Duck_dodgers007 Posted October 17, 2012 Share Posted October 17, 2012 I'm having second thoughts about being a liberal, think about how victimized tired, old, stupid, mean, cranky, old white men are. how can these stoic old, angry, irrational, stupid, ignorant fools have it so bad. I mean the media is so against them! The media is centered on huge corporations, what chance do our old cranky men have against these left leaning corporate media Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rob's House Posted October 17, 2012 Share Posted October 17, 2012 Weird...Fox focus group...acting like Romney did a lot better than I thought he did. Perhaps repeating those econ stats, over and over, is a lot more powerful for them. Cause...it's not like I don't hear it here every damn day. It was all likeability. Most people who follow the issues aren't going to be swayed by this ****. Confidence & likeability are crucial. Obama scored on strength & toughness, which he needed to, but largely at the cost of being likable.. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dayman Posted October 17, 2012 Share Posted October 17, 2012 Don't be an ass. It's not a matter of Obama not stopping it. It's a matter of his team not coming clean on it. Does this by itself say all that needs to be said about foreign policy? Obviously not. But are you honestly saying that the President sitting on that info, stonewalling the population, & riding off to party w/ Jay-Z in the immediate aftermath is irrelevant? If it was Bush would it be irrelevant? Who's really wearing the partisan glasses here? I can't speak for the American people. To this day, I do believe that Bush had intelligence that there were weapons of mass destruction...however "over hyped" the lock-solidness may have been. To this day, probably you don't agree, I do think that there were protests in countries all over about a stupid video, apparently there may have been protests in Libya as well (not surprising at all), and there was an attack in Libya as well that was deliberate and willful regardless of the scope of the plan. Do I think there was a massive lie or cover-up? No. I do think the interplay between protests and attacks over all the countries was confusing in the media reporting...and likely confusing in intelligence that has to be right and thus must be slow. And yes, I do agree that the official position was still confusing beyond the point that the unofficial position became clear...in a situation like this...I don't see how that is surprising. I'm having second thoughts about being a liberal, think about how victimized tired, old, stupid, mean, cranky, old white men are. how can these stoic old, angry, irrational, stupid, ignorant fools have it so bad. I mean the media is so against them! The media is centered on huge corporations, what chance do our old cranky men have against these left leaning corporate media I look at reasonable repubs both in congress and on message boards like a joke at time when they stand by and let insane people say stupid things. So don't take too much personal offense, but STFU about this old cranky white men schtick. It's stupid. Don't be stupid. People associate you with me wrongly since we both support the same presidential candidate, so don't be an idiot. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OCinBuffalo Posted October 17, 2012 Share Posted October 17, 2012 It was all likeability. Most people who follow the issues aren't going to be swayed by this ****. Confidence & likeability are crucial. Obama scored on strength & toughness, which he needed to, but largely at the cost of being likable.. I guess.... These guys were talking about Romney as "Mr. President" and giving Obama hell.... ....I swear to God: one guy, who voted for Obama in 2008, said "Obama bullschitted us" no censor, no bleep, and 80% of the group agreed and If that isn't on youtube in the next 20 minutes.....then the Romney campaign is just awful. If that's representative of the real sentiment out there? Landslide. I mean...that's not what I think. I think he really believed that what he was doing was going to work. But, if I am in the minority on that? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
B-Man Posted October 17, 2012 Author Share Posted October 17, 2012 Romney Was Right on Oil, Gas Production on Federal Lands Decreasing By Katrina Trinko During the debate, President Obama and Mitt Romney had this heated exchange: ROMNEY: And production on private — on government land – OBAMA: Production is up. ROMNEY: — is down. OBAMA: No, it isn’t. ROMNEY: Production on government land of oil is down 14 percent. OBAMA: Governor – ROMNEY: And production on gas – (CROSSTALK) OBAMA: It’s just not true. ROMNEY: It’s absolutely true. Look, there’s no question but the people recognize that we have not produced more (inaudible) on federal lands and in federal waters. And coal, coal production is not up; coal jobs are not up. Who’s right? Romney, according to Greenwire: Oil production fell by 14 percent in fiscal 2011 below the previous year on federal lands and waters, according to statistics provided last month by the Interior Department. Natural gas production fell 11 percent over the same period (Greenwire, Feb. 27). . Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DC Tom Posted October 17, 2012 Share Posted October 17, 2012 I can't speak for the American people. To this day, I do believe that Bush had intelligence that there were weapons of mass destruction.. We actually had someone (at least one) person on this board at the time who'd seen the intelligence first-hand. Unless Paul was part of the conspiracy, Bush didn't lie. The intel may have been slanted by confirmation bias (I think it probably was, to some degree), and some of the claims were completely outlandish (if they had a nuclear program...where the hell was the industrial footprint? A nuke program is a BIG program, not like a hide-in-plain-sight chemical program or hide-in-a-brewery bio program), and there's more than a dozen different intel programs in the federal government getting different raw data (theoretically...but a lot of the Iraq intel was single-sourced, which is bad practice) But that's a failure of the intel process, not a lie inflicted from up top. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dayman Posted October 17, 2012 Share Posted October 17, 2012 We actually had someone (at least one) person on this board at the time who'd seen the intelligence first-hand. Unless Paul was part of the conspiracy, Bush didn't lie. The intel may have been slanted by confirmation bias (I think it probably was, to some degree), and some of the claims were completely outlandish (if they had a nuclear program...where the hell was the industrial footprint? A nuke program is a BIG program, not like a hide-in-plain-sight chemical program or hide-in-a-brewery bio program), and there's more than a dozen different intel programs in the federal government getting different raw data (theoretically...but a lot of the Iraq intel was single-sourced, which is bad practice) But that's a failure of the intel process, not a lie inflicted from up top. Agreed minus the idea someone on this board had credible info not available to us all Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Duck_dodgers007 Posted October 17, 2012 Share Posted October 17, 2012 I can't speak for the American people. To this day, I do believe that Bush had intelligence that there were weapons of mass destruction...however "over hyped" the lock-solidness may have been. To this day, probably you don't agree, I do think that there were protests in countries all over about a stupid video, apparently there may have been protests was a massive lie or cover-up? No. I do think the interplay between protests and attacks over all the countries was confusing in the media reporting...and likely confusing in intelligence that has to be right and thus must be slow. And yes, I do agree that the official position was still confusing beyond the point that the unofficial position became clear...in a situation like this...I don't see how that is surprisin I look at reasonable repubs both in congress and on message boards like a joke at time when they stand by and let insane people say stupid things. So don't take too much personal offense, but STFU about this old cranky white men schtick. It's stupid. Don't be stupid. People associate you with me wrongly since we both support the same presidential candidate, so don't be an idiot. No, I'll say whatever I want, go f yourself if you do not like it. If I want to answer Tom and his groupies stupidity with mocking stupidity I'll do it, no matter what some moron like you think I will. I'll argue however I want, you can criticize me all you want, whatever. You are very unimportant. Maybe you are fake Dem, just here to attack Dems? Are you Tom's other profile? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rob's House Posted October 17, 2012 Share Posted October 17, 2012 I can't speak for the American people. To this day, I do believe that Bush had intelligence that there were weapons of mass destruction...however "over hyped" the lock-solidness may have been. To this day, probably you don't agree, I do think that there were protests in countries all over about a stupid video, apparently there may have been protests in Libya as well (not surprising at all), and there was an attack in Libya as well that was deliberate and willful regardless of the scope of the plan. Do I think there was a massive lie or cover-up? No. I do think the interplay between protests and attacks over all the countries was confusing in the media reporting...and likely confusing in intelligence that has to be right and thus must be slow. And yes, I do agree that the official position was still confusing beyond the point that the unofficial position became clear...in a situation like this...I don't see how that is surprising. You might be surprised what I do & don't agree with. I'm not the conservative version of the twits excoriating Bush for not tossing the kid off his lap & making a B line to the door when told of 9/11. He probably should have calmly told the class something important came up & he had to go, but whatever. Similarly, I don't think Obama playing to his prejudices & then running off to Vegas right after is an impeachable offense. But it is a black eye, & one that is a lot more legitimate concern than a lot of the bull **** that permeates the political scene. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OCinBuffalo Posted October 17, 2012 Share Posted October 17, 2012 I look at reasonable repubs both in congress and on message boards like a joke at time when they stand by and let insane people say stupid things. So don't take too much personal offense, but STFU about this old cranky white men schtick. It's stupid. Don't be stupid. People associate you with me wrongly since we both support the same presidential candidate, so don't be an idiot. No! That is your penance for being a lib: you are chained to Duck_Dipshit, and you have to deal with it! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Duck_dodgers007 Posted October 17, 2012 Share Posted October 17, 2012 Agreed minus the idea someone on this board had credible info not available to us all You agree with Tom! Surprise! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rob's House Posted October 17, 2012 Share Posted October 17, 2012 No, I'll say whatever I want, go f yourself if you do not like it. If I want to answer Tom and his groupies stupidity with mocking stupidity I'll do it, no matter what some moron like you think I will. I'll argue however I want, you can criticize me all you want, whatever. You are very unimportant. Maybe you are fake Dem, just here to attack Dems? Are you Tom's other profile? You're a !@#$ing douche bag. You were useless as DIN & you've devolved to worthless since changing names. You bring nothing insightful or interesting to the conversation. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dayman Posted October 17, 2012 Share Posted October 17, 2012 No, I'll say whatever I want, go f yourself if you do not like it. If I want to answer Tom and his groupies stupidity with mocking stupidity I'll do it, no matter what some moron like you think I will. I'll argue however I want, you can criticize me all you want, whatever. You are very unimportant. Maybe you are fake Dem, just here to attack Dems? Are you Tom's other profile? LOL. I am not Tom's other profile. Maybe I am a fake Dem...but no Repub on this board would say that. I'm partisan as anyone who follows certain policies must be...but hate that 2 private organizations with expansive platforms control politics (if they had less expansive platforms it would be tolerable as it was in our nations history). As for you saying what you want, absolutely right. As for me saying what I want in response, absolutely right. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
