vote for rickie, the pistol packing, predator prorogating president perry, [Archive]

View Full Version : vote for rickie, the pistol packing, predator prorogating president perry,

markabilly

22nd August 2011, 05:16

finally another good reason to vote for perry, besides him being somewhere else other than Texas

a real old fashion pistol packing, coyote killer......straighten out congress real quick

If elected president, Rick Perry could still jog with his gun

http://l.yimg.com/bt/api/res/1.2/2kDU8k2Q5Hs1cGNol_mjtA--/YXBwaWQ9eW5ld3M7cT04NTt3PTE5MA--/http://l.yimg.com/lk/api/res/1.2/7PujO9iHHSf0KjEYviYnIg--/YXBwaWQ9eW1lZGlhO2g9MzI1O3c9MzAw/http%3A//mit.zenfs.com/100/2011/08/rick-perry-gun.jpg Perry (Rodger Mallison/AP)

When Republican presidential candidate Rick Perry goes for a jog in Texas, the governor doesn't just throw on a pair of gym shorts and tennis shoes before dashing out the door. He also packs a concealed .380 Ruger (http://www.ruger.com/products/lcp/models.html) loaded with deadly hollow-point bullets, fully equipped with a laser-sight for precise killing. (What, you don't?)
He says he keeps it on him in case of an attack from wild animals. Last year, the Texas governor sent a coyote to canine heaven (http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2010/04/27/national/main6438660.shtml) with a single shot while he was exercising in Austin, claiming it had threatened his dog.
But if he were elected president, could Perry hypothetically continue to pack heat on his morning run? You're damn right he could.
The Ticket asked several constitutional scholars and presidential experts if a sitting president would be allowed to carry a gun if he wanted to, even if it meant breaking local law. Since the White House is located in Washington, D.C.--a city that bans carrying firearms--the answer isn't perfectly simple. As presidential scholar Kenneth R. Mayer of the University of Wisconsin put it, the legal questions would get "big, fat, and hairy in a hurry."

http://news.yahoo.com/blogs/ticket/elected-president-rick-perry-could-still-jog-gun-190824495.html

:D

but the real question is whether they will will let him use it in the debates to make a point.......YAHOO!!!

Eki

22nd August 2011, 05:52

Somehow that photo reminded me of Saddam Hussein:

http://2.bp.blogspot.com/_v1qE3Ofp5V0/SwEbEbHhr1I/AAAAAAAAFPg/-n4P6T8AGF4/s400/saddam_shooting_(AP).jpg

Bob Riebe

22nd August 2011, 06:41

Well as the firearm in the photo of Perry is in no way related to the asinine article, it does not surprise me you would try to make such an analogy BUT then your picture reminds me of this Democratic presidential candidate.

http://digitaljournalist.org/issue0309/images/life/dukakis.jpg

markabilly

22nd August 2011, 12:20

thought fishing rods were banned in britain....animal cruelty laws and such

ioan

23rd August 2011, 21:28

Nah, you'll have to shoot the fish otherwise you're not qualified to post in this thread!

Brown, Jon Brow

24th August 2011, 23:31

It would be quite interesting if the most powerful person in the world believed in Intelligent Design. :(

markabilly

25th August 2011, 13:34

Don't laugh, Rickie has jumped out to a commanding lead over his fellow repubes.....Bachmann is fading fast, and Rommney is a mere shadow compared to pistol packing Perry. What is it.....35% compared to 22% for Rommeny?? And only after being a late jumper

Unfortunately when it comes to sucking tit on fat corporations, mega-banks and Wall Street, Perry is even better at it than Obama, and unlike Obama, Perry does not hide that fact at all.

Do not under-estimate the next president of the USA

YYAAAAHHHHHOOOOOOOOOOOOO

and just when you thought it could not get any worse.............

Jag_Warrior

5th November 2011, 01:52

Don't laugh, Rickie has jumped out to a commanding lead over his fellow repubes.....Bachmann is fading fast, and Rommney is a mere shadow compared to pistol packing Perry. What is it.....35% compared to 22% for Rommeny?? And only after being a late jumper

And just like that, Perry has faded like the evening sun. Rather than a horse race, this is more like watching a bunch of three-legged mules racing in the Kentucky Derby. Is there a remaining crack-pot who HASN'T thrown his/her hat in the GOP ring (or at least danced around the edges)??? We've had the king of bankruptcy and ego, Donald Trump. We've had Silly Sarah Palin. We've had Michele "My Hubby Isn't as Gay as He Looks and Acts" Bachmann. We've had Newt "What Tiffany Account?!" Gingrich. Now we've got Herman "How You Doin', Baby?" Cain.

I figure Romney will just bide his time and take this sad nomination by default. And the part that I find funniest is, the one guy who can probably beat Obama in a national election is the one guy who "the base" Republicans can't stand. Unless they get one of their crack-pots as the nominee, I wonder how many of them will just stay at home on election day?

anthonyvop

5th November 2011, 14:33

I figure Romney will just bide his time and take this sad nomination by default. And the part that I find funniest is, the one guy who can probably beat Obama in a national election is the one guy who "the base" Republicans can't stand. Unless they get one of their crack-pots as the nominee,

Funny how those on the right are Crackpots but the Ubber-Liberal left wing President Obama is all but guaranteed re-election in your mind.

Obama is a lame duck. His own party is distancing themselves from his administration. He is this generations Jimmy Carter......But more damaging.

BDunnell

5th November 2011, 15:18

Funny how those on the right are Crackpots but the Ubber-Liberal left wing President Obama is all but guaranteed re-election in your mind.

Funny how those who make such statements always tend to write them so badly.

Roamy

5th November 2011, 16:21

As far as potential Presidents go - I would pick Perry right under my favorite Donald Trump.

Jag_Warrior

6th November 2011, 03:32

Funny how those on the right are Crackpots but the Ubber-Liberal left wing President Obama is all but guaranteed re-election in your mind.

Where did you get that from? Is that what I posted? No. Left or right has nothing to do with it. Democrat James Traficant was a crack-pot (IMO) and he was hardly "on the right". And I don't see Ron Paul as a crack-pot. Whether I agree with him on a particular issue or not, at least the man has the intellectual ability to present his positions in a logical fashion most of the time. I cannot say the same for those who I listed above.

Obama is a lame duck. His own party is distancing themselves from his administration. He is this generations Jimmy Carter......But more damaging.

I have no idea what the results of the 2012 election will be. But last time I checked, in order for a President to lose the office, someone has to beat him. And no, I don't think Herman Cain, Michele Bachmann or Rick Perry will be able to do that. Outside of "the base", the negatives on those people make their success in a national election pretty unlikely, IMO.

What I can't figure out though... why am I still getting fund raising letters from Sarah Palin? In fact, I can't figure out why I got the first one! Back during the CART/IRL Civil War, angry IRL fans used to sign me up for gay porn and spam me with that stuff. This must be one of my low-life "friends" who gave my mailing address to Silly Sarah. :mad:

Roamy

10th November 2011, 17:28

race aficionado

10th November 2011, 17:39

Well last night Perry pulled out the six shooter and shot himself :) Holy crap at this rate the only one left will be Obama (no pun intended) :) I am not sold that Romney is the real deal and cn beat Obama.

I stand by what I've always said: no matter what, given the current options, Obama will be the U. S. of A's president for four more years. Our forum members that cringe with this prospect of reality may just have to go ahead and accept this.

:s mokin:

chuck34

10th November 2011, 17:44

I stand by what I've always said: no matter what, given the current options, Obama will be the U. S. of A's president for four more years. Our forum members that cringe with this prospect of reality may just have to go ahead and accept this.

:s mokin:

Oh I've accepted that Obama will be two termer for a while now. Doesn't mean I have to like it. Doesn't mean that I don't fear for my country. Dosen't mean that I don't fear for my children's future (or even mine).

What a sad state our political affairs are in when Obama is the best we can come up with.

Roamy

10th November 2011, 17:46

Yes - No more Israel and a nuclear Iran - Man I better get my ass to Santiago!!

race aficionado

10th November 2011, 17:48

Yes - No more Israel and a nuclear Iran - Man I better get my ass to Santiago!!

What's with Chile - too many earthquakes - it must be the women then . . . .

:s mokin:

Bob Riebe

10th November 2011, 18:16

I stand by what I've always said: no matter what, given the current options, Obama will be the U. S. of A's president for four more years. Our forum members that cringe with this prospect of reality may just have to go ahead and accept this.

:s mokin:

That must be wishfill thinking as it can not be based on logic.

It seems too many are listening to the Rinos that run the Republican cluster-f of a party and not the people who voted in the last Fed. elections.

The actual candidate vs candidate campaign has not started yet, and right now talking heads on the radio are playing enough pre-recorded gaffs and "promises" THE OBAMA made that are outright lies, that if he gets re-elected this country actually deserves to go through the misery that will bring.

Rove's numbers got his ass handed to him while Bush was president and he is no smarter now than he was then.

Bob Riebe

10th November 2011, 18:21

Well last night Perry pulled out the six shooter and shot himself :) Holy crap at this rate the only one left will be Obama (no pun intended) :) I am not sold that Romney is the real deal and cn beat Obama.Perry and Romney are the ones only the Rinos think should run, not the conservative voters that took the house back and that is all.

If you remember Obama was considered in the same class as Cain when he said he would run for President, only unlike Obama Cain has actually run something and actually held a job in life.

The election is a long way off and any doomsday remarks are foolishness.

Jag_Warrior

10th November 2011, 18:43

Oh I've accepted that Obama will be two termer for a while now. Doesn't mean I have to like it. Doesn't mean that I don't fear for my country. Dosen't mean that I don't fear for my children's future (or even mine).

What a sad state our political affairs are in when Obama is the best we can come up with.

Obama is the best we can come up with because the opposition has spent WAY too much time on non-serious, unqualified candidates. What the (modern) GOP, the TEA party and others on the right have failed to accept is that the United States is a center-right country, not a far right (or far left) country... has been for quite some time. Center-right does not indicate a preference for a particular party, just a general political philosophy. So if massive time is wasted on attention wh***s like Donald Trump and Sarah Palin, complete flakes like Michele Bachmann, a guy who was maybe good at selling pizzas but knows less about foreign policy than even Palin, or a governor who makes that Miss Teen South Carolina chick look like she had her thoughts together... yeah, it's not that hard to see Obama as "the best that we can come up with".

I still think that if Romney gets the nomination, Obama will have a real fight on his hands. I understand the Evangelicals and TEA party types don't like him. But anyone that they do like has little chance of beating Obama for President (or Donald Duck for Chief Dog Catcher in most states). From what I've read, the TEA party movement has about the same positives among American voters as the Occupy Wall Street kids. Although I believe both movements have higher positives than Congress, Republicans in Congress and Democrats in Congress.

IMO, only when more Republicans finally step out of the right wing echo chamber they've created will they find greater national success. But if they keep putting people at the head of the pack, who most have no intention of voting for, they shouldn't be surprised that Obama is seen as a better option.

Rick Perry? I voted for George W. Bush in 2000. It's the only vote I've ever made in my life that I wish that I could take back. Including Nixon, I think he did more harm to this nation than any President since Herbert Hoover. So why in the world would I (or anyone else in their right mind) vote for his even dumber, brother-from-another-mother??? The only way I could ever see myself casting a vote for Perry would be if he was running against Michele Bachmann, Sarah Palin, Donald Trump or Herman Cain... even money against Newt Gingrich. I'd easily take Ron Paul over any of these goofs. Whether I agree with him on this issue or that, at least he's intellectually honest and fairly logical.

So if Obama wins another term, fate can't be blamed. Blame the opposition for not presenting a candidate that was worth voting for.

Eki

10th November 2011, 19:00

The only thing that was good in George W Bush was that he occasionally provided us with comedy. I think this Perry character could have it in him too:

Perry (http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2011/11/10/perrys-painful-performance-opens-door-wider-for-gingrich/)

Bob Riebe

10th November 2011, 20:48

Obama is the best we can come up with because the opposition has spent WAY too much time on non-serious, unqualified candidates. What the (modern) GOP, the TEA party and others on the right have failed to accept is that the United States is a center-right country, not a far right (or far left) country... has been for quite some time. Center-right does not indicate a preference for a particular party, just a general political philosophy. So if massive time is wasted on attention wh***s like Donald Trump and Sarah Palin, complete flakes like Michele Bachmann, a guy who was maybe good at selling pizzas but knows less about foreign policy than even Palin, or a governor who makes that Miss Teen South Carolina chick look like she had her thoughts together... yeah, it's not that hard to see Obama as "the best that we can come up with".

I still think that if Romney gets the nomination, Obama will have a real fight on his hands. I understand the Evangelicals and TEA party types don't like him. But anyone that they do like has little chance of beating Obama for President (or Donald Duck for Chief Dog Catcher in most states). From what I've read, the TEA party movement has about the same positives among American voters as the Occupy Wall Street kids. Although I believe both movements have higher positives than Congress, Republicans in Congress and Democrats in Congress.

IMO, only when more Republicans finally step out of the right wing echo chamber they've created will they find greater national success. But if they keep putting people at the head of the pack, who most have no intention of voting for, they shouldn't be surprised that Obama is seen as a better option.

Rick Perry? I voted for George W. Bush in 2000. It's the only vote I've ever made in my life that I wish that I could take back. Including Nixon, I think he did more harm to this nation than any President since Herbert Hoover. So why in the world would I (or anyone else in their right mind) vote for his even dumber, brother-from-another-mother??? The only way I could ever see myself casting a vote for Perry would be if he was running against Michele Bachmann, Sarah Palin, Donald Trump or Herman Cain... even money against Newt Gingrich. I'd easily take Ron Paul over any of these goofs. Whether I agree with him on this issue or that, at least he's intellectually honest and fairly logical.

So if Obama wins another term, fate can't be blamed. Blame the opposition for not presenting a candidate that was worth voting for.Romney is from the same mold as Bush, only he bends with the wind like a blade of grass.
Perry and Romey are both Rinos like Bush and thank God due to the T.E.A. party, conservatives finally have the guts to tell the Rinos where to shove their bs.
Obama is an incompetent lying fool. I agree if he win we deserve the garbage he represents, but the election is a long ways away and, maybe, inspite of the liberal press that is doing everything it can to destroy conservative candidates, I still have faith in the general population to give Obama the same send-off it gave Carter, who actually looks like a good president compared to Obama.
As bad as Bush was, we have in Obama what we probably would have had, had Bush lost either election. An incompetent idiot.

It is sad when in past elections we had to choose between a putz or incompetence, but that is what happened when the Rinos took over the Republican party, and the Rinos are are trying like hell to get it back.

chuck34

10th November 2011, 20:50

the TEA party and others on the right have failed to accept is that the United States is a center-right country, not a far right (or far left) country... has been for quite some time.

I agree the the US is a center-right country. But I would argue that the TEA party is actually center right, not far right as many would like us to believe. If you actually go to a TEA party rally, and actually listen to what is said by the speakers (not what the media says they said), you would see that they really are center-right. Unless you believe that fiscal disipline, limited government, and personal resonsibility are somehow far-right.

I still think that if Romney gets the nomination, Obama will have a real fight on his hands. I understand the Evangelicals and TEA party types don't like him. But anyone that they do like has little chance of beating Obama for President (or Donald Duck for Chief Dog Catcher in most states). .... IMO, only when more Republicans finally step out of the right wing echo chamber they've created will they find greater national success. But if they keep putting people at the head of the pack, who most have no intention of voting for, they shouldn't be surprised that Obama is seen as a better option.

Yeah, that's exactly what "they" said about McCain. Just nominate a centrist Republican, and the Dems will have no chance. Yep that worked out well. What people want (and of couse this is a generalization) is someone with strong fiscal conservative view points, and they don't waver from that. Romney doesn't live up to that. The Republican base may very well go out and vote for him, but they won't go out and work for him. So he won't really win over many independents. Many Republicans will just stay home. But the Dems will come out in force to support their guy. It'll be '08 all over again.

I'd easily take Ron Paul over any of these goofs. Whether I agree with him on this issue or that, at least he's intellectually honest and fairly logical.

I agree that he's intellecually honest and logicial. His foreign policy just scares the pants off me. I know he (and many here on these boards) doesn't believe that Iran having a nuke is an issue. However, they have expressly said that they will use a nuke against Isreal. And there aren't many people who believe they aren't working on nuke capability right now. So that's like your neighbor saying that he's going to kill his wife. Then you see him at the gun store, and think to yourself, eh who cares? Ok I know that's going to drag this way off topic now, sorry.

So if Obama wins another term, fate can't be blamed. Blame the opposition for not presenting a candidate that was worth voting for.

I don't blame fate. I blame the quality of people running. Heck if I was 35 I'd be tempted to run over these guys. :D

Bob Riebe

10th November 2011, 20:52

Jag_Warrior

12th November 2011, 01:39

I agree the the US is a center-right country. But I would argue that the TEA party is actually center right, not far right as many would like us to believe. If you actually go to a TEA party rally, and actually listen to what is said by the speakers (not what the media says they said), you would see that they really are center-right. Unless you believe that fiscal disipline, limited government, and personal resonsibility are somehow far-right.

I've done it many times myself, but I'm sure we both know that there are various TEA party groups, and there is no central message or true structure that necessarily links one to another. So it's likely that some are center right (fiscally and/or socially) and some are far right (fiscally and/or socially). The one that Fox News supported (TEA Party Express?), they apparently didn't get along with the original group or its founder. But I'm much more familiar with the TEA party (in my area) than you probably realize. A friend of mine just won a seat on a local Board of Supervisors this past Tuesday, and he's a member of a TEA party group. I got to know him last year and I sat in his house getting to know him for several hours on our first meeting. He's a good guy. I found out he'd won the seat when sent me an invite on LinkedIn yesterday. But he really is a fiscal conservative/libertarian. He's also a social libertarian. One of his biggest issues is legalizing hemp growing (not for smoking, but industrial hemp). So let's take Michele Bachmann and Sarah Palin. Let's pretend for a second that they are actual fiscal conservatives (or as Sarah once spelled it, a "physical" conservative). Unlike my friend, they are most certainly not social libertarians. They are Evangelicals/Christian Right type people on social issues. But Michele often calls herself a "libertarian". :rolleyes: So like other political movements that gain some traction, that's what I see in many TEA party people, who strive for higher office or greater popularity: they learn to sing the right songs, but what they've been for most of their lives (on the social side, in this case) doesn't just disappear.

I'd say that you, my friend and myself could sit and have a civil discussion on economics or social issues. But from what I know of him, he wouldn't waste his time sitting in the same room with someone like Michele Bachmann. He also has no use for Obama. But that doesn't mean that he'd put a complete goof, like Bachmann, in the White House just because she claims to be a "fiscal conservative". Heck, I can claim to be Jewish. But I'll be honest with you... I'm going to have myself a big sausage and egg biscuit the first chance I get. Hmm good! :D Just saying something does not make it so. Right?

