[King Lear]

HoosierDaddy, on 28 September 2012 - 06:32 AM, said:

Morgoth, on 28 September 2012 - 06:29 AM, said:

Anyone who use the phrase 'wake up' in political discourse should be delegated to the basement of obscurity.

Are they sheeple Gem?

I'm sensing a Gem theme tonight...

[Terez]

Morgoth, on 28 September 2012 - 06:29 AM, said:

Anyone who use the phrase 'wake up' in political discourse should be delegated to the basement of obscurity.

lol, yeah that was my reaction to the phrase exactly. Didn't make it 30 seconds into the video...

[Vengeance]

It is Samuel L Jackson riffing on Go the $%#^ to sleep. Which he narrated. You need to sit back buckle in and enjoy the motherfucking snakes on the motherfucking plane.

[Gnaw]

Vengeance, on 28 September 2012 - 12:38 PM, said:

It is Samuel L Jackson riffing on Go the $%#^ to sleep. Which he narrated. You need to sit back buckle in and enjoy the motherfucking snakes on the motherfucking plane.

As Veng noted

http://www.youtube.c...h?v=CseO1XRYs9I
Hilarious audio narration of the greatest children's book for adults to read to themselves. Probably best to not actually read it to the toddler though.

http://en.wikipedia....e_Fuck_to_Sleep

[Illuyankas]

The Obama campaign is pulling no punches:




Oh, and if you think I'm being too biased towards Obama as anything beyond mediocre but provably infinitely better for the US than Romney;

1. You're probably right

2. From offsite:

Quote

I'm sorry, what?

Is President Obama the best President? Nope. Is President Obama arguably mediocre thus far? Sure, maybe.

Are his policies even close to what we would see under George Bush (or, for that matter, any other modern Republican)? Umm.. are you really asking this goddamn question? If you honestly believe things are "identical" or that there is "literally no difference" you are ignorant. Please pay some fucking attention.

I spent about 15 minutes pulling together some of his notable accomplishments, but rest assured that there are plenty more I am leaving out for the sake of brevity. Each of these are on an entirely different planet that what you'd see anyone from the party across the aisle spending their time on.

Would a modern Republican administration have signed Dodd-Frank or the Consumer Protection Act? No. Obama did.

Would a modern Republican administration have signed the Lilly Ledbetter Fair Pay Act? No. Obama did.

Would a modern Republican administration have ended the ban on stem cell research? No. Obama did.

Would a modern Republican administration have doubled funding for renewable fuels? No. Obama did.

Would a modern Republican administration have appointed two young Supreme Court Justices who oppose Citizens United, and be willing to appoint however many more in the years to come? No. Obama did, and Obama will.

Would a modern Republican administration have aggressively enacted a wide variety of pro-LGBT initiatives, including the repeal of DADT and the eventually support of same-sex marriage, something no sitting President has ever done? No. Obama did.

Would a modern Republican administration have continued to aggressively pursue conservation programs? No. Obama did.

Would a modern Republican administration have pushed for and signed the largest reform to student aid in almost fifty years, or expanded pell grants? No. Obama did.

Would a modern Republican administration have continued to doggedly track and pursue Osama Bin Laden, 10 years after the events of September 11th? Nope. Obama did.

Would a modern Republican administration carry out an aggressive deportation policy while at the same time working towards a meaningful reform of the system that goes beyond "eh, ship them out"? No. Obama did.

Would a modern Republican administration sign any form of universal health care bill even approaching what was in the Affordable Care Act? No. Yet Obama did.

Would a modern Republican administration have mandated that the Department of Defense record its interrogations? No. Obama did.

Basically you're full of it, dude. Did Obama walk back his view on the drug war? Sure. Is he more willing to use force than some people on the left would prefer? Yep. Did he sign the NDAA bill even though it had some indefinite detention language? Unfortunately, yeah.

Is he the same as Bush or anybody else on the other team? Nope.
Stop saying so.

3. Seriously. Does anyone who seriously, legitimately feels Romney could - not even will, could - win this election explain why they think so without mentioning the usual online tosh you see written like dumb Americans voting Republicans as always? Not that you guys would say something like that, but the racist redneck fundie idea gets thrown around a lot.




Also I saw part of the Wolverine's OTP (One Term President) video and they are the whitest people I have ever seen.

[Terez]

I couldn't make myself watch it so I googled the lyrics...and came across this:

http://www.stormfron.../forum/t687101/

[worry]

LOL at stormfront accepting a rap video just because it aligns with their political motives.

[worry]

[Shinrei]

I think Mitt Romney is an asshat, and will certainly not vote for him. Despite my generally libertarian leanings, i would have been willing to vote Obama if he'd come through on some of the civil liberty issues and war-abroad issues. This piece echoes almost exactly what the deal-breakers are for me.

http://www.theatlant...k-obama/262861/

This post has been edited by Shinrei: 29 September 2012 - 12:34 PM

[Terez]

worrywort, on 29 September 2012 - 04:49 AM, said:

LOL at stormfront accepting a rap video just because it aligns with their political motives.

I was not even aware that such places existed. I mean, I know there are blatant racists on the internet, but this forum is pretty active...also, one of the people on the thread lambasted his forum-mates for appreciating a video made by 'wiggers' who were just upset because they voted for Obama and then didn't get any freebies. (Wonder how this jives with the rhetoric that Obama is all about giving out freebies.)

