Smallc Posted September 5, 2012 Report Posted September 5, 2012 Why would they be putting that back in? Who cares? Quote
bud Posted September 5, 2012 Report Posted September 5, 2012 Omg! Did anyone else just see the convention delegates boo God and Jerusalem? Yikes! who cares? screw god and the religious battles over jerusalem. Quote http://whoprofits.org/
Smallc Posted September 5, 2012 Report Posted September 5, 2012 who cares? screw god and the religious battles over jerusalem. This may be the first time I agree with you. Quote
bud Posted September 5, 2012 Report Posted September 5, 2012 pelosi makes me want to vomit. why am i torturing myself? Quote http://whoprofits.org/
waldo Posted September 5, 2012 Report Posted September 5, 2012 Ann Romney is a likeable person. Michelle Obama is a hardass ideologue who is doing Barack with a strap on bi-weekly, guaranteed.Then they lay in bed, smoking a cigarette, looking at the ceiling and say to each other "someday, we're gone change this country into what Karl Marx dream so many years ago" seek help - start here: Quote
Shady Posted September 6, 2012 Author Report Posted September 6, 2012 Why would they be putting that back in? Who cares? Good question. But it was really bad optics. Quote
punked Posted September 6, 2012 Report Posted September 6, 2012 Why would they be putting that back in? Who cares? Obama said he couldn't run on that because they are nit his beliefs and asked them to Change it. Quote
Smallc Posted September 6, 2012 Report Posted September 6, 2012 You know, watching the DNC, in comparison to the RNC (I haven't paid that much attention to either) it's clear which party has more energy, and more drive. If this is any indication, Romney doesn't stand a chance. Quote
Smallc Posted September 6, 2012 Report Posted September 6, 2012 (edited) They have one of the most unimpressive line up of speakers that I've ever seen since being interested in politics and conventions. Oh yes, what a weak bunch of speakers they have at this convention.... Edited September 6, 2012 by Smallc Quote
cybercoma Posted September 6, 2012 Report Posted September 6, 2012 You know, watching the DNC, in comparison to the RNC (I haven't paid that much attention to either) it's clear which party has more energy, and more drive. If this is any indication, Romney doesn't stand a chance. Yeah, but we knew a looong time ago that Romney didn't have the support of the party. Quote
Smallc Posted September 6, 2012 Report Posted September 6, 2012 Yeah, but we knew a looong time ago that Romney didn't have the support of the party. The Republicans, after that speech, have a huge hill to climb. Quote
kimmy Posted September 6, 2012 Report Posted September 6, 2012 The Republicans, after that speech, have a huge hill to climb. Two more really strong speeches tonight from Elizabeth Warren and especially Bill Clinton. He did a really good job of replying to some of the fiction the Republicans have been pushing. -k Quote (╯°□°)╯︵ ┻━┻ Friendly forum facilitator! ┬──┬◡ﾉ(° -°ﾉ)
Smallc Posted September 6, 2012 Report Posted September 6, 2012 Two more really strong speeches tonight from Elizabeth Warren and especially Bill Clinton. He did a really good job of replying to some of the fiction the Republicans have been pushing. I would say there were three really strong speeches tonight...but you'd have to ask Shady. According to him, this convention has nothing but boring speakers. Quote
cybercoma Posted September 6, 2012 Report Posted September 6, 2012 Did Romney have any past presidents speak at the RNC? Quote
kimmy Posted September 6, 2012 Report Posted September 6, 2012 I would say there were three really strong speeches tonight...but you'd have to ask Shady. According to him, this convention has nothing but boring speakers.Which ones?Did Romney have any past presidents speak at the RNC? I don't think George H.W. Bush actually believes in the new Grover Norquist version of the Republican Party. And I think they'd have done just about anything to keep George Walker Bush from showing his face. -k Quote (╯°□°)╯︵ ┻━┻ Friendly forum facilitator! ┬──┬◡ﾉ(° -°ﾉ)
Smallc Posted September 6, 2012 Report Posted September 6, 2012 Which ones? Clinton, Warren, and Fluke. Quote
msj Posted September 6, 2012 Report Posted September 6, 2012 Andrew Coyne in today's Globe... Eventually it hits you. Perhaps it’s the sign language interpreters to one side of every podium. Maybe it’s the women in pantsuits, or the “recovery wellness rooms,” or the Service Employees International Union booth, but somewhere between the LGBT caucus and the Planned Parenthood rally you realize: we are among the Democrats now. The Tampa Republicans may not have been all that diverse, but they were unified. There really isn’t much in the way of wings, let alone “caucuses,” in today’s GOP. The only real division is between the establishment and the base: the former wants to be in government, the latter wants to abolish it. By contrast, the Democrats are a riot of competing interests and ideologies, a tent so big it is in constant danger of collapse. Ron Paul would not even speak at the RNC because Romeny demanded (rightfully so, imo) to be fully supported and wanted to see a preview of Paul's speech. So, instead, a little video was shown and Paul is on record as stating "I don't fully endorse him as President." As for what the RNC has become, well, I think this video sums it up quite nicely: A new guide to the Republican herd. The advantage of having less herds is that you can focus your message and keep most people within the smaller tent. The disadvantage is that it is a smaller tent. Quote If a believer demands that I, as a non-believer, observe his taboos in the public domain, he is not asking for my respect but for my submission. And that is incompatible with a secular democracy. Flemming Rose (Dutch journalist) My biggest takeaway from economics is that the past wasn't as good as you remember, the present isn't as bad as you think, and the future will be better than you anticipate. Morgan Housel http://www.fool.com/investing/general/2016/01/14/things-im-pretty-sure-about.aspx
Moonlight Graham Posted September 6, 2012 Report Posted September 6, 2012 Sandra Fluke = one of the best speeches I've ever seen, period. Quote "All generalizations are false, including this one." - Mark Twain Partisanship is a disease of the intellect.
kimmy Posted September 6, 2012 Report Posted September 6, 2012 Sandra Fluke = one of the best speeches I've ever seen, period. Really? Wow. I'm glad you guys liked her. I was really hoping she would have a good speech, but I was afraid she may have come across as whiny. I'm exactly her target demographic (or I would be, if I were American) so maybe that made me more critical of her. I really liked Sister Simone, the "Nun on the bus". I think that most religious voices in politics tend to be those of religious conservatives (for historical reasons, I gather, relating to the "Moral Majority" aligning itself with the Republicans many years ago.) So hearing from this very compassionate speaker was a really nice change. -k Quote (╯°□°)╯︵ ┻━┻ Friendly forum facilitator! ┬──┬◡ﾉ(° -°ﾉ)
Shady Posted September 6, 2012 Author Report Posted September 6, 2012 It's too bad Clinton and Obama can't switch places. Clinton could take over as president, and Obama could be, say, the ambassador to Kenya or something. Quote
Black Dog Posted September 6, 2012 Report Posted September 6, 2012 (edited) It's too bad Clinton and Obama can't switch places. Clinton could take over as president, and Obama could be, say, the ambassador to Kenya or something. I get it! Cuz he's black, right? And not an American! Edited September 6, 2012 by Black Dog Quote
Shady Posted September 6, 2012 Author Report Posted September 6, 2012 I get it! Cuz he's black, right? And not an American! Chill out, I'm being sarcastic. Except for the part of him switching with Bill. Quote
cybercoma Posted September 6, 2012 Report Posted September 6, 2012 Chill out, I'm being sarcastic. Except for the part of him switching with Bill. Sarcastic and racist. Quote
cybercoma Posted September 6, 2012 Report Posted September 6, 2012 Bill Clinton claimed that Democrats have created more jobs than Republicans. Fact-checkers note that it is actually true. The Claim: Clinton said that over the past half century almost twice as many jobs had been created when Democrats were in the White House as under Republican administrations.[snip] The Facts: Clinton’s math is correct. Using Bureau of Labor Statistics figures for the month each president took office, Democratic presidents presided over the creation of 42.3 million jobs and Republican chief executives saw 23.9 million. http://mobile.bloomberg.com/news/2012-09-06/bill-clinton-asserts-democrats-create-more-jobs-reality-check.html Quote
cybercoma Posted September 6, 2012 Report Posted September 6, 2012 If Michelle Obama's speech killed the entire Republican Convention, did Clinton's put the nail in the coffin? Quote
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.