Yeah, that's exactly what "they" said about McCain. Just nominate a centrist Republican, and the Dems will have no chance. Yep that worked out well. What people want (and of couse this is a generalization) is someone with strong fiscal conservative view points, and they don't waver from that. Romney doesn't live up to that. The Republican base may very well go out and vote for him, but they won't go out and work for him. So he won't really win over many independents. Many Republicans will just stay home. But the Dems will come out in force to support their guy. It'll be '08 all over again.

Who is "they", because I don't recall that being any sort of meaningful message. McCain lost, but he (and his "barely legal" conservative running mate) would have likely been beaten even worse if they'd sung the praises of the far right during the election. After Bush and the neocons, who in the world wanted to hear that? Who wants to hear it even now? Remember what the American people were going through then... and are still going through. I'm an NRA Life Member. And I know quite a few NRA members and fellow gun club shooters who held the same belief as that guy that was interviewed before the election: "I love my guns... but I love my family more." That was a VERY scary time. And some people, who would have otherwise NEVER voted for him, were willing to go for Obama. Now I don't think Obama will get many of those votes this time. But I also don't see them voting for just any chatterbox... just so it's not Obama. Some... but not enough that one of the goofballs could win nationally. If these various TEA party groups believe that, then I invite them to run Bachmann, Trump, Cain or whomever on a 3rd party ticket. Let's see how that works out. Even if the GOP fell in line with them and supported a goof, it would still be a bloodbath nationally, IMO. Like I said, outside of "the base", these people just aren't that popular. And the more they talk, the more their negatives seem to go up.

I agree that he's intellecually honest and logicial. His foreign policy just scares the pants off me. I know he (and many here on these boards) doesn't believe that Iran having a nuke is an issue. However, they have expressly said that they will use a nuke against Isreal. And there aren't many people who believe they aren't working on nuke capability right now. So that's like your neighbor saying that he's going to kill his wife. Then you see him at the gun store, and think to yourself, eh who cares? Ok I know that's going to drag this way off topic now, sorry.

On most issues, Ron Paul is an across the board libertarian. He has taken some positions which are not, but to be a true libertarian one believes that if a person takes it upon himself to smoke weed, make pornography for his own enjoyment, engage in homosexual acts, own a gun, grow tobacco on his own land, etc., etc., it's his own business. And the same holds true of foreign policy. Libertarians (small "l") have a hard time understanding why every problem that has to do with Israel means that the U.S. also has a problem. No! If we are expected to look out for ourselves as Americans, why do we need to send our boys to die for someone else overseas... and pay tribute to smaller powers like we're the conquered? I fully agree with that libertarian viewpoint. If libertarianism is good for American citizens, then by golly, it's good for everybody that asks us for handouts too.

I don't blame fate. I blame the quality of people running. Heck if I was 35 I'd be tempted to run over these guys. :D

Maybe you and Tim Pawlenty could hook up on a ticket? :D From what little I know of him, Tim Pawlenty seems like a fairly reasonable guy. I don't agree with all of his views, but unlike Bachmann, Cain, Perry, Palin, Trump and a host of other TEA party champions, he seems to be a learned and rational man. And maybe that was his problem: he wasn't "sexy" enough. The TEA party (IMO) would get MUCH more support, outside of "the base", if it was more like United We Stand. Now that was a beautiful political movement (overall). But this whooping, hollering, hyperbole and illogical crazy talk turns a lot of people off, yours truly included. But like I said, when you live in an echo chamber, you don't realize how far away from the normal distribution you are. And I think that's the biggest problem the TEA party groups have.

Jag_Warrior

12th November 2011, 01:50

It is sad when in past elections we had to choose between a putz or incompetence, but that is what happened when the Rinos took over the Republican party, and the Rinos are are trying like hell to get it back.

I know what R.I.N.O. stands for. But what I've always wondered is, who gets to decide who is or is not a R.I.N.O.? Who is the gatekeeper? Who gets to hold the litmus paper while the candidate takes a whizz on it? Sounds like a pissy job, IMO. :D

BTW, if Jack Kemp was still alive today, would he be considered a "real Republican" or would the Conservative Lords on High deem him to be a R.I.N.O.???

Bob Riebe

12th November 2011, 02:25

Maybe you and Tim Pawlenty could hook up on a ticket? :D From what little I know of him, Tim Pawlenty seems like a fairly reasonable guy. I don't agree with all of his views, but unlike Bachmann, Cain, Perry, Palin, Trump and a host of other TEA party champions, he seems to be a learned and rational man. And maybe that was his problem: he wasn't "sexy" enough. The TEA party (IMO) would get MUCH more support, outside of "the base", if it was more like United We Stand. Now that was a beautiful political movement (overall). But this whooping, hollering, hyperbole and illogical crazy talk turns a lot of people off, yours truly included. But like I said, when you live in an echo chamber, you don't realize how far away from the normal distribution you are. And I think that's the biggest problem the TEA party groups have.Pawlenty, is a Rino, he is more conservative than some Rinos but still too far left in too many matters.
Which is why he supports Romney the blade of grass Rino, who bends with any wind he thinks might get him elected.

He had one of his FEES go in the ****ter, when the Minn. Supreme Court said that he could call it what he wanted to but it was still an illegal tax.

---------------------
Jack Kemp would be judged by his stance on political manners, nothing more, nothing less.

Jag_Warrior

12th November 2011, 03:27

Again, who makes up this body which determines who is a R.I.N.O?

Bob Riebe

12th November 2011, 03:47

Again, who makes up this body which determines who is a R.I.N.O?The voting public which is why the T.E.A exists.
Any Republican who attacks the T.E.A. party is probably a Rino.

Jag_Warrior

12th November 2011, 04:06

So any Republican who isn't down with the TEA party is a R.I.N.O.? M'kay... works for me. Just curious.

Alexamateo

12th November 2011, 04:41

Bob Riebe

12th November 2011, 05:56

Heck, Ronald Reagan would be a RINO if he were around today. :D Talk like a supply-sider, but spend like a Keynesian, and Lord knows, he'd catch it for his views on immigration.

It's gotten where if I see someone calling someone else a RINO, I tend to discount their views. Keep up the ideological purity tests and your tent gets smaller and smaller. It has certainly made me turn away as my views would put me in the RINO camp. I guess I'll just have to find another home.
That is what the Constitution, which is the base camp for the so called T.E.A., says is your right.

Rinos such as Bush, crapped all over it.

Reagan was very good for that moment in time. Compared to Carter even another Democrat would have been better-- but not as great as some talking heads, especially one on Fox who seemed to be paranoid about Hillary Clinton, made him out to be.

markabilly

12th November 2011, 14:53

I am very very upset at what has happenned to Perry.

And so is Donkey Jote.

What really affected Perry was the stuff about this hunting camp that his dad started going to many many years ago, where someone wrote "n*****head" on a rock, also many years ago. Over the years, that had been painted over, the rock turned, but folks say it was still visible. Well, I say so what? Last time I was in a new york subway, I saw far worse written all over the walls. On that we decide who to vote for? :rolleyes:

Meanwhile Cain is showing he is more qualified than Billyboy Clinton was to be president, with bimbo eruptions all over the place.....soon he might be ahead of Billy. :eek:

What upsets me is that this probably means Texas will end up still stuck with him. :bigcry:

What upsets Donkey Jote, is that this means that Perry will not be selling the nation's highway system to this company from Spain to turn into toll roads like Perry has been doing with all the roads in Texas :bigcry:

That lost income will probably push Spain into bankruptcy next to Greece......... :dozey:

Rollo

13th November 2011, 01:36

Bob Riebe

13th November 2011, 07:20

After checking the opinion polls following the "oops heard around the world" and Herman "Sugar" Cain moving upwards despite horrible scandals, I wouldn't be surprised if Newt Gingrich sneaks back into a potential position.At least one woman accused candidate Clinton of attemped rape, but for some reason the press did not give that one onehundreth the coverage they have given accusations against Cain that have amounted to "He used horny speech on me."

Jag_Warrior

14th November 2011, 04:39

At least one woman accused candidate Clinton of attemped rape, but for some reason the press did not give that one onehundreth the coverage they have given accusations against Cain that have amounted to "He used horny speech on me."

Are we talking about Kathleen Willey? The same woman who was on 60 Minutes and a host of other news shows? She also had a book out a few years ago: "Target: Caught in the Crosshairs of Bill and Hillary Clinton". I saw her on Fox News. Given what she had to work with, I'm not sure how much more attention she wanted. Seemed like she got quite a bit, as I recall.

As for Cain, what the one woman (represented by Allred) claims would amount to assault. She claims that he laid hands on her - and that is (legally) an assault. Personally, I don't believe her, but the claim was not just "horny speech".

And hey, I'm not going to say that the women who came out of the woodwork on Clinton did or did not get as much attention as the one being represented by Gloria "Sewer Rat" Allred (I suspect that one is playing Grab The Money & Run). Personally, I think that people who take settlements and then slither off have no business being paid much attention to when they show up 15 years later. This isn't an anti-woman statement. But in this society we make it entirely too easy for a woman to smear a man's reputation with no fear of prosecution or consequences. We also allow those involved in entertainment and sports to have a free ride in the justice system here. But that's going off topic, onto people like Lohan and the Penn State situation, so I'll stop right there.

chuck34

14th November 2011, 17:48

... snip ...

So you know a guy in a TEA Party, he's even an elected official. Cool. :s mokin: That doesn't mean that you are some sort of expert. Nor does it mean I'm an expert, although I have slightly more "credentals" than you. All I'm saying is that I would clasify most TEA Party groups as center-right. Calls for limited government (Constitutionality), and fiscal sanity in government are center-right in my book. I have yet to hear anyone at a rally talk one lick about any social issues. Except maybe something along the lines of personal/family responsibilites, etc. Bachmann? Palin? I haven't heard them speak, or even mentioned at the local rallies I've been to. They just wanted to co-opt the movement for their own personal gain. I suppose they're allowed to do that, but they've pretty much been "found out" for what they are.

You seriously don't recall many media outlets telling us all that the Republicans should nominate a "moderate" like McCain over a "conservative" like Romney? {Funny that looking back :) ) You must not have been paying much attention then. I know you (and most) will disagree, but I do believe that when McCain "suspended" his campain to work on the crisis, that had he called for no bailouts that many conservatives in the Republican base would have stopped holding their nose or worse, and voted for him. Not saying that he would have won, but I do believe it would have been closer. Many people (myself included) were/are? looking for a leader with a spine that knows there are consequeces for bad behaviour. And no, I can't prove that, but I'm sure I'll be blasted for my opinion all the same.

Pawlenty? I don't know much about him. That was probably his problem, someone as tuned into politics as I am really doesn't know much about him.

Jag_Warrior

14th November 2011, 20:23

Well, if the U.S. is indeed a center-right nation, for some reason, the TEA party has more opposition than support these days. Interesting that the TEA party is no more favored in most broad polls than a supposedly "left wing" movement: Occupy Wall Street (http://www.politico.com/news/stories/1011/66224.html). So either the U.S. isn't as center-right as some/most think it is, or the TEA party isn't perceived to be as center-right as you think it is.

(http://www.gallup.com/poll/148940/Tea-Party-Sparks-Antipathy-Passion.aspx)The national Tea Party movement appears to have lost some ground in popular support after the blistering debate over raising the nation's debt ceiling in which Tea Party Republicans in the U.S. House and Senate fought any compromise on taxes and spending. Fourteen percent of Americans consider themselves strong supporters of the Tea Party movement, and, perhaps not coincidentally, 12% of the public consists of conservative Republicans who wanted members of Congress who shared their views on the budget to hold out for a deal they could agree with. That is according to a July 15-17 Gallup poll on the debt ceiling debate. (http://www.gallup.com/poll/148940/Tea-Party-Sparks-Antipathy-Passion.aspx)
http://www.gallup.com/poll/148940/Tea-Party-Sparks-Antipathy-Passion.aspx
Along with the decline in overall support for the Tea Party from 30% to 25% in recent months, Gallup finds more Americans holding intensely negative feelings toward the movement than intensely positive feelings. It thus appears that, to date, the Tea Party's leadership and activities may have been more successful at galvanizing the movement's opponents than expanding its base of passionate supporters. (http://www.gallup.com/poll/148940/Tea-Party-Sparks-Antipathy-Passion.aspx)

All this to say, what you may perceive to be "center-right" may not be what many/most other people perceive to be "center-right".

chuck34

14th November 2011, 23:34

Dave B

15th November 2011, 08:50

Knock-on

15th November 2011, 10:57

As an outsider looking in, Obama has been a massive disappointment in office. He promised so much, yet so little has changed. However the thought of bible-bashing anti-abortion climate-change denying warmongers getting into power terrifies the tripe out of me, and that's all the opposition seems to have on offer.

Obama seems to have run out of ideas and steam but the alternatives scare the bejezus out of me. The world could become a very dangerous place, very quickly.

Bob Riebe

15th November 2011, 19:27

As an outsider looking in, Obama has been a massive disappointment in office. He promised so much, yet so little has changed. However the thought of bible-bashing anti-abortion climate-change denying warmongers getting into power terrifies the tripe out of me, and that's all the opposition seems to have on offer.As no one who fits your bizarre dream is running for the presidential office, you are running from shadows.

Bob Riebe

15th November 2011, 19:32

Obama seems to have run out of ideas and steam but the alternatives scare the bejezus out of me. The world could become a very dangerous place, very quickly.Yeah tell that to the people of Syria, or Eygpt or Kyrgyzstan or....
Yep Obama and his band of socialist twits have made the world such a safe place.

BDunnell

15th November 2011, 19:35

As no one who fits your bizzare dream is running for the presidential office, you are running from shadows.

Yes, the Republicans couldn't possibly have a reasonable, sensible moderate running for office, could they?

It says a lot that the mainstream right in Europe finds what has become the mainstream right in the US quite a frightening thing. When I read that someone finds the notion of a Presidential candidate not being a religious extremist, not being anti-abortion, not being a climate change denier and not being a warmongerer 'bizarre' (note correct spelling — why is it people of your political beliefs always use English so badly?) one begins to understand why.

Bob Riebe

15th November 2011, 20:01

Yes, the Republicans couldn't possibly have a reasonable, sensible moderate running for office, could they?

It says a lot that the mainstream right in Europe finds what has become the mainstream right in the US (it should be U.S.) quite a frightening thing. When I read that someone finds the notion of a Presidential candidate not being a religious extremist, not being anti-abortion, not being a climate change denier and not being a warmongerer 'bizarre' (note correct spelling — why is it people of your political beliefs always use English so badly?) one begins to understand why.
Thank you for the spelling correction, and I mean that in serious manner as if it looked wrong, it proably was wrong.
(I think the wording you meant to say is: spell English so badly.
What you wrote makes no sense as the opposite would be to say: use English so well- which has nothing to do with grammatical errors.)
ANYWAY.

Because no one that fits the vacuous paranoid parameters, that you/he have listed, is running for office.

The mainstream right, however you may define that, are all governed by socialist governments of various construct; therefore their opinion (what you wrote is just your opinion of their opinion) is skewed by the policital attitudes they were raised in. None of them were raised in anything in Europe, that even remotely mimics that of the U.S.

BDunnell

15th November 2011, 20:04

Thank you for the spelling correction, and I mean that in serious manner as if it looked wrong, it proably was wrong.
(I think the wording you meant to say is: spell English so badly.
What you wrote makes no sense as the opposite would be to say: use English so well- which has nothing to do with grammatical errors.)
ANYWAY.

Because no one that fit the vacuous paranoid parameters, that you/he have listed, is running for office

Good answer!

Rollo

15th November 2011, 22:22

CNN Poll:
CNN Poll: Gingrich soars, Cain drops (http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/2011/11/14/cnn-poll-gingrich-soars-cain-drops/)

PPP Poll:
Gingrich Leads in PPP Poll, Followed by Cain - By Katrina Trinko - The Corner - National Review Online (http://www.nationalreview.com/corner/283138/gingrich-leads-ppp-poll-followed-cain-katrina-trinko)

CNN: Romney 24, Gingrich 22, Cain 14, Perry 12
PPP: Gingrich 28, Cain 25, Romney 18, Perry 6

PPP is a Democratic (I use the word in the titular sense, not the adjective) polling agency. The more tumultuous the primary, the better it is for Dems. PPP might be fine outside of the primary season, but I wouldn't trust them with primary polling of the opposition.
The fact that Newt Gringich is winning in any poll is pretty ridiculous.

Both Cain and Gingrich haven't had enough time in the spotlight to get their unfavorables up.
. (Though Cain is working on it!) (http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2011/nov/15/herman-cain-libya-blunder-doubt)

donKey jote

15th November 2011, 22:44

. (Though Cain is working on it!) (http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2011/nov/15/herman-cain-libya-blunder-doubt)

In an earlier interview he said one priority would be to stop China acquiring nuclear weapons, unaware it has had them since the 1960s.
...
Asked how he would deal with Iran's alleged ambition of securing a nuclear weapon, he said that the US, by exploiting domestic energy sources, would undercut Iranian oil prices, making the nuclear option too expensive for Tehran
sweet :)

Bob Riebe

16th November 2011, 00:34

DexDexter

16th November 2011, 07:27

As an outsider looking in, Obama has been a massive disappointment in office. He promised so much, yet so little has changed. However the thought of bible-bashing anti-abortion climate-change denying warmongers getting into power terrifies the tripe out of me, and that's all the opposition seems to have on offer.

But at least he has a passport. I bet many of those Republican candidates have never even left the American continent. Bush hadn't.

monadvspec

16th November 2011, 20:11

BDunnell

16th November 2011, 20:19

Eh :s hrugs: Movements have their ups. Movements have their downs. I'll grant you this is a down time for the TEA party. But as the election moves closer, I bet either they will gain traction again. Or another group, or candidate will champion their cause(s).

And the rest of the world, whether right or left, will continue to consider them absurd.

Jag_Warrior

16th November 2011, 20:39

Yep, we definitely need to get a good neocon back in office. It is our God given duty to save the rest of the world... whether the rest of the world wants to be saved or not.

I mean, we can't let the Chinese get nuclear (or "nukyular" as the last one said it) weapons. And the Iranians... what a bunch of ingrates. We spent all this time and money taking out their major enemy (Iraq) and what do they do? They whip around and continue developing nuclear weapons themselves. And you folks know what nuclear weapons are, doncha? WMD's! WMD's! WMD's! :bounce: Call up the 82nd Airborne! And to the rest of the world, just remember, if you ain't with us on this, you is agin us on this. We're a gonna stamp out this communist, socialist Muslimism once and for all! Is you with us???!!! Or is you not???!!! Yeehaw! Attack!!!!! :dork:

Plus, another (senseless) war would be a darn good cure for Industral Disease. :)

sXJ0E1TYN-E

donKey jote

16th November 2011, 21:00

donKey jote

16th November 2011, 21:02

chuck34

17th November 2011, 00:03

I'm getting lost here. Please help me out. What does T.E.A. Party stand for and what is a Rino? I know what a R.I.N.O is and what a the Tea party is but not the T.E.A. Pary or Rino. Are these new and where did they come from. What doe the letters T.E.A. stand for (mean) and what on earth is a rino?

Thanks in advance.

I belive Bob Riebe has used these names or organizations in some of his/her posts.