B-Man Posted October 17, 2012 Author Share Posted October 17, 2012 CANDY CROWLEY INSERTED HERSELF INTO THE DEBATE, OUTRAGEOUSLY, to break up Romney’s most dramatic moment, when Romney was questioning what Obama said the day after the attack in Benghazi. Obama had said he’d called the attack an “act of terror” and Romney was staring him down about it. Crowley broke up the showdown, saying “He did in fact call it an act of terror,” which took the wind out of Romney’s sails. We were advised to check the transcript, but the dramatic moment was lost. The transcript shows Romney was right, and Crowley and Obama were wrong. ADDED: The phrase “acts of terror” does appear in the remarks: “No acts of terror will ever shake the resolve of this great nation, alter that character, or eclipse the light of the values that we stand for.” As Patrick Brennan says at NRO: “One could take that as a reference to acts which include the tragedy in Benghazi, obviously, but there was clearly no effort made to label it an act of terrorism. One reason why this might be: According to U.S. law, acts of terrorism are premeditated. The Obama administration’s line for days following Obama’s Rose Garden statement suggested that the attack wasn’t premeditated.” Posted by Ann Althouse http://pjmedia.com/instapundit/154373/ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
3rdnlng Posted October 17, 2012 Share Posted October 17, 2012 You're a !@#$ing douche bag. You were useless as DIN & you've devolved to worthless since changing names. You bring nothing insightful or interesting to the conversation. I wish he would just go the way of BF4E. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rob's House Posted October 17, 2012 Share Posted October 17, 2012 I wish he would just go the way of BF4E. I haven't been around here much lately. Was he banned or did he voluntarily !@#$ off? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chef Jim Posted October 17, 2012 Share Posted October 17, 2012 Agreed minus the idea someone on this board had credible info not available to us all Paul scared the crap out if me with the things he didn't tell us. I could tell he knew things he so wanted to share but knew he couldn't. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OCinBuffalo Posted October 17, 2012 Share Posted October 17, 2012 Fox dial thingies...show Obama flat on economy, Romney doing well. Democrats were ~60 on the whole thing, for both guys. Republicans big swing up for Romney, down for Obama. Hmmm...these Vegas people are pissed at Obama. (and...lots of plastic surgery....that probably seemed like a good idea...20 years ago. ) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dayman Posted October 17, 2012 Share Posted October 17, 2012 CANDY CROWLEY INSERTED HERSELF INTO THE DEBATE, OUTRAGEOUSLY, to break up Romney’s most dramatic moment, when Romney was questioning what Obama said the day after the attack in Benghazi. Obama had said he’d called the attack an “act of terror” and Romney was staring him down about it. Crowley broke up the showdown, saying “He did in fact call it an act of terror,” which took the wind out of Romney’s sails. We were advised to check the transcript, but the dramatic moment was lost. The transcript shows Romney was right, and Crowley and Obama were wrong. ADDED: The phrase “acts of terror” does appear in the remarks: “No acts of terror will ever shake the resolve of this great nation, alter that character, or eclipse the light of the values that we stand for.” As Patrick Brennan says at NRO: “One could take that as a reference to acts which include the tragedy in Benghazi, obviously, but there was clearly no effort made to label it an act of terrorism. One reason why this might be: According to U.S. law, acts of terrorism are premeditated. The Obama administration’s line for days following Obama’s Rose Garden statement suggested that the attack wasn’t premeditated.” Posted by Ann Althouse http://pjmedia.com/instapundit/154373/ This is pure stupidity. There is no other way to put it. It was a bad specific point for Romney to make, it was inaccurate and corrected b/c the moderator knew it was wrong and said so. If Romney wants to attack on Libya, let him do it based on the facts. The killing of US diplomats is an act of terror. Whether people knew to what extent it was premeditated at the time or separate from the protests or an opportunistic attack..that's an entirely different question. Do you think, OC that Romney would have stopped that from happening? It's as simple as that. What is your answer. And if you say no, that doesn't mean this can't be used as a political attack...it's just a key think to ask yourself at the outset. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KD in CA Posted October 17, 2012 Share Posted October 17, 2012 (edited) You're a !@#$ing douche bag. You were useless as DIN & you've devolved to worthless since changing names. You bring nothing insightful or interesting to the conversation. Don't feed the trolls. Eventually he'll take his sad, angry act elsewhere. btw....since all the Facebook people are complaining about moderators again, can I assume Obama didn't score a big win? Edited October 17, 2012 by KD in CT Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts