“We think we are going to have a safe and successful convention,” Davis said. “The local police and Secret Service will make sure of that.”
I'm sure the Secret Service loves an "anyone can have a gun" policy at the convention.
But you can't have it inside the building.
First of all, that's a moot point, because people have to enter and exit the building.
Second, while the ploy is to show support for second amendment rights, by banning sign posts they are stomping all over first amendment rights. DERP DERP DERP I hate the Republican party so much.
“We think we are going to have a safe and successful convention,” Davis said. “The local police and Secret Service will make sure of that.”
I'm sure the Secret Service loves an "anyone can have a gun" policy at the convention.
But you can't have it inside the building.
First of all, that's a moot point, because people have to enter and exit the building.
Second, while the ploy is to show support for second amendment rights, by banning sign posts they are stomping all over first amendment rights. DERP DERP DERP I hate the Republican party so much.
They should just put everyone in free speech zones
HenroidMexican kicked from Immigration ThreadCentrism is Racism :3Registered Userregular
I was going to say "welcome back Syphon!" and then you kinda went and used a phrase I foam at the mouth over. Pistols at dawn, sir. (welcome back )
By the way, I'm not going to resurrect that side-track from a couple pages ago, but I find myself agreeing wholly with spool for once unconditionally. That's fucked up.
I was going to say "welcome back Syphon!" and then you kinda went and used a phrase I foam at the mouth over. Pistols at dawn, sir. (welcome back )
By the way, I'm not going to resurrect that side-track from a couple pages ago, but I find myself agreeing wholly with spool for once unconditionally. That's fucked up.
I was going to say "welcome back Syphon!" and then you kinda went and used a phrase I foam at the mouth over. Pistols at dawn, sir. (welcome back )
By the way, I'm not going to resurrect that side-track from a couple pages ago, but I find myself agreeing wholly with spool for once unconditionally. That's fucked up.
Why do you hate free speech and America Jesus?
0
Options
HenroidMexican kicked from Immigration ThreadCentrism is Racism :3Registered Userregular
Pro-Obama Super PAC says: "Thanks to Bain layoffs of steelworkers and a resulting loss of decent health insurance, this man's wife died of cancer."
Romney campaign aide: "They should have moved to Massachusetts - due to Romney's health care reform and all the great stuff in it that Romney implemented, she would have been able to afford insurance!"
THEY ARE SO BAD AT THIS. THEY - ARE - SO - BAD - AT - THIS.
Absalon on
0
Options
HenroidMexican kicked from Immigration ThreadCentrism is Racism :3Registered Userregular
I heard that Super PAC ad this morning on the Stern Show during the news, it was REALLY brutal. I know I've said to fight fire with fire if one party is going to fight dirty but that ad is really odd even for me. But if the husband is okay with it, then that's what matters.
That said, I wasn't expecting the Romney campaign to respond to it with anything other than, "That's dirty fighting" type stuff. Holy smokes.
0
Options
AbsalonLands of Always WinterRegistered Userregular
Now you might be asking, since this all went down yesterday, what is the Romney campaign doing? Has the Romney campaign responded?
Yes, they have.
The Romney campaign responded this morning on Fox. Off the top of your head, what do you think the Romney campaign said about it?
Well, I'm gonna tell you. I have the story here from Mediaite and the headline says it all.
Romney spokesperson: "That woman would have had health care under Romneycare." That's the reaction.
Appearing on Fox News with Bill Hemmer, Mitt Romney campaign spokesperson Andrea Saul attacked the ad and then she veered off-message. She said that the fired steelworker would have had access to health care if he had lived in Massachusetts, where under Romney's plan health care coverage is extend ---
Now wait, you telling me that you get a campaign person on from the Romney campaign to respond to an allegation that your candidate is responsible for a woman's death and your answer is "she would have had health insurance if she'd lived in Massachusetts."
What -- um -- I don't know the people at the Romney campaign but I'm gonna tell you your candidate is accused of killing a woman because ---
This isn't about health insurance! They're out there saying that your guy killed a woman! And your answer is, well she'd of had health insurance if she lived in Massachusetts?
F-From the sound of this, they don't know at the Romney campaign what the purpose of this ad was and how it took root. They apparently don't know that the Obama campaign ran an ad accusing Romney of murder, essentially. And Stephanie Cutter's backing it up. The woman DID die. Romney got rich. He closed the plant. Husband lost a job. Wife got sick and died. Romney made out like a bandit.