T.E.A party, and tea party are the same just different spellings. Taxed Enough Already

R.I.N.O. and rino are the same thing just different spellings. Repubican In Name Only

chuck34

17th November 2011, 00:04

And the rest of the world, whether right or left, will continue to consider them absurd.

Ok. And I should worry about that because ....? Did your mom ever use the expression what if everyone else jumped off a bridge?

Bob Riebe

17th November 2011, 03:18

I'm getting lost here. Please help me out. What does T.E.A. Party stand for and what is a Rino? I know what a R.I.N.O is and what a the Tea party is but not the T.E.A. Pary or Rino. Are these new and where did they come from. What doe the letters T.E.A. stand for (mean) and what on earth is a rino?

Thanks in advance.

I belive Bob Riebe has used these names or organizations in some of his/her posts.
Taxed Enough Already-- is a group that actually exists; whereas- Republican in name only, or Rino- is an adjective, usually modifying, the he in a sentence. they are sometines called Democrat light, and do not represent Repulican standards.
Hence the reason I write T.E.A. party and Rino which would be the most correct manner.

monadvspec

17th November 2011, 20:36

Thanks Bob and Chuck. I was being a little sarcastic with my comment but you set me straight. I did not realize that there was an actual long version to the TEA party name. I always thought it was just a reference to the Boston Tea party and nothing more.

Now I am educated a little more on the politics of these fringe groups.

Thanks you.

BDunnell

17th November 2011, 20:51

Ok. And I should worry about that because ....? Did your mom ever use the expression what if everyone else jumped off a bridge?

Would you not prefer to live in a country where politicians considered mainstream domestically are not the object of fear and ridicule elsewhere? Sarah Palin always springs to mind. Conservatives in the UK found her laughable.

anthonyvop

17th November 2011, 20:53

Now I am educated a little more on the politics of these fringe groups.

Thanks you.

Fringe groups? The Tea Party?

You have a lot to learn my friend.

anthonyvop

17th November 2011, 20:56

BDunnell

17th November 2011, 21:11

Why should I care what other countries think about us? I want my President to act for what is best for MY COUNTRY. If other countries like it...great. if not? BoooHoooo!

I was already aware of your point of view on this, I think.

chuck34

17th November 2011, 23:48

Would you not prefer to live in a country where politicians considered mainstream domestically are not the object of fear and ridicule elsewhere? Sarah Palin always springs to mind. Conservatives in the UK found her laughable.

Honestly no I don't care what other countries think. If we do what is right for us that is our prerogative.

When did Sarah Palin get elected as some sort of national leader? She's not even running for anything. Whay do you continue to use her as some sort of slur against conservatives? She is popular among some, but she saw the writing on the wall and knew that a run for President would be a disaster. She's does not represent anyone at this point. She is not my "ideal" conservative. I do not support her, nor do i defend her world view.

Do I need to dig up the name of some failed liberal politicians so that i can continue to play this petty game with you?

Bob Riebe

17th November 2011, 23:55

Would you not prefer to live in a country where politicians considered mainstream domestically are not the object of fear and ridicule elsewhere? Sarah Palin always springs to mind. Conservatives in the UK found her laughable.Sarah Palin comes to mind and Biden does not?
That is a nice case of blind prejudice or simple ignorance.

BDunnell

17th November 2011, 23:57

Honestly no I don't care what other countries think. If we do what is right for us that is our prerogative.

Just as it is the prerogative of any country's leaders to do what they feel is right for them — or do you not extend your point of view that far?

When did Sarah Palin get elected as some sort of national leader? She's not even running for anything. Whay do you continue to use her as some sort of slur against conservatives? She is popular among some, but she saw the writing on the wall and knew that a run for President would be a disaster. She's does not represent anyone at this point. She is not my "ideal" conservative. I do not support her, nor do i defend her world view.

None of this provides any reason not to bring her name up. If I wish to do so, I will do so, thank you. She strikes me as an ideal example to cite, given her prominence and the reaction she provoked even from those on the right in other countries. Why should I not express an opinion about her on the grounds that she was never elected as a national leader?

Do I need to dig up the name of some failed liberal politicians so that i can continue to play this petty game with you?

You seem to assume that everyone is as virulently partisan as you are — that the mention of such names would cause great offence.

BDunnell

18th November 2011, 00:02

Sarah Palin comes to mind and Biden does not?
That is a nice case of blind prejudice or simple ignorance.

Oh, Biden would have been laughed off the national stage in many other Western countries too, while it is hard to imagine Francois Mitterrand reaching such prominence in many other European nations given the murky nature of his background. But you will forgive me for not being overly concerned about being seen as balanced in your eyes.

chuck34

18th November 2011, 00:20

Just as it is the prerogative of any country's leaders to do what they feel is right for them — or do you not extend your point of view that far?

None of this provides any reason not to bring her name up. If I wish to do so, I will do so, thank you. She strikes me as an ideal example to cite, given her prominence and the reaction she provoked even from those on the right in other countries. Why should I not express an opinion about her on the grounds that she was never elected as a national leader?

You seem to assume that everyone is as virulently partisan as you are — that the mention of such names would cause great offence.

You've set up a nice little game there. One where you can "insult" me and somehow score points with the mere mention of Sarah Palin. Yet you have declared yourself somehow immune to similar tactics. Forgive me if I refrain from playing along.

BDunnell

18th November 2011, 00:23

You've set up a nice little game there. One where you can "insult" me and somehow score points with the mere mention of Sarah Palin. Yet you have declared yourself somehow immune to similar tactics. Forgive me if I refrain from playing along.

Not at all. I can assure you that my comments are absolutely not made, nor any questions posed, with that intention. They are meant genuinely.

chuck34

18th November 2011, 00:31

Not at all. I can assure you that my comments are absolutely not made, nor any questions posed, with that intention. They are meant genuinely.

Whatever. You clearly brought up Palin's name (which is no way connected to the original point) to mock and ridicule conservatives. Then when it is pointed out that conservatives have basically told her where to go, you make the childish excuae along the lines of I don't care she's a conservative you're a conservative so i still get to laugh at you. Ha ha ha. But if one were to dare bring up similar liberals you claim "no fair no fair". It's a childish game.

Why not just debate the points instead of invoking failed politicians with no bearing upon the argument at hand?

markabilly

18th November 2011, 01:00

TEA= goodies
RINO= baddies

Pay Donkey no mind, he is just think of teabagging

Meanwhile I am thinkin that perry should move and run for president of Greece. That would make both Texas and Greece a lot more smarter.

Jag_Warrior

19th November 2011, 07:51

Pay Donkey no mind, he is just think of teabagging

Meanwhile I am thinkin that perry should move and run for president of Greece. That would make both Texas and Greece a lot more smarter.

OK, I understand how Palin got elected governor of Alaska. There's only 20 people who live there to begin with... 5 of them were under 18, 6 were dog drunk on election day and 5 of the remaining 9 were related to her (that woman sure is fertile), so she won. But now, how in the world did you folks in Texas get tricked into voting for this complete goofball for governor? I've spent a fair amount of time in Texas. It's not a bad place, depending on which section you're in. And the DFW area, I actually liked quite a bit... came very close to moving there several years ago. So how bad was the Rickster's opponent that you folks picked him? I mean, was Daffy Duck or one of the Muppets running against him or something??? Seriously, the dude makes Michele Bachmann seem (somewhat) intelligent and sane.

And here's the icing on the cake, "the base" is so wound up about letting Romney get the nod... they seem set to drag Newt Gingrich back into the race. On the one hand, it's rather funny. But since I live here, it's also sad. I guess we've let our national politics become so corrupt and filthy that decent, intelligent people refuse to put their hats in the ring. Just for a second, think about the immense intellectual horsepower that we have at many of our major corporations... and then think about the village idiots we have in Congress right now. Especially in the House, I'd say that a great many of them can't even do simple math. And so, here we are.

Bob Riebe

19th November 2011, 19:30

Jag_Warrior

20th November 2011, 19:09

The 2008 election proved your point better that anything.
We have Marxist Chicago scum for a President, and a raving lunatic for a Vice President all funded by the most Wall Street funded president ever.
Brilliant!

You forgot Socialist/Communist/Islamist/Fascist.

But whether one agrees with Obama's positions or not (or wants to make up things that he is nor isn't), that still does not excuse the rather incredible (and quite obvious) lack of intellect when it comes to Perry, Cain, Bachmann and Palin. There is just no way to spin that, IMO.

Rollo

20th November 2011, 19:25

I guess we've let our national politics become so corrupt and filthy that decent, intelligent people refuse to put their hats in the ring. Just for a second, think about the immense intellectual horsepower that we have at many of our major corporations... and then think about the village idiots we have in Congress right now. Especially in the House, I'd say that a great many of them can't even do simple math. And so, here we are.

Either you're not paying politicians enough money and so market forces have dictated that better people remain in private industry.
OR
Private industry has sufficient power to keep the Congress feeble. How many major corporations paid zero in taxation last year, for instance?

Jag_Warrior

20th November 2011, 21:06

Either you're not paying politicians enough money and so market forces have dictated that better people remain in private industry.
OR
Private industry has sufficient power to keep the Congress feeble. How many major corporations paid zero in taxation last year, for instance?

I'd say it's some combination of the above - though if you look at our campaign finance and insider trading laws, they've found ways to pay themselves quite well, that aren't available to the average citizen. And I'd also add, our nation (and maybe the world) has a dreadful shortage of people with a sense of (res) public(a) duty, such as the legendary (and maybe somewhat mythical) Lucius Cincinnatus had. I think most people in general, and politicians in particular, are in a mode of "what's in it for me?". I can see the problem, but I have no real answer on how to correct it.

Bob Riebe

22nd November 2011, 05:13

You forgot Socialist/Communist/Islamist/Fascist.

But whether one agrees with Obama's positions or not (or wants to make up things that he is nor isn't), that still does not excuse the rather incredible (and quite obvious) lack of intellect when it comes to Perry, Cain, Bachmann and Palin. There is just no way to spin that, IMO.
No only you mentioned socialist, communist, islamist fascist so they must be heavy on your mind, your baseless accusations against Republican candidates show you do not seem to have much else.
OK as your rhetoric is your opinion , it is based on what proof?
Do not bring up sound bytes of the candidates speaking before thinking as one can list as many for Obama, and good lord he has Biden as second in command.

WE have a community orgainzer, who was not good at that, who will not release his college transcripts.
Not much excuse there for his lack of intellect, which his presidential record shows quite plainly.
When Dem. had control of both the House and Senate he got soooo much done.

chuck34

22nd November 2011, 13:14

I'd say it's some combination of the above - though if you look at our campaign finance and insider trading laws, they've found ways to pay themselves quite well, that aren't available to the average citizen. And I'd also add, our nation (and maybe the world) has a dreadful shortage of people with a sense of (res) public(a) duty, such as the legendary (and maybe somewhat mythical) Lucius Cincinnatus had. I think most people in general, and politicians in particular, are in a mode of "what's in it for me?". I can see the problem, but I have no real answer on how to correct it.

I would agree with much of this. But I don't think you have to go as far back as Cincinnatus. Up until recently (maybe 35-40 years ago) our Presidents, and many in Congress, made much less in their public service careers than their private wealth. Look at many of our Founders. Monroe basically died a popper. Jefferson's estate had to sell off much of his property (including his slave rather than freeing them as he wanted) to pay off his debts. Madison had to beg the Federal Congress and the Virginia legislature for money owed to him. On and on up to guys like Truman and Ike. Heck JFK sure didn't need the money.

anthonyvop

22nd November 2011, 16:55

Private industry has sufficient power to keep the Congress feeble. How many major corporations paid zero in taxation last year, for instance?

Don't forget the Unions, Environmental Extremists and other Ultra-Left wing Groups which "Donate" much more than the corporations do.

markabilly

27th November 2011, 20:18

OK, I understand how Palin got elected governor of Alaska. There's only 20 people who live there to begin with... 5 of them were under 18, 6 were dog drunk on election day and 5 of the remaining 9 were related to her (that woman sure is fertile), so she won. But now, how in the world did you folks in Texas get tricked into voting for this complete goofball for governor? I've spent a fair amount of time in Texas. It's not a bad place, depending on which section you're in. And the DFW area, I actually liked quite a bit... came very close to moving there several years ago. So how bad was the Rickster's opponent that you folks picked him? I mean, was Daffy Duck or one of the Muppets running against him or something??? Seriously, the dude makes Michele Bachmann seem (somewhat) intelligent and sane.

.

When the former governor Bush became President, Perry basically inherited the job automatically as he was Lt Governor at the time.

It was only at the last (primary) election that Perry had a substantial candidate against him--she was a well respected US Senator. The old boys of the republican aprty recruited her with the intent of running Perry out of office. Amnyb issus, like selling public roads built with taxpayer money to some Spanish company to put tolss on them for 50 years, requiring school girls to get a vacinnation to take care of his friend and former aide who represented the company, and on and on................

She had an earkly lead, but Perry avoided much of any kind of debate, and instead, went around campaigning in person, which is something he does very well.
He beat her easy.

If Perry had done the same, just avoided the debates as much as posible (which I think have only proven to be destructive to all of the candidates) and campaigned on a personal level, he might still be doing very well.

Well doing that and not having gone hunting at that hunting camp where his dad used to go........

Gregor-y

8th December 2011, 22:43

It's time for a Hail Mary, but not the Catholic kind because the most conservative Protestant sects don't consider Catholics to be Christian:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0PAJNntoRgA

Brown, Jon Brow

8th December 2011, 23:14

It's time for a Hail Mary, but not the Catholic kind because the most conservative Protestant sects don't consider Catholics to be Christian:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0PAJNntoRgA

I can't help but cringe when I watch this video. Any politician preaching the same religious BS in the UK would be laughed off the scene.

I can't help but think what Thomas Jefferson would think if he saw this.

BDunnell

8th December 2011, 23:25

I can't help but cringe when I watch this video. Any politician preaching the same religious BS in the UK would be laughed off the scene.

Indeed they would. I like to think this makes us better people than those who go for the likes of Rick Perry on religious grounds.

Rollo

8th December 2011, 23:32

Don't forget the Unions, Environmental Extremists and other Ultra-Left wing Groups which "Donate" much more than the corporations do.

Would you care to prove your rather baseless assertion?

ShiftingGears

9th December 2011, 02:34

I can't help but cringe when I watch this video. Any politician preaching the same religious BS in the UK would be laughed off the scene.

I daresay the same for Australia as well. Cringeworthy stuff.

Bob Riebe

9th December 2011, 04:26

It's time for a Hail Mary, but not the Catholic kind because the most conservative Protestant sects don't consider Catholics to be Christian:
That is bs but whn one considers the source making the accusation- to be expected.

Bob Riebe

9th December 2011, 04:31

Indeed they would. I like to think this makes us better people than those who go for the likes of Rick Perry on religious grounds.Sadly that is true.
Christian faith should not be a political matter, and preachers SHOULD NOT RUN, unless they deordain themselves first.

At the same time if someone saying they are a Christian or mormon or Jehovah Witness etc. some hows makes them a point of ridicule or political eggheads use that against them, then this society has become a prejudiced farce where only policially correct speech and persons are considered proper.

BDunnell

9th December 2011, 07:16

At the same time if someone saying they are a Christian or mormon or Jehovah Witness etc. some hows makes them a point of ridicule or political eggheads use that against them, then this society has become a prejudiced farce where only policially correct speech and persons are considered proper.

Well, I presume you are in favour of free speech. Therefore, it is only right to be able to criticise a politician on any grounds.

Rollo

9th December 2011, 11:32

Sadly that is true.
Christian faith should not be a political matter, and preachers SHOULD NOT RUN, unless they deordain themselves first.

Why?

Don't preachers also have the right to free speech? In a democracy, isn't it the will of the people to decide who they vote for?

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech,
- excerpt 1st Amendment

Ultimately every decision made by every politician is made based on the conviction of their beliefs or as the representative of their constituents. So long as a politician wasn't making legislation which establishes "religion", then there really is no reason to debar them from office.

BDunnell

9th December 2011, 11:48

Christian faith should not be a political matter, and preachers SHOULD NOT RUN, unless they deordain themselves first.

Would you also be in favour of any prospective politician giving up all business interests?

Gregor-y

9th December 2011, 17:23

That is bs but when one considers the source making the accusation- to be expected.
If this ad isn't a frantic attempt to bring up support from the deep dark dregs of the supposed Republican base what is it? Unlike Shoeless Joe, your saying doesn't make it so.

Roamy

9th December 2011, 17:48

And it shall be in the end - The Christians vs the Muslims. Non believers unfortunately will be severely outnumbered and therefore will have to choose a side. It is pretty clear who the T.I.R.E.s will choose. You only have to look to the middle east to see religion is elected and not political parties. Should the non believers be able to make a formidable challenge then the only way would be to ban all religion outside of one's home.
and all reference thereof in any public place. You and I know that won't happen. That is precisely why Smith and Wesson was formed!!

Brown, Jon Brow

9th December 2011, 18:58

ShiftingGears

9th December 2011, 23:39

At the same time if someone saying they are a Christian or mormon or Jehovah Witness etc. some hows makes them a point of ridicule or political eggheads use that against them, then this society has become a prejudiced farce where only policially correct speech and persons are considered proper.

Out of interest, would you have the same view if that person was a Muslim?

Bob Riebe

10th December 2011, 17:28

Out of interest, would you have the same view if that person was a Muslim?Depends on if they condemn the Islamist terrorists or rationalize that their murdering ways are justified.

Bob Riebe

10th December 2011, 17:34

Would you also be in favour of any prospective politician giving up all business interests?Hmmm, an ordaided business man. I have never heard of any such thing.
They are not even remotely related.
Any poliitician should never be refered to as the reverend.
At the same time financial conflicts of interest, should be addressed by laws that do not exist at this time.
Politicians should be sent to prison for insider trading just like common citizens are.

Bob Riebe

10th December 2011, 17:35

If this ad isn't a frantic attempt to bring up support from the deep dark dregs of the supposed Republican base what is it? Unlike Shoeless Joe, your saying doesn't make it so.My reply has nothing to do with the add, and every thing to do with your remark about Roman Catholics.

BDunnell

10th December 2011, 19:49

Hmmm, an ordaided business man. I have never heard of any such thing.
They are not even remotely related.
Any poliitician should never be refered to as the reverend.
At the same time financial conflicts of interest, should be addressed by laws that do not exist at this time.
Politicians should be sent to prison for insider trading just like common citizens are.

There is nothing stopping that from happening already.

As for the first couple of sentences of that contribution, if you choose not to see the entirely relevant and germane comparison, so be it.

Gregor-y

11th December 2011, 15:57

My reply has nothing to do with the add, and every thing to do with your remark about Roman Catholics.
So you haven't attended services at Emmanuel Freewill Baptist or Pentecostal churches, then.

donKey jote

11th December 2011, 22:23

r0xQcEH7Dqo

Bob Riebe

12th December 2011, 04:55

So you haven't attended services at Emmanuel Freewill Baptist or Pentecostal churches, then.Actually- I think your original statement was correct.http://foolstown.com/sm/alc.gif

Roamy

12th December 2011, 06:22

Now here is a extreme joke by the democratic government. Lets see what Perry says about this. I said we are heading to hell in a lead sled but now it looks like the dems want to put rocket on the sled to get to hell quicker.

