing compared to the machine Tom DeLay built. Oh, and you might want to look into the Duke Cunningham scandal as well.
I was also interested to find out that the Pentagon Papers were LBJ's Pentagon Papers. That is a very interesting interpretation. I guess the 9/11 report was Clinton's 9/11 report as well?
If you want to compare the congressional post office scandal to Iran Contra do it. One ivolves stealing postage, while the other involves illegally selling arms. Sounds comparable right?
I mean you've even got Jim Traficant on the list. That guy was no more a Democrat than Dick Cheney is.
Alcee Hastings was a judge. It was bad, but it's not really what we're talking about here. Also, you may notice that Dems. refuse to give him the chairmanship of his committee to this day. We can't help that people in Florida keep electing him. Meanwhile, Republicans make Tom DeLay majority leader.
I just want to make sure this is clear. In your mind Travelgate = Watergate? Stealing postage= Iran Contra? That whole idea is a Republican idea. They illegally fund a war and try to compare it to stealing postage. Then people like you say "everyone does it."
Does everyone mess up from time to time. Yes. Does everyone lose an entire American city on their watch? No. Are their corrupt folks on both sides? Yes. Does one side celebrate their corrupt guys and give them positions of leadership or tv shows? Yes. (See: Oliver North, G. Gordan Liddy, Tom DeLay, Karl Rove, etc.)
Sorry about my joke about you not liking to read. It came from you not liking the fact that Michael Moore has plans, but there not in his movie and you wining about having to read. It is interesting that you read fiction. I think it explains a lot.
Again, I'm not saying Democrats are saints. Quite the opposite. I'm saying they have tried to pass policies that will help America work better for more Americans. You are the one that tried to compare what Romney did to the "political sway game". It's just not true. Obama gave an honest answer. Romney lied. Both sides didn't do it. Romney lied... and then he went on and put up his make up.
As Harry Truman once said, "If they quit lying about me, I'll quit telling the truth about them."
"What you've shown is that a select few Democrats have been involved in scandals. What I've shown is that since '68 (Nixon's election) the Republican party on the national level is built on corruption. See the difference?"
You told me to name some things that I thought Demorcats were accused or convicted of to prove that they have cheated in the past, as well as Republicans. And I did.
It's a pretty bold and generalized statement to make that a national political organization is based on corruption. I would have to say that a majority of the national politicians with both of the major parites do not wish to back any of their policies on corruption. Does corruption happen every now and then? Yes, because all people are human and make mistakes.
Arguing the degree to which corruptions were worse for the country or making a statement saying that a few select politicians in one party have made mistakes which have hurt more than the other party is a waste of time (especially the ones in the past where no more can come of it)...all political corruptions hurt the political progress made by many on both sides.
Yeah, I'm not going to pretend that I know everything about all the political scandals of both parties...I don't really care. I do know that both parties have had a select few politicians over the years make mistakes. That is all I've stated.
"If you want to compare the congressional post office scandal to Iran Contra do it."
Nah, I really don't. But you can go ahead and compare all you wish.
"I just want to make sure this is clear. In your mind Travelgate = Watergate? Stealing postage= Iran Contra?"
Uh, I never said any of that, nor do I think that. And for the record I will not engage in a debate on the degree to which corruption scandals involving national politicians within both parties can be compared. It's a waste of time.
It's like saying who's hurt baseball more by allegations of steroid abuse, Barry Bonds or Rafael Palmero? Who cares? They've both hurt baseball to some degree. We need to find ways to minimize the allegations being made by people who think steroid use is widespread enough to create a negative impact on baseball.
And yeah, I like to read a well written fictional book. Sometimes I even want to read something funny (like Carl Hiaason or Dan Jenkins), so sue me.
"You are the one that tried to compare what Romney did to the "political sway game". It's just not true."
Woooah, I think you've misinterpreted what I wanted to say here about Romeny. Romney is wrong...dead wrong. He used a generalization about Obama wanting to teach sex-ed to kindergarteners to try to "sway" dumb ass people to his side. But an educated person knows that Obama has a position on what public schools should teach to the little ones and Romney has a position on what to teach (or in this case what not to teach) the little ones. They are different. Now go pick a side, or don't pick a side, I don't really care. Did Romney lie by saying he backed age appropriate sex-ed in 2002 and says he doesn't now? No, he didn't lie. He still believes in age appropriate sex-ed...just not for kindergarteners. Did he lie saying Obama wants to teach sex-ed to kindergarteners? No, Obama DOES want to teach a form of sex-ed to kindergarteners: inappropriate touching and where babies come from. Did Romney say exactly what Obama wants to teach? No. There lies the generalization and not disclosing the total truth about what Obama actually said for Romney's political reasons (which is def wrong by Romney)...but in this case, there were no lies made by Romney. He just chooses the part he wants to about the sex-ed comments Obama made and beats it over the head with a hammer to make a stupid point to the dumb asses that will follow him. Typical politician. But I'm sure somewhere in the long line of Democratic (just as in Republican) naitonal politicans, there have been misleading statements that have been made. And like I said before, that my friends is the politics we are becoming used to in the US of A.
Ok...nuf said...I'm ready for Bobo...
"It's a pretty bold and generalized statement to make that a national political organization is based on corruption."
Nixon= Watergate
Reagan + Bush= Iran/Contra
Bush II= Cronies. Cronies everywhere. Put in place throught the K Street Project. Which leads to no bid contracts. Look it up.
Post a Comment