QuoteRomney readying for low-key European turn
LONDON — Mitt Romney will land here Wednesday for the start of an overseas tour that will take him into the heart of Obama country: Europe.
As the Democratic presidential hopeful in 2008, Barack Obama's visit to Europe ahead of the election drew saturation media coverage and massive crowds — including 250,000 people for a landmark speech in Berlin — that cemented the senator from Illinois's rock-star status in the grand capitals of the Old World. Four years later, President Obama, although somewhat off his peak, still receives approval ratings of 80 percent or higher in Britain, France and Germany.
In contrast, as Romney arrives for a week-long run through Britain and Poland, with a trip to Israel in between, the Republican presidential candidate remains relatively unknown in Europe. His first stop in London has received miserly coverage in the back pages of British newspapers, where he is often characterized by his wealth and Mormon religion. Over the course of an hour in this city's busy Paddington Station this week, eight of 15 people stopped by a reporter were not sure who Romney was.
"Is he the millionaire?" Barbara Bolan, 64, a retired optician, asked with a puzzled look.
That is, perhaps, exactly the way Romney wants it. Observers cite his seeming reluctance to discuss his time in France as a young Mormon missionary, and the intense if pragmatic Republican focus on his domestic image, as evidence that Romney is happy to stage a low-key tour. Republicans may even consider too much of an outpouring a drawback, given the liberal-leaning image of European politicians. For instance, British Prime Minister David Cameron — a conservative with whom Romney will meet on Thursday — is openly pushing to legalize same-sex marriage and has proudly called his administration the "greenest" in the nation's history.
There is also the reality that Obama — credited with dramatically boosting the image of the United States in a region that had little love for President George W. Bush — remains so popular in Europe that trying to outshine him here would be too high a bar.
"The Republican Party today is about what's happening at home, it's about domestic issues," said Xenia Dormandy, senior fellow at Chatham House in London. "It's not looking for a discussion on America's reputation in the world. Because if Romney gets into that debate, especially in Europe, he is going to lose."
Romney's trip should, however, offer him a chance to portray himself as an international statesman. Cameron, Polish Prime Minister Donald Tusk and Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu will welcome him. In addition, Romney will meet with opposition leaders and other notable figures, including former British prime minister Tony Blair and the Polish Solidarity icon Lech Walesa.
On Friday, Romney will meet with Irish Prime Minister Enda Kenny, and aides said he may join other foreign dignitaries in London for the opening ceremony of the Olympic Games, which he plans to attend. He is not expected to deliver formal remarks in Britain.
"This trip is an opportunity for the governor to listen and learn, to visit countries that share common values, common interests, and I should also say in many cases shared heritage with people here in the United States," Lanhee Chen, the Romney campaign's policy director, told reporters.
Romney has caused a local stir by tapping the deep pockets of American bankers in London at two fundraisers — one co-hosted by a top lobbyist at Barclays and a dinner costing as much as $75,000 per head — at a time when financial institutions here are facing an image crisis over a scandal involving interest-rate manipulation. In response, a cluster of left-leaning British politicians have put forward a largely symbolic motion chiding the banks for engaging in U.S. fundraising at such a sensitive time.
"I think it offends people's sense of morals and ethics," said Grahame Morris, a lawmaker from the opposition Labor Party. "Barclays should stop promoting candidates that are intent on deregulating the markets."
In Israel, Romney will attempt to strike a contrast with Obama, who has not visited the country while in office and has had a cool relationship with Netanyahu, aggravated by disagreements over how to promote peace with the Palestinians.
American Jews living in Israel, many of them religiously observant and politically conservative, voted overwhelmingly for Obama's Republican opponent, Sen. John McCain (Ariz.), in the 2008 presidential election, and Obama is widely considered less than friendly to the policies of the right-leaning Israeli government. That has appeared to ensure Romney a warm welcome.
"He will be received with presidential honor, due both to love of the candidate and hatred of his rival," Yossi Sarid, a left-leaning columnist and former lawmaker, wrote in the liberal newspaper Haaretz.
In Poland, the last leg of his journey, Romney will find himself in a country where Obama is substantially less popular. A Pew Research Center poll from June showed that 50 percent of those asked had confidence in the U.S. president — far lower than in Western Europe. But on the streets of Warsaw, there has been little attention paid to Romney's trip.
At the same time, Romney's status as a candidate rather than an elected leader has led to a delicate dance of protocol, with Tusk opting to receive Romney in his home town of Gdansk, outside the Polish capital.