Well, she'd have had health insurance if she lived in Massachusetts. Uh, you couple that with -- there was a lack of understanding or desire to join the Chick-Fil-A Day?
Well its a culture war thing, the beltway always leads with "These are GOP Issues dems STAY AWAY" but this year Obama keeps pinging these issues, womens rights, gay marriage, immigration, welfare. And the best Romney can do is lie about Obama's stances.
The Democrats better keep this up after Obama's left office. The country desperately needs a competent opposition party to keep the Republicans in check.
The way they're doing it now I'm starting to think they really have the country's best interests in mind. All the while republicans just want to loot the sinking ship as fast as possible
I'm not really fond of the ad, but that's superPACs for you. They're playing to win, and don't really need to answer to anyone sadly.
The response though, it hilariously off message and silly. "Well.. that wouldn't happen if we had some form of comprehensive healthcare plan possibly involving the term _____-care! Wait. Fuck. Did I just say that? Did I really just imply the solution to that problem would be the other guy's plan? Motherfucker!"
I do enjoy the Obama team's response "We have nothing to do with that ad! Ignore our own previous ads that featured the same dude? We're totally not coordinating!"
Self-righteousness is incompatible with coalition building.
Have they had ads with him? I know they had teleconferences with him. I've been looking to see if they played up the "his actions KILLED MY WIFE" angle, or just the "dude, I lost my job and my insurance" angle. It's the implication that it directly lead to her death that I'm less than comfortable with.
0
Options
AbsalonLands of Always WinterRegistered Userregular
I do enjoy the Obama team's response "We have nothing to do with that ad! Ignore our own previous ads that featured the same dude? We're totally not coordinating!"
They should have said - "That man retroactively separated himself from the regular campaign before the Super PAC ad in question aired."
0
Options
HenroidMexican kicked from Immigration ThreadCentrism is Racism :3Registered Userregular
Maybe I was mistaken about Republicans being the one to drag us down to the dirtiest rhetoric ever. One of these days an Obama Super PAC is going to have this in their ad:
"Mitt Romney likes to eat shit and fuck his mom."
Or perhaps, "Mitt Romney backs his car over neighborhood dogs and cats he runs over. TWICE."
Maybe I was mistaken about Republicans being the one to drag us down to the dirtiest rhetoric ever. One of these days an Obama Super PAC is going to have this in their ad:
"Mitt Romney likes to eat shit and fuck his mom."
Or perhaps, "Mitt Romney backs his car over neighborhood dogs and cats he runs over. TWICE."
The Obama campaign ads are at least true. I'm sorry that Republicans have such an appalling record, but telling the truth about said record does not make it the "dirtiest rhetoric ever." Not even close.
Why aren't you fond of that ad? What's with all this fucking hand wringing from people?
You know what happens in the US when people lose their jobs?
They lose their health insurance.
You know what sick people without health insurance do?
They fucking DIE.
Welcome to reality.
Stop being fucking squimish.
I draw a time based line at causation here. Losing health insurance does not cause death. It can prevent health, which is not the same thing.
Essentially: I know it's an emotional appeal, but it has about the same grounds as "you fired that dude, and he came down with cancer kater. You killed him." which would be an unbelievable leap of logic for anyone. "You fired that dude and he lost his insurance, and came down with cancer which he couldn't afford treatment for" is damning enough in my mind. Attaching the death implies that if I ever fire anyone, I'm eventually responsible for their deaths?
Why go the extra logical leap when the facts are damning enough?
0
Options
sportzboytjwsqueeeeeezzeeeesome more tax breaks outRegistered Userregular
Maybe I was mistaken about Republicans being the one to drag us down to the dirtiest rhetoric ever. One of these days an Obama Super PAC is going to have this in their ad:
"Mitt Romney likes to eat shit and fuck his mom."
Or perhaps, "Mitt Romney backs his car over neighborhood dogs and cats he runs over. TWICE."
I think you got the first one backwards.
Walkerdog on MTGO
TylerJ on League of Legends (it's free and fun!)
0
Options
AManFromEarthLet's get to twerk!The King in the SwampRegistered Userregular
edited August 2012
Oh fucking please.
Faith, here's an equivocator that could swear in both the scales
against either scale, who committed treason enough for God's
sake, yet could not equivocate to heaven. O, come in, equivocator
That ad isn't saying Romney killed his wife, it says Romney doesn't understand the consequences of the actions he takes and policies he supports. Which is true if we want to be generous about Mr. Mittens' character.