U.S. Proposes Unmanned Border Entry With Mexico | Fox News (http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2011/12/11/us-proposes-unmanned-border-entry-with-mexico/?test=latestnews)

F1boat

14th December 2011, 08:24

Ricky is so disgusting... I hope that the US voters will not buy such horrible bait.

Roamy

14th December 2011, 18:16

Ricky is so disgusting... I hope that the US voters will not buy such horrible bait.

So you prefer Donald Trump??

markabilly

14th January 2012, 19:31

Ricky is so disgusting... I hope that the US voters will not buy such horrible bait.

I did. Hoped he would be somewhere else other than Texas. :D

Looks like my hopes are in the dumpster. Just do not see Rickie sticking around in the race much longer. :(

Instead, my bet is we will get Rommney against Obama. Rommney reminds me so much of Nixon--the 'conservative" who wanted to be re-elected so bad, that he created "the great society" and spent more money than his predessors on welfare, et al....... :dozey:

Jag_Warrior

14th January 2012, 20:17

I believe "The Great Society" was Johnson.

Gregor-y

16th January 2012, 15:51

Nixon's biggest sin was giving all the southern segregation supporters who were disaffected from the Democratic party refuge among the Republicans. It would have been better to shun them and leave them twisting in the wind to die out (or form their own party like various national front parties in Europe) rather than become the base of the Republican party today.

For all the praise Nixon gets for continuing the Great Society and exacerbating the Sino-Soviet split (questions about the long term consequences of that are another story) I think his 'southern strategy' and Watergate (not to mention other shenanigans that sent a lot of his staff to prison) cast a shadow from which he can't escape.

Roamy

18th January 2012, 08:40

Unfortunately Perry is the real deal but the media is controlling the elections. FoxNews will support Romney or Newt. Romney can't beat Obama and Newt will be challenged as well. But in a country where Ron Paul can get 23% of any vote you know we are probably fcked without a revolution. Ron Paul should do us a favor and move to Iran.

Gregor-y

18th January 2012, 16:08

Garry Walker

18th January 2012, 17:26

Perry was the Fox News darling until the frequent debates showed he didn't have two brain cells to rub together. If the Republicans had multiple debates like this in 2000 Bush I bet wouldn't have been nominated, either.

Obama showed in the last election that you don't have to have any intelligence, honesty or brain whatsoever and you can still get voted in.

edv

19th January 2012, 16:44

WEll, it's all over for Rick now...he has just pulled out.
He has endorsed Newt, who is suddenly the focus of a MSM smear campaign regarding his bitter ex-wife.

Gregor-y

20th January 2012, 20:08

I'm glad. Endorsing Newt ensures the Republican crazy train will keep rolling for a few more weeks at least.

After that all there is to look forward to are endless campaign ads where Romney talks about not apologizing for America, praising corporate greed as more American than caring for citizens, and ensuring we have a military so large no one will think of flying a plane into our buildings ever again.

And if my wife cheated on me, divorced me to marry the ******* then had the gall to claim to be a values candidate I wouldn't be very accommodating, either. I think his little scripted tirade last night was better proof Newt doesn't have the character you'd want in a president compared to his infidelity.

monadvspec

22nd January 2012, 12:09

Obama showed in the last election that you don't have to have any intelligence, honesty or brain whatsoever and you can still get voted in.

You're suggesting that the president is unintelligent is laughable. Goes to show that there are people out there without a modicum of intellect to recognize a great intellect. Sad America if that is where you are.

ShiftingGears

22nd January 2012, 12:43

I'm pretty glad Rick Perry is out of the race for the White House. Came across as a total moron. Ron Paul is an interesting candidate for the Republicans, it would be good if he could seriously challenge Romney and Gingrich. He seems unusually intelligent for a presidential candidate. It really doesn't take long to find a video in which he makes a strong, sensible case that he believes in, which is more than can be said about Perry and his frankly embarrassing ranting about christian values.

DrpoqWryDbw&feature=related

Also, perhaps we should change the thread title to something more relevant such as the Republican Primaries, seeing as Perry is no longer competing.

Bob Riebe

23rd January 2012, 02:44

Goes to show that there are people out there without a modicum of intellect = Obama.
Intellect is not a attribute of one who reaches the level of cheap Chicago politics Obama has.

monadvspec

23rd January 2012, 17:48

Intellect is not a attribute of one who reaches the level of cheap Chicago politics Obama has.

Once more I have an idiot attributing my quote in a fraudulent manner. I have asked you before Riebe, stop using and changing my posts. I have seen people banned for less and you still being able to post is quite the anomaly.

To the issue of lack of intelligence. You display it along with others that are unable to recognize intellect due mostly to their lack of same.

BDunnell

23rd January 2012, 18:52

Intellect is not a attribute of one who reaches the level of cheap Chicago politics Obama has.

And what about your level of intellect, Bob? People in glass houses and all that...

chuck34

23rd January 2012, 19:28

You're suggesting that the president is unintelligent is laughable. Goes to show that there are people out there without a modicum of intellect to recognize a great intellect. Sad America if that is where you are.

I keep hearing all about how Obama has such a great intellect. Honest question, how does anyone know that? As far as I know he hasn't released his college transcripts. I haven't heard any particularly new/original/great ideas out of him. And we've all heard him off-telepropter sounding maybe 1 step smarter than W (57 states, etc). So please, honestly where is the evidence that supports this idea that Obama is some "great intellect"?

BDunnell

23rd January 2012, 19:29

I keep hearing all about how Obama has such a great intellect. Honest question, how does anyone know that? As far as I know he hasn't released his college transcripts.

Why should he?

donKey jote

23rd January 2012, 19:32

Intellect is relative, and the fact he hasn't made any major boobies surely puts him in the "great" category when compared to the recent numpties and contenders.
The whole argument is a bit sad really, or would be if I cared ;) :p

chuck34

23rd January 2012, 19:37

Why should he?

Honestly I don't know. Most Presidential candidates do in this country. And if he wants to keep having people refer to him as some great intellect/thinker, then I think grades come into the equation, at least somewhat. That and books written, ideas championed, and in the case of a politican legislation championed, as well as some other factors. But Obama doesn't rank up there as one of the "greats" on any of those accounts.

And to be fair, there are many liberal "intellects" that I can recognize even if I don't agree with them. In my book you can be wrong/have differing opinions from mine but still be a thinker of some intellect. Lawrence Summers is one example from economics. But Obama just doesn't measure up. I don't see any evidence of his great mind.

chuck34

23rd January 2012, 19:40

hasn't made any major boobies

You mean like visiting all 57 states? Or deciding to go on a multiple million dollar vacation as you rail against the evils of the rich? I could go on, but Obama's mistakes aren't what's under discussion here. Where is the evidence that he's "the smartest man to ever be President" as I've heard him refered to before? A relative lack of mistakes does not mean he's that smart/great/whatever.

BDunnell

23rd January 2012, 20:06

Honestly I don't know. Most Presidential candidates do in this country.

Ah, yes, because academic intelligence is so important to the voters in the American heartland, isn't it?

chuck34

23rd January 2012, 20:37

Ah, yes, because academic intelligence is so important to the voters in the American heartland, isn't it?

That's a completely different topic. It is fairly interesting though that in the '04 campaign Kerry was seen as "the smart one" while W. was "the dumb one". But their grades, both from Yale, were almost equal, with W. actually pulling down slightly better grades.

But, what evidence is there that Obama is a great intellect?

BDunnell

23rd January 2012, 20:43

That's a completely different topic. It is fairly interesting though that in the '04 campaign Kerry was seen as "the smart one" while W. was "the dumb one". But their grades, both from Yale, were almost equal, with W. actually pulling down slightly better grades.

But the simple fact remains that, no matter how one cares to dress it up, Bush came across in public as an absolute moron. The same goes for Palin later. I say this not out of any political bias, but as a simple, accurate statement. It amazes me that anyone could think otherwise. More than that, it scares me to think that such people could ever be taken seriously. They wouldn't be in Britain. With Blair, we may have gone for smarmy, but not stupid.

chuck34

23rd January 2012, 20:47

But the simple fact remains that, no matter how one cares to dress it up, Bush came across in public as an absolute moron. The same goes for Palin later. I say this not out of any political bias, but as a simple, accurate statement. It amazes me that anyone could think otherwise. More than that, it scares me to think that such people could ever be taken seriously. They wouldn't be in Britain. With Blair, we may have gone for smarmy, but not stupid.

Ok, but what makes Obama any different? Because he can read a teleprompter well? Is that seriously the only qualification for being "inteligent" now?

BDunnell

23rd January 2012, 20:48

Ok, but what makes Obama any different? Because he can read a teleprompter well? Is that seriously the only qualification for being "inteligent" now?

Oh, come on. He simply doesn't come across as an idiot like Bush and Palin. Anyone with the slightest common sense as regards human behaviour ought to be able to see that, whatever their political persuasion.

Did you ever vote for Bush?

chuck34

23rd January 2012, 20:56

Oh, come on. He simply doesn't come across as an idiot like Bush and Palin. Anyone with the slightest common sense as regards human behaviour ought to be able to see that, whatever their political persuasion.

Ok so not coming across as dumb as Bush or Palin is your definition of a "great intellect", or "the smartest man to ever be President"? Come on, quit talking about Bush and Palin. We're discussing Obama. How do you know that Obama is as smart as everyone says he is?

Did you ever vote for Bush?
Completely irrelevent to the discussion at hand. And a very transparent attempt at de-railing the current subject. If I say "yes", then I'm just as dumb as Bush, and my questioning of Obama's intellect is purely political. If I say "no", then I'm a hypocrite and not a "real" conservative.

What evidence is there that Obama is a "great intellect"? And again, being smarter than Bush or Palin does not count.

BDunnell

23rd January 2012, 21:06

Ok so not coming across as dumb as Bush or Palin is your definition of a "great intellect", or "the smartest man to ever be President"? Come on, quit talking about Bush and Palin. We're discussing Obama. How do you know that Obama is as smart as everyone says he is?

What evidence is there that Obama is a "great intellect"? And again, being smarter than Bush or Palin does not count.

Chuck, your arguing here is hardly marking you out to be an intellect of any size. Where in any of my posts have I suggested that Obama is any of these things? Find it, and I will gladly retract it. But I haven't. Stop reading things into comments that simply aren't there.

Completely irrelevent to the discussion at hand. And a very transparent attempt at de-railing the current subject. If I say "yes", then I'm just as dumb as Bush, and my questioning of Obama's intellect is purely political. If I say "no", then I'm a hypocrite and not a "real" conservative.

It is relevant, in my view, because if you did you should be somewhat ashamed. Bush would have been laughed out of the reckoning in the UK, and for that I give thanks that I'm British.

chuck34

23rd January 2012, 21:33

Chuck, your arguing here is hardly marking you out to be an intellect of any size. Where in any of my posts have I suggested that Obama is any of these things? Find it, and I will gladly retract it. But I haven't. Stop reading things into comments that simply aren't there.

You personally have not claimed that Obama was any of those things. However, you were responding to my post which were responses to those that have claimed Obama to be a great intellect. Sorry for trying to stick to one point at a time. If your only contribution to the discussion is that Obama is smarter than Bush or Palin, then fine you are probably right. But that is not what my posts were refering to.

It is relevant, in my view, because if you did you should be somewhat ashamed. Bush would have been laughed out of the reckoning in the UK, and for that I give thanks that I'm British.

Honestly I don't believe Bush to be the "moron" that he's made out to be. Sure he's no towering intellect, but he's also no dummy. He simply can not speak eloquently, which makes him come across dumb. I don't know how anyone can claim that someone who has obtained such a high office is dumb, they must know something. And I really don't think that Bush would have been "laughed out" in the UK. The UK has their share of quirky pols.

Bob Riebe

23rd January 2012, 22:32

And what about your level of intellect, Bob? People in glass houses and all that...Then stop throwing them and all that and you will not have to worry about any such pathetic response that has nothing to do with the topic but of course few, to near none, of your posts ever do. They all amount to simpleton attacks against posters who do address the topic.

Bob Riebe

23rd January 2012, 22:46

Oh, come on. He simply doesn't come across as an idiot like Bush and Palin. Anyone with the slightest common sense as regards human behaviour ought to be able to see that, whatever their political persuasion.

LOL, if Obama does not have his teleprompter his speaking amounts to : ah- I ah-um-well um we-ah I don't know-ah um if....

You either have not heard Obama without his teleprompter and are speaking from ignorance or you have and are just spewing bull-sh-t.

BDunnell

23rd January 2012, 22:54

Then stop throwing them and all that and you will not have to worry about any such pathetic response that has nothing to do with the topic but of course few, to near none, of your posts ever do.

How you can write such gobbledegook in this discussion and expect it to be taken seriously I genuinely have no idea. You are, with respect, in no position to criticise anyone else when it comes to intelligence and eloquence.

BDunnell

23rd January 2012, 22:55

LOL, if Obama does not have his teleprompter his speaking amounts to : ah- I ah-um-well um we-ah I don't know-ah um if....

You either have not heard Obama without his teleprompter and are speaking from ignorance or you have and are just spewing bull-sh-t.

Quick tip, Bob — starting a contribution to a debate about someone's intelligence with 'LOL' does little to enhance the seriousness of your arguments.

Brown, Jon Brow

24th January 2012, 01:01

And I really don't think that Bush would have been "laughed out" in the UK. The UK has their share of quirky pols.

Bush at prime minister's questions would have been brilliant to watch.

chuck34

24th January 2012, 12:34

Bush at prime minister's questions would have been brilliant to watch.

Obama would be hilarious.

MP: Mr. Prime Minister, what are your thoughts on the European Debt Crisis?

Obama: Well .... ahhh ... ummm .... Let me be clear ..... ahh ... ummm .... Hope .... ahh .... Change .... ummm .... pay your fair share ....

BDunnell

24th January 2012, 13:14

chuck34

24th January 2012, 13:40

If that's your definition of 'hilarious' — goodness me.

It would be hilarious because it would expose this "great intellect" for what he really is, a good teleprompter reader. After such a performance he "would have been laughed out of the reckoning in the UK". Then the really hilarity would insue, watching all the Obama defenders/Bush bashers squirm, and do mental gymnastics trying to defend him.

Let's face it Obama, Bush, Biden, Kerry, Romney, Santorum, and many others would all be laughed out of the room at question time. The only ones that wouldn't be (of the current crop of Presidental wanna-be's or outright candidates) are Gingrich and Paul. And Gingrich only by a hair. I do wish we had that type of thing here.

ShiftingGears

24th January 2012, 13:42

Obama would be hilarious.

MP: Mr. Prime Minister, what are your thoughts on the European Debt Crisis?

Obama: Well .... ahhh ... ummm .... Let me be clear ..... ahh ... ummm .... Hope .... ahh .... Change .... ummm .... pay your fair share ....

Having paid increased attention to American politics lately, he seems pretty clueless - he is quite awful without rehearsed speeches. Definitely doesn't come across as someone with a clear understanding of what he's doing.

ArrowsFA1

24th January 2012, 16:47

It would be hilarious because it would expose this "great intellect" for what he really is, a good teleprompter reader.
I don't get this criticism of Obama as being reliant on the teleprompter simply because 1) he is not unique among politicians for using one 2) why shouldn't they be used?

The art of memorised speech making is long gone. Just watch any government minister in the Commons with their copious notes. Notes and speeches are prepared by numerous advisors to strike a tone which is more often than not aimed at getting attention in news bulletins.

I doubt whether any President or Prime Minister these days would be trusted to write and deliver their own speech, let alone be permitted to talk unscripted. Far to dangerous an idea for their spin doctors to contemplate :p :

Bob Riebe

24th January 2012, 16:51

How you can write such gobbledegook in this discussion and expect it to be taken seriously I genuinely have no idea. You are, with respect, in no position to criticise anyone else when it comes to intelligence and eloquence.
Mr. Dunnell, sir:
How can you write such gobbledegook in this discussion and expect it to be taken seriously?
You are, with respect, in no position to criticise, anyone else, when it comes to intelligence and eloquence.

Bob Riebe

24th January 2012, 16:56

Quick tip, Bob — starting a contribution to a debate about someone's intelligence with 'LOL' does little to enhance the seriousness of your arguments.Your response made me laugh, and I wrote that down.
At least you are not saying I should be using cartoon figures, as some posters do on other forums, when I write "LOL".

Bob Riebe

24th January 2012, 17:09

It would be hilarious because it would expose this "great intellect" for what he really is, a good teleprompter reader. After such a performance he "would have been laughed out of the reckoning in the UK". Then the really hilarity would insue, watching all the Obama defenders/Bush bashers squirm, and do mental gymnastics trying to defend him.

Let's face it Obama, Bush, Biden, Kerry, Romney, Santorum, and many others would all be laughed out of the room at question time. The only ones that wouldn't be (of the current crop of Presidental wanna-be's or outright candidates) are Gingrich and Paul. And Gingrich only by a hair. I do wish we had that type of thing here.
Do not forget the occasion where Pres. Obama read the othre leaders speech to the point, that at the end, he thanked himself for being there.

Such a robotic mindless action does not show any great intellect or even thought involved. If he had been actively thinking, he would have caught himself- before - he read the part that thanked him for being there.

chuck34

24th January 2012, 17:33

I don't get this criticism of Obama as being reliant on the teleprompter simply because 1) he is not unique among politicians for using one 2) why shouldn't they be used?

The art of memorised speech making is long gone. Just watch any government minister in the Commons with their copious notes. Notes and speeches are prepared by numerous advisors to strike a tone which is more often than not aimed at getting attention in news bulletins.

I doubt whether any President or Prime Minister these days would be trusted to write and deliver their own speech, let alone be permitted to talk unscripted. Far to dangerous an idea for their spin doctors to contemplate :p :

This is true, for the most part. However, I remember at the start of his term (haven't see one lately) how Obama would use a teleprompter even at a press conference. Something the "dumb" Bush never did. Notes are one thing. If you have notes, you still have to use some reasoning to put thoughts together. But on a teleprompter you don't even have to do that, just read.

But again, I don't really want to be the Bush defender here, as I will readily admit that he was/is not a towering intellect. I would however like someone to put forth some evidence supporting the claim that Obama is.

Bagwan

24th January 2012, 18:56

Bambam beat the Bush , and was the perfect new head for the same beast , all shiny and half black for Oprah .

Paul is the real savior , but the beast will shout louder , and nobody will listen .

After all , who wants to actually pay for one's sins ?
Silly Mr. Paul , actually bringing reality into politics . What nerve .

ArrowsFA1

25th January 2012, 08:25

This is true, for the most part. However, I remember at the start of his term (haven't see one lately) how Obama would use a teleprompter even at a press conference. Something the "dumb" Bush never did.

http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_6q-f-zD4xPY/TNZXcePx15I/AAAAAAAAZvo/rMONqNcqllI/s1600/Teleprompter.jpg