But Romney might schedule a speech on foreign policy while in Poland. Sources familiar with the planning in Poland said the candidate's advisers want 1,000 to 2,000 people to attend, a figure that Polish organizers say could be hard to achieve.
Yet some Polish media reports have portrayed Romney's trip as a reassurance of the traditionally close relationship between the Republican Party and Central Europe.
"There are less and less people in Washington who are familiar with Central Europe," said Bartosz Wisniewski, a U.S. analyst at the Polish Institute of International Affairs. "Mr. Romney has these kinds of guys on his team. We should seize this chance."
But wait: there's more!
QuoteMitt Romney would restore 'Anglo-Saxon' relations between Britain and America
Mitt Romney would restore "Anglo-Saxon" understanding to the special relationship between the US and Britain, and return Sir Winston Churchill's bust to the White House, according to advisers.
The Telegraph
As the Republican presidential challenger accused Barack Obama of appeasing America's enemies in his first foreign policy speech of the US general election campaign, advisers told The Daily Telegraph that he would abandon Mr Obama's "Left-wing" coolness towards London.
In remarks that may prompt accusations of racial insensitivity, one suggested that Mr Romney was better placed to understand the depth of ties between the two countries than Mr Obama, whose father was from Africa.
"We are part of an Anglo-Saxon heritage, and he feels that the special relationship is special," the adviser said of Mr Romney, adding: "The White House didn't fully appreciate the shared history we have".
Mr Romney on Wednesday embarks on an overseas tour of Britain, Israel and Poland designed to quash claims by Mr Obama's team that he is a "novice" in foreign affairs. It comes four years after Mr Obama's own landmark foreign tour, which attracted thousands of supporters.
He lands in London early on Wednesday morning, in advance of meetings with David Cameron and other senior ministers on Thursday. He will also meet Ed Miliband and Tony Blair before attending two lucrative fundraisers and the opening ceremony of the Olympics.
He used a speech in Nevada on Tuesday to accuse the President of drastically weakening America's stance towards rivals such as Russia, China and Iran while imposing "devastating" spending cuts on the US military.
"If you do not want America to be the strongest nation on earth, I am not your President," he told the Veterans of Foreign Wars. "You have that President today". Promising another "American century" in which the US acts as the global night watchman and does not hesitate to "wield our strength" when needed, he said: "I will not surrender America's leadership in the world".
Members of the former Massachusetts governor's foreign policy advisory team claimed that as president, he would reverse Mr Obama's priority of repairing strained overseas relationships while not spending so much time maintaining traditional alliances such as Britain and Israel.
"In contrast to President Obama, whose first instinct is to reach out to America's adversaries, the Governor's first impulse is to consult and co-ordinate and to move closer to our friends and allies overseas so they can rely on American constancy and strength," one told the Telegraph.
"Obama is a Left-winger," said another. "He doesn't value the NATO alliance as much, he's very comfortable with American decline and the traditional alliances don't mean as much to him. He wouldn't like singing 'Land of Hope and Glory'."
The two advisers said Mr Romney would seek to reinstate the Churchill bust displayed in the Oval Office by George W. Bush but returned to British diplomats by Mr Obama when he took office in 2009. One said Mr Romney viewed the move as "symbolically important" while the other said it was "just for starters", adding: "He is naturally more Atlanticist".
Mr Obama has appeared less interested in relations with London than Mr Bush. He repeatedly rebuffed Gordon Brown when the then-prime minister sought a meeting at the UN in 2009 and was criticised for responding to an elaborate gift with a set of DVDs that did not work in Britain.
A change in tone was reflected by the enthusiastic welcome extended to Mr Cameron during an official visit and dinner in March. However, British diplomats remain frustrated by their "transactional" relationship with the Obama White House and lack of support on issues such as the Falkland Islands.
Mr Romney has not made any commitments on the Falklands, but several in his foreign policy team favour backing Britain and publicly rejecting claims of sovereignty by Christina Kirchner, the Argentine president. Under Mr Obama the US remains neutral.
The advisers could not give detailed examples of how policy towards Britain would differ under Mr Romney. One conceded that on the European crisis: "I'm not sure what our policy response is."
However they said Mr Cameron and Mr Romney, who is being advised by several former Bush aides and other neo-conservative thinkers, shared a seriousness towards the threats of Islamist terrorism, a potentially nuclear-armed Iran and the challenging consequences of the Arab Spring.