When you ask why if liberals are so fucking smart they lose so goddamn always, remember the porter.
Why aren't you fond of that ad? What's with all this fucking hand wringing from people?
You know what happens in the US when people lose their jobs?
They lose their health insurance.
You know what sick people without health insurance do?
They fucking DIE.
Welcome to reality.
Stop being fucking squimish.
I draw a time based line at causation here. Losing health insurance does not cause death. It can prevent health, which is not the same thing.
Essentially: I know it's an emotional appeal, but it has about the same grounds as "you fired that dude, and he came down with cancer kater. You killed him." which would be an unbelievable leap of logic for anyone. "You fired that dude and he lost his insurance, and came down with cancer which he couldn't afford treatment for" is damning enough in my mind. Attaching the death implies that if I ever fire anyone, I'm eventually responsible for their deaths?
Why go the extra logical leap when the facts are damning enough?
Because it should be attached. Because a lack of public healthcare in America is directly killing people and a very real, massive weight around the necks of business large and small that completely fucks up labor mobility.
Like 90% of what PE funds do wouldn't fucking matter if regulation and safety nets were actually enforceable and comprehensive. I have approximately zero problems with a candidate who's platform is against both those things were forced to defend why the obvious consequences should be acceptable to the American public.
0
Options
HenroidMexican kicked from Immigration ThreadCentrism is Racism :3Registered Userregular
Maybe I was mistaken about Republicans being the one to drag us down to the dirtiest rhetoric ever. One of these days an Obama Super PAC is going to have this in their ad:
"Mitt Romney likes to eat shit and fuck his mom."
Or perhaps, "Mitt Romney backs his car over neighborhood dogs and cats he runs over. TWICE."
The Obama campaign ads are at least true. I'm sorry that Republicans have such an appalling record, but telling the truth about said record does not make it the "dirtiest rhetoric ever." Not even close.
I know. I just kinda lament that it's come down to this. There was a time in our history where this kinda crap was agreeably uncalled for.
0
Options
AstaerethIn the belly of the beastRegistered Userregular
Why aren't you fond of that ad? What's with all this fucking hand wringing from people?
You know what happens in the US when people lose their jobs?
They lose their health insurance.
You know what sick people without health insurance do?
They fucking DIE.
Welcome to reality.
Stop being fucking squimish.
This is mostly correct. Politics is not a sport; policy has consequences, and we have to engage in a discussion about those consequences in an honest manner.
However, the ad's not really about Romney's policy, it's about his character. I'd be less guilty about liking the ad if the message was "This is what will happen if Romney is elected and repeals Obamacare" rather than "This Romney guy is a scumbag and a murderer".
Maybe I was mistaken about Republicans being the one to drag us down to the dirtiest rhetoric ever. One of these days an Obama Super PAC is going to have this in their ad:
"Mitt Romney likes to eat shit and fuck his mom."
Or perhaps, "Mitt Romney backs his car over neighborhood dogs and cats he runs over. TWICE."
The Pro-Obama SuperPACs are running ads that are negative in tone but factually correct.
The Pro-Romney SuperPACs (and Romney himself) are running ads that are negative in tone and patently false.
Maybe I was mistaken about Republicans being the one to drag us down to the dirtiest rhetoric ever. One of these days an Obama Super PAC is going to have this in their ad:
"Mitt Romney likes to eat shit and fuck his mom."
Or perhaps, "Mitt Romney backs his car over neighborhood dogs and cats he runs over. TWICE."
The Obama campaign ads are at least true. I'm sorry that Republicans have such an appalling record, but telling the truth about said record does not make it the "dirtiest rhetoric ever." Not even close.
I know. I just kinda lament that it's come down to this. There was a time in our history where this kinda crap was agreeably uncalled for.
And that time would be what? Never? Look at old campaign ads, its always dirty.
I would like some money because these are artisanal nuggets of wisdom philistine.
Maybe I was mistaken about Republicans being the one to drag us down to the dirtiest rhetoric ever. One of these days an Obama Super PAC is going to have this in their ad:
"Mitt Romney likes to eat shit and fuck his mom."
Or perhaps, "Mitt Romney backs his car over neighborhood dogs and cats he runs over. TWICE."
The Obama campaign ads are at least true. I'm sorry that Republicans have such an appalling record, but telling the truth about said record does not make it the "dirtiest rhetoric ever." Not even close.
I know. I just kinda lament that it's come down to this. There was a time in our history where this kinda crap was agreeably uncalled for.
When was that time? Jefferson and Adams hated each other (goat fucking child molester would not have been out of place in the campaign of 1800). Burr killed Hamilton. Senators used to beat each other with canes on the Senate floor.
The only time that conceivably could have been politically "polite" was when everyone was owned by the Trusts in the Gilded Age.
Self-righteousness is incompatible with coalition building.
Maybe I was mistaken about Republicans being the one to drag us down to the dirtiest rhetoric ever. One of these days an Obama Super PAC is going to have this in their ad:
"Mitt Romney likes to eat shit and fuck his mom."
Or perhaps, "Mitt Romney backs his car over neighborhood dogs and cats he runs over. TWICE."
The Obama campaign ads are at least true. I'm sorry that Republicans have such an appalling record, but telling the truth about said record does not make it the "dirtiest rhetoric ever." Not even close.
I know. I just kinda lament that it's come down to this. There was a time in our history where this kinda crap was agreeably uncalled for.
When Jefferson was running against Adams, Adams ran advertisements stating that Jefferson was secretly a hermaphrodite.
HenroidMexican kicked from Immigration ThreadCentrism is Racism :3Registered Userregular
Fuck! Alright, Jesus jumped up Christ! I'm sorry invoking "the other candidate is responsible for someone's cancer killing them" made me feel awkward for the candidate I support! Goddamn.
0
Options
AManFromEarthLet's get to twerk!The King in the SwampRegistered Userregular
It's not so much how you felt so much as how you said it and how it was wrong.
Fuck! Alright, Jesus jumped up Christ! I'm sorry invoking "the other candidate is responsible for someone's cancer killing them" made me feel awkward for the candidate I support! Goddamn.
Sorry.
I didn't mean to come off as jumping on you, but I really think the Jefferson/Adams campaign stuff is hilarious, you know, 200 years after the fact.
I actually don't disagree the rhetoric is unfortunate (though unilateral disarmament I do disagree with), just with the statement that it's different than it used to be.
Self-righteousness is incompatible with coalition building.
Maybe I was mistaken about Republicans being the one to drag us down to the dirtiest rhetoric ever. One of these days an Obama Super PAC is going to have this in their ad:
"Mitt Romney likes to eat shit and fuck his mom."
Or perhaps, "Mitt Romney backs his car over neighborhood dogs and cats he runs over. TWICE."
The Obama campaign ads are at least true. I'm sorry that Republicans have such an appalling record, but telling the truth about said record does not make it the "dirtiest rhetoric ever." Not even close.
I know. I just kinda lament that it's come down to this. There was a time in our history where this kinda crap was agreeably uncalled for.
Was this during the famous "fantasyland" era of American politics?
Maybe I was mistaken about Republicans being the one to drag us down to the dirtiest rhetoric ever. One of these days an Obama Super PAC is going to have this in their ad:
"Mitt Romney likes to eat shit and fuck his mom."
Or perhaps, "Mitt Romney backs his car over neighborhood dogs and cats he runs over. TWICE."
The Obama campaign ads are at least true. I'm sorry that Republicans have such an appalling record, but telling the truth about said record does not make it the "dirtiest rhetoric ever." Not even close.
I know. I just kinda lament that it's come down to this. There was a time in our history where this kinda crap was agreeably uncalled for.
Was this during the famous "fantasyland" era of American politics?
Posts
First of all, that's a moot point, because people have to enter and exit the building.
Second, while the ploy is to show support for second amendment rights, by banning sign posts they are stomping all over first amendment rights. DERP DERP DERP I hate the Republican party so much.
Yes, I just wanted an excuse to post that video.
They should just put everyone in free speech zones
PSN/Steam/NNID: SyphonBlue | BNet: SyphonBlue#1126
By the way, I'm not going to resurrect that side-track from a couple pages ago, but I find myself agreeing wholly with spool for once unconditionally. That's fucked up.
PSN/Steam/NNID: SyphonBlue | BNet: SyphonBlue#1126
Romney is vying to replace Joe Biden.
But that's like no contest. Biden will whoop his ass from hell to breakfast.
That's insulting to Biden on all kinds of levels.
pleasepaypreacher.net
Pro-Obama Super PAC says: "Thanks to Bain layoffs of steelworkers and a resulting loss of decent health insurance, this man's wife died of cancer."
Romney campaign aide: "They should have moved to Massachusetts - due to Romney's health care reform and all the great stuff in it that Romney implemented, she would have been able to afford insurance!"
Wingnuts: "BNAARG! FGAAHRK! GNNNNNNNNNAAAAAAARRRGBL!!!!!!"
THEY ARE SO BAD AT THIS. THEY - ARE - SO - BAD - AT - THIS.
That said, I wasn't expecting the Romney campaign to respond to it with anything other than, "That's dirty fighting" type stuff. Holy smokes.
Yum. Yum yum yum yum yum.
pleasepaypreacher.net
The response though, it hilariously off message and silly. "Well.. that wouldn't happen if we had some form of comprehensive healthcare plan possibly involving the term _____-care! Wait. Fuck. Did I just say that? Did I really just imply the solution to that problem would be the other guy's plan? Motherfucker!"
You know what happens in the US when people lose their jobs?
They lose their health insurance.
You know what sick people without health insurance do?
They fucking DIE.
Welcome to reality.
Stop being fucking squimish.
They should have said - "That man retroactively separated himself from the regular campaign before the Super PAC ad in question aired."
"Mitt Romney likes to eat shit and fuck his mom."
Or perhaps, "Mitt Romney backs his car over neighborhood dogs and cats he runs over. TWICE."
I draw a time based line at causation here. Losing health insurance does not cause death. It can prevent health, which is not the same thing.
Essentially: I know it's an emotional appeal, but it has about the same grounds as "you fired that dude, and he came down with cancer kater. You killed him." which would be an unbelievable leap of logic for anyone. "You fired that dude and he lost his insurance, and came down with cancer which he couldn't afford treatment for" is damning enough in my mind. Attaching the death implies that if I ever fire anyone, I'm eventually responsible for their deaths?
Why go the extra logical leap when the facts are damning enough?
I think you got the first one backwards.
TylerJ on League of Legends (it's free and fun!)
That ad isn't saying Romney killed his wife, it says Romney doesn't understand the consequences of the actions he takes and policies he supports. Which is true if we want to be generous about Mr. Mittens' character.
When you ask why if liberals are so fucking smart they lose so goddamn always, remember the porter.
Because it should be attached. Because a lack of public healthcare in America is directly killing people and a very real, massive weight around the necks of business large and small that completely fucks up labor mobility.
Like 90% of what PE funds do wouldn't fucking matter if regulation and safety nets were actually enforceable and comprehensive. I have approximately zero problems with a candidate who's platform is against both those things were forced to defend why the obvious consequences should be acceptable to the American public.
I know. I just kinda lament that it's come down to this. There was a time in our history where this kinda crap was agreeably uncalled for.
This is mostly correct. Politics is not a sport; policy has consequences, and we have to engage in a discussion about those consequences in an honest manner.
However, the ad's not really about Romney's policy, it's about his character. I'd be less guilty about liking the ad if the message was "This is what will happen if Romney is elected and repeals Obamacare" rather than "This Romney guy is a scumbag and a murderer".
The Pro-Obama SuperPACs are running ads that are negative in tone but factually correct.
The Pro-Romney SuperPACs (and Romney himself) are running ads that are negative in tone and patently false.
These two things are not the same.
twitch.tv/Taramoor
@TaramoorPlays
Taramoor on Youtube
"Did you know Obama is a muslim? He wasn't even born in America!"
"Did you know that because of the policies Mitt Romney advocates there is real harm coming to American families?"
Hmm...
DIRTIEST RHETORIC EVER; OBAMA SHOULD BE ABOVE THIS!
Also, SuperPAC.
And that time would be what? Never? Look at old campaign ads, its always dirty.
pleasepaypreacher.net
When was that time? Jefferson and Adams hated each other (goat fucking child molester would not have been out of place in the campaign of 1800). Burr killed Hamilton. Senators used to beat each other with canes on the Senate floor.
The only time that conceivably could have been politically "polite" was when everyone was owned by the Trusts in the Gilded Age.
When Jefferson was running against Adams, Adams ran advertisements stating that Jefferson was secretly a hermaphrodite.
This ain't new.
twitch.tv/Taramoor
@TaramoorPlays
Taramoor on Youtube
Sorry.
I didn't mean to come off as jumping on you, but I really think the Jefferson/Adams campaign stuff is hilarious, you know, 200 years after the fact.
twitch.tv/Taramoor
@TaramoorPlays
Taramoor on Youtube