j44

Yeah, I Googled him and saw his current gig but didn't know about SOPA.

So you're admitting that your arguments are absurd? Also, you understand that being absurd undermines your case, right?

You're proving my point. The left fringe does portray Romney as being radical but the right fringe does the same with Obama. Shady, what's the difference between calling Romney an ultra-conservative nut and calling Obama a communist?

I don't know if we should be emulating the principles and procedures of the Mexican, Chinese and Saudi police.

Chris Dodd. There is a name I haven't heard in a long time.

Agreed. I generally think that if you have to blatantly lie in such a way about 'allies' your policy of supporting them is in trouble from the start.

I kind of see your point but I disagree a little. While our leaders say a foreign leader is moderate I don't think they all believe that. I believe anyone who knew Saddam's actions would not call him a moderate. Unless of course a US President needed to justify a close relationship with a leader to the American people. I don't know if he ever used the term moderate but I'm sure Reagan didn't think Saddam was one. I do believe Morsi is a moderate with regard to Egyptian politics. I don't think he is overly ideological, doesn't hate Jews and is probably reasonable in day to day political discussion with advisers.

Party platforms are often designed to appease the base. Giving Ron Paul time is a way to appeal to the libertarian wing of the party. Romney isn't scared. He is pandering (or depending on how you look at it not pandering). I'm not pretending these things are ok I just get sick of people screaming at the top of their lungs that they other side is full of idiots. Those rape comments were incredibly insensitive and wrong. He should be called out for it and then I would like to move on. If you want to continue yelling about it that is fine. I would rather discuss other things in a more civil way. That is just me though.

You are totally missing my point while providing more examples of what I said above. You are quoting the fringe of the GOP. One Senate candidate said that and a very, very small number of people backed him up. The vast, vast majority of the GOP called on him to quit. You are citing his comments and painting the entire GOP with that brush. Again, when the left does this they look just as ridiculous as when Shady does it.

We will see if they pursue that while in power or try to hold on as long as possible. I do think that they are more moderate than they are often portrayed. At least I think Morsi and those at the top are/will be. However, moderates can be dictatorial and power hungry too.

Yeah, I thought that was a bit much. Could be a sign of desperation; I don't think the GOP can win the Medicare debate. And I don't know if one elderly woman will help convince the average voter that Romney/Ryan will save Medicare.

Both sides do it. Romney isn't the fringe. He panders to the fringe to get support. Obama is doing it too. The Democratic base isn't as extreme (or as noticeable) when they are in power. When a party is out of power the fringe really comes out. My point was that the name calling doesn't get us anywhere.

The nicest call you've ever had was from a girl asking for money?

I’m still leaning in the I think Ryan wasn’t a great pick. I could be wrong and he could ignite the base enough to make the difference. Most polls show things are pretty close and for months I have been of the mind that this will be a very close election. Maybe Romney felt that he could compete with independents enough but really needed more enthusiasm from the base. While initially I thought it was a base pick (I’m not so sure how it will keep the enthusiasm up for months but who knows?) the more I think about it the more I think that it was done partly to change the subject from Mitt’s taxes, Bain and everything else he has been attacked for. And of course make Romney look like a true fiscal conservative and make the choice clearer. Because in my opinion, if this was just a base pick it wasn’t a good decision. Not that it didn’t excite the base but because that is all it may have done (while of course causing problems with Medicare). For about three weeks now Mitt has not been on message about the economy. Granted, I didn’t feel his campaign was doing well in the message category and he has been on his back foot for the most part even with the jobless rate and overall economic situation but why? Character wise he was being destroyed pretty successfully by Chicago and The White House and then he went overseas and made some stupid comments that didn’t help him. Then he comes back and announces the Ryan pick which changes the narrative (for a little while at least) to Ryan and (whether intentional or not) Medicare. As much as I think Ryan will help Romney be more at ease and more personable on the trail I don’t think talking about Medicare is good for Mitt. While I think most reasonable people would agree that Medicare needs reform I don’t think it is a winning message. To me, whether you agree with Ryan’s ideas or not that is beside the point with regard to the politics of it. Ryan’s ideas get into details. To win, Mitt needs to get independent voters and people who don’t...pay attention... to the gritty details of policies and plans. And I think this is a huge problem. So while I think Ryan excites a certain segment of the GOP it also could (and most certainly will) turn off some independents because even people that are concerned about government debt and the economy still like their entitlements. Whether Ryan excites more of the base than he turns off independents is something we will have to wait until November to see. I am an Obama supporter but he isn’t running on ideas-at least not on ideas that will work. While I think increasing taxes on the rich is a good idea in this case and it is great politics it isn’t a solution. I am not saying he doesn’t have some ideas about how to solve the country’s fiscal problems but he is not running on them. And for the record I think he would (if re-elected) strike a deal and seriously work toward dealing with the debt. And let’s face it, increasing taxes a few points on a small percentage of the population isn’t going to solve anything. But like I said, it is a good campaign message. Maybe Mitt thought that his campaign needed a boost by picking an ideas guy to change the narrative and show the American people that Mitt isn’t a flip flopper but I’m not sure people will be thinking that come November. Even if the job numbers continue on their current path I don’t think Mitt will win if he continues on his current path. Unless the economic numbers get worse (maybe they have to get much worse) he will not unseat the President. Romney might have some things up his sleeve that he will come out with after (or during) the convention but he needs to change some things. I, of course, have no idea how he can do that. If I didn’t I would be running his campaign but am I the only one that thinks he is on a losing path unless the economy gets worse and worse? There is always an October surprise. That could be the economy or it could be something else. Obama could bomb Iran and get re-elected by a landslide. At the same time, that would spike oil prices and possibly ruin and already fragile world economy and then President Romney. Also, there is a reason Mitt isn’t talking about the economy. I think if they really wanted to his campaign would be talking about it more. It is difficult to stay on message with these foolish rape comments and everything that gets in the way but is it just me or if Boston more off message than they should be? Mitt’s policies might or might not work to get the economy going again. I think if you summed up his tax policies to the average voter he or she wouldn’t really get behind them. Maybe that is it. Maybe he was getting hit too hard on the ‘Mitt wants to lower taxes for rich people like him.’ Maybe that is why they aren’t on message. Maybe Mitt hopes the jobs numbers keep going down and when November comes he will have a better shot. Does he have anything else?

I was trying to point out the foolishness and pointlessness of both sides acting like that. Nevermind.

Shady, why do you cite these things? What is the purpose? To show that there are idiots on the left? Isn't it the same as left wingers citing idiots on Fox? What's the point?

I think that military strength comes from economic strength. The opposite can be true but I believe economic tools are more efficient and useful. War is a means to protect and project economic interests and not vice versa.

At times, economic might can.

No, it won't.

Are you saying the banks are blameless?

Actually, it was both.

I wish people would stop countering the other sides' idiotic actions by acting idiotic.

I can't imagine the hate mail they get when they run Democratic ads.

Would Fox News run an Obama ad?

It still amuses me to this day. As does the Wild Rose destroying Redford's PCs. Really? I liked Layton and I think Mulcair is smart and capable but he doesn't come across as someone I would want to be friends with.