Mr Romney has pledged to stop Iran obtaining a nuclear weapon, threatening military action more stridently than Mr Obama. He said on Tuesday that only a "complete cessation" of uranium enrichment by Iran was satisfactory – a stronger demand than the White House's.
"The same ayatollahs who each year mark a holiday by leading chants of 'Death to America' are not going to be talked out of their pursuit of nuclear weapons," he said in his speech.
After leaving London, he will deliver a speech in Jerusalem on Sunday, again threatening Iran and criticising Mr Obama for declining to visit Israel since taking office. He will give another speech in Warsaw on Tuesday.
He also attacked Mr Obama on Tuesday over the "contemptible" alleged leak of secrets about the raid that killed Osama bin Laden, the drone campaign against al-Qaeda and cyber-attacks on Iran.
The advisers spoke on the condition of anonymity because Mr Romney's campaign requested that they not criticise the President to foreign media. After another adviser criticised Mr Obama in a German magazine last month, the President sharply instructed them that "America's political differences end at the water's edge".
Mitt Romney was speaking to a war veterans' group in Reno, Nevada when he made strongly worded attacks on the foreign policies of Barack Obama.
The Republican candidate said Mr Obama had alienated Israel, the United States' main ally in the Middle East, after an open microphone caught the president criticising Israeli prime minister Benjamin Netanyahu last year.
"The people of Israel deserve better than what they have received from the leader of the free world," Mr Romney told the assembled veterans.
He then questioned whether the danger of a nuclear-armed Iran had receded in any way during the four years of the Obama administration.
Mr Romney went on to assure the audience that he would face-up to China over alleged currency manipulation as well as copyright and patent theft. "The president hasn't done it and won't do it and I will", he said.
Who are you even arguing with? We know both candidates are shit, but we all know that Mitt is worse because he's got all the baggage that comes with being a Republican, such as the gun lobby, political Christianity and all the deregulators.
Quote from: Neil on July 25, 2012, 11:13:17 PM
Who are you even arguing with? We know both candidates are shit, but we all know that Mitt is worse because he's got all the baggage that comes with being a Republican, such as the gun lobby, political Christianity and all the deregulators.
I'm not arguing with anybody, you fucking foreigner. This is the Mittenspalooza World Tour Megathread, to chronicle all the interesting tidbits of his European visits, for the benefit of all Languishites, as they develop.
Now go back to masturbating into your flanneled Gretzsky sex doll.
Waste of time. It would probably be far easier to pander to Democrats than to Europeans.
Quote from: CountDeMoney on July 25, 2012, 11:19:16 PM
Quote from: Neil on July 25, 2012, 11:13:17 PM
Who are you even arguing with? We know both candidates are shit, but we all know that Mitt is worse because he's got all the baggage that comes with being a Republican, such as the gun lobby, political Christianity and all the deregulators.
I'm not arguing with anybody, you fucking foreigner. This is the Mittenspalooza World Tour Megathread, to chronicle all the interesting tidbits of his European visits, for the benefit of all Languishites, as they develop.
Now go back to masturbating into your flanneled Gretzsky sex doll.
No it isn't. This thread is for you to sneer at Republicans. There's no useful information to convey in relation to Romney, because he's not important.
Quote from: Neil on July 25, 2012, 11:13:17 PM
Who are you even arguing with? We know both candidates are shit, but we all know that Mitt is worse because he's got all the baggage that comes with being a Republican, such as the gun lobby, political Christianity and all the deregulators.
I don't agree with the "we all know" section.
Quote from: Neil on July 25, 2012, 11:22:20 PM
No it isn't. This thread is for you to sneer at Republicans. There's no useful information to convey in relation to Romney, because he's not important.
He will be, if he becomes your President. Oh wait...he can't be, because you're a useless fucking Canadian who only thinks he's an American.*
*All the other Canadian citizens on the board are exempt from this statement, of course. None of you guys are the North American equivalent of Martinus, wishing he was someone he's not.
Do we have to point out, yet again, that you're the one who wishes that you had my gun control, socialized medicine, fewer blacks and no Republicans?
The only thing in the US I'm interested in is 4-down football and dreadnought battleships.
Quote from: Neil on July 25, 2012, 11:33:44 PM
Do we have to point out, yet again, that you're the one who wishes that you had my gun control, socialized medicine, fewer blacks and no Republicans?