[HoosierDaddy]

Shinrei, on 29 September 2012 - 12:34 PM, said:

I think Mitt Romney is an asshat, and will certainly not vote for him. Despite my generally libertarian leanings, i would have been willing to vote Obama if he'd come through on some of the civil liberty issues and war-abroad issues. This piece echoes almost exactly what the deal-breakers are for me.

http://www.theatlant...k-obama/262861/

So, you voting for Johnson then?

[Terez]

"Up with Chris Hayes"—a discussion on the donor class:

http://www.msnbc.msn...79738/#49137554

This is the first time I've ever seen a pundit mention the fact that Obama expressed his concerns about the effects of having to spend all of his time kissing donor ass in The Audacity of Hope. It's something I bring up a lot in political discussions, and it annoys me that pundits rarely quote him or even mention that fact. I have seen some in the media point out that Obama has called himself a New Democrat in certain contexts and denied being a New Democrat in others.

[worry]

I suppose if you were truly libertarian, then Johnson isn't the worst you could do (Ron Paul springs to mind). I don't personally think Obama has been very weak overall in terms of civil liberties (and protections, which a libertarian might divorce from liberties). Solid strides with women, LGBTQ, minorities, and on torture all spring instantly to mind (though as an aside, I just heard yesterday that John Yoo -- that genuine cardboard cutout villain who wrote the memos excusing the Bush admin on torture -- is suing the Obama admin over Deffered Action...made me sick to my stomach). I do realize that with Shin, the Patriot Act was one of the biggest offenses of the Bush Admin and so Obama's occasional lookalike programs irk him, but to me of those three things listed in that article, only the Pakistan stuff really gets to me. And I've said it before, but as awful as the Patriot Act was, a lot of its worst offenses were dismantled through the judicial process even during the Bush admin, so there wasn't a whole lot of white knighting necessary by the time Obama took office.

That said, I do agree with Shin at least in the belief that a government will take advantage of every avenue deemed legal, whether it's necessary or not. Just read that warrantless domestic spying has just about doubled under Obama -- not necessarily at his direct order or anything, and not illegally, and mostly "metadata", but still that's all also part of the problem. Agencies will do what they can, whether they should or not, and whether it's necessary or not. But if the executive branch abhors a legal vacuum, then it's up to the legislative and judicial branches to do their jobs and shrink those vacuums. Also, I just can't swallow the "lesser of two evils" argument for Obama vs. Romney, since Obama has been -- against all the odds stacked against him from the beginning -- pretty darn good. I wouldn't try to dissuade a libertarian from voting for Johnson, but a liberal/progressive who buys into that lesser of two evils logic is just being foolish.

[Shinrei]

HoosierDaddy, on 29 September 2012 - 11:15 PM, said:

Shinrei, on 29 September 2012 - 12:34 PM, said:

I think Mitt Romney is an asshat, and will certainly not vote for him. Despite my generally libertarian leanings, i would have been willing to vote Obama if he'd come through on some of the civil liberty issues and war-abroad issues. This piece echoes almost exactly what the deal-breakers are for me.

http://www.theatlant...k-obama/262861/

So, you voting for Johnson then?

Most likely, yes.

[Terez]

I started a poll at Theoryland on the election (who do you think will win, not who do you want to win). It randomly turned into a right-left economics discussion because unlike here we have some long-term conservatives at Theoryland. (We had a forum change so join dates aren't real; the main guy I'm arguing with—our resident libertarian lawyer—has been there a lot longer than me, since I think '98 or '99 or something. I didn't discover the internet until 2004.) Even still I think our conservatives feel a little marginalized, and many of the forum liberals are relatively silent because they hate being on the same side of debates as me.

[amphibian]

So you enjoy talking politics on the internet in the relatively drama-free safe places you've found to discuss your most liked hobbies/activities with others?

Jeez. Not to mention that 538 now puts Obama at 80% to win. All of the swing states are leaning his way.

[Gnaw]

Iowa Election Markets say it's Obama.

http://iemweb.biz.ui...h_PRES12_VS.cfm



http://iemweb.biz.ui..._PRES12_WTA.cfm

[Terez]

amphibian, on 03 October 2012 - 12:17 AM, said:

So you enjoy talking politics on the internet in the relatively drama-free safe places you've found to discuss your most liked hobbies/activities with others?

Malazan is relatively drama-free (these days anyway). Theoryland, not so much.

Quote

Jeez. Not to mention that 538 now puts Obama at 80% to win. All of the swing states are leaning his way.

It's been over 80% for a few days hasn't it? I had to explain to my mother tonight why Democrats have a problem with Voter ID laws. She insisted that there is lots of voter fraud. I said no, there isn't. She argued with me, using her own experience working in the insurance industry as evidence. I'm like, Mom, the one has little to do with the other. Voter fraud is practically non-existent. Eventually I convinced her, I think; she's not very tuned in but she votes, and she was raised to be a hardcore Republican like most white people in the South. So it's very difficult to convince her of anything...

[Gust Hubb]

So tell me that I'm reposting this, please:

http://www.huffingto..._n_1933189.html


Mitt Romney Style...

This post has been edited by Gust Hubb: 04 October 2012 - 12:23 AM

[Terez]

Five minutes!