Not at the expense of using Monopoly colored money and coins with ducks on them. You only wish you had a passport with big eagle on it.
QuoteThe only thing in the US I'm interested in is 4-down football and dreadnought battleships.
Who gives a fuck. Stop shitthreading, and go back to letting Timmay lovingly lather your scrotum, you simple foreign gimp.
Quote from: garbon on July 25, 2012, 11:24:55 PM
Quote from: Neil on July 25, 2012, 11:13:17 PM
Who are you even arguing with? We know both candidates are shit, but we all know that Mitt is worse because he's got all the baggage that comes with being a Republican, such as the gun lobby, political Christianity and all the deregulators.
I don't agree with the "we all know" section.
You don't feel that those groups are baggage to the once noble Republican Party?
Oh those groups are but I don't think that makes him worse.
I'm more or less OK with the gun lobby and very cool with "all the deregulators."
Quote from: CountDeMoney on July 25, 2012, 11:35:46 PM
Quote from: Neil on July 25, 2012, 11:33:44 PM
Do we have to point out, yet again, that you're the one who wishes that you had my gun control, socialized medicine, fewer blacks and no Republicans?
Not at the expense of using Monopoly colored money and coins with ducks on them. You only wish you had a passport with big eagle on it.
QuoteThe only thing in the US I'm interested in is 4-down football and dreadnought battleships.
Who gives a fuck. Stop shitthreading, and go back to letting Timmay lovingly lather your scrotum, you simple foreign gimp.
Your sour grapes make me laugh. You're the one who seems to feel that I really want to be American, no matter how much I damn handguns and 'health care'.
At any rate, it's my thread, and I'll do what I like with it.
Quote from: CountDeMoney on July 25, 2012, 11:35:46 PM
Quote from: Neil on July 25, 2012, 11:33:44 PM
Do we have to point out, yet again, that you're the one who wishes that you had my gun control, socialized medicine, fewer blacks and no Republicans?
Not at the expense of using Monopoly colored money and coins with ducks on them. You only wish you had a passport with big eagle on it.
The one that everyone sneers at around the world? I'll pass.
Quote from: Barrister on July 26, 2012, 12:05:39 AM
Quote from: CountDeMoney on July 25, 2012, 11:35:46 PM
Quote from: Neil on July 25, 2012, 11:33:44 PM
Do we have to point out, yet again, that you're the one who wishes that you had my gun control, socialized medicine, fewer blacks and no Republicans?
Not at the expense of using Monopoly colored money and coins with ducks on them. You only wish you had a passport with big eagle on it.
The one that everyone sneers at around the world? I'll pass.
They sneer because they wish they had it. :D
Well, if he is afraid he will lose his right winger credentials by meeting with Cameron, I'm sure meeting with the homophobic Polish ruling party will help him. :mad:
Quotethe Polish Solidarity icon Lech Walesa.
That will help him with the lunatic right wing Polish immigration in the US (who overwhelmingly support PiS), who consider Walesa a traitor and a Russian spy. :lol:
Quote from: Tonitrus on July 25, 2012, 11:19:20 PM
Waste of time. It would probably be far easier to pander to Democrats than to Europeans.
He is not pandering to Europeans. He is pandering to the Brits, the Poles and the Israelis (the latter two nations having a relatively sizable minorities in the US who can vote in the US presidential elections). If you consider these to be "Europeans" you really know very little about European politics. :lol:
Don't worry, nobody here considers Poles to be European. :P
Quote from: Peter Wiggin on July 26, 2012, 12:38:38 AM
Don't worry, nobody here considers Poles to be European. :P
I know. :P
But none of the nations he is visiting is really European. Brits are their own category and neither Israelis nor Poles count either. These are all the nations that traditionally like Republicans in the US.
Quote from: Martinus on July 26, 2012, 12:43:07 AM
Quote from: Peter Wiggin on July 26, 2012, 12:38:38 AM
Don't worry, nobody here considers Poles to be European. :P
I know. :P
But none of the nations he is visiting is really European. Brits are their own category and neither Israelis nor Poles count either. These are all the nations that traditionally like Republicans in the US.
I'm surprised that Poles really have any preference one way or the other between Democrats and Republicans. I figured that they would still be debating Federalists vs Anti-Federalists.
;)
Quote from: dps on July 26, 2012, 12:51:43 AM
Quote from: Martinus on July 26, 2012, 12:43:07 AM
Quote from: Peter Wiggin on July 26, 2012, 12:38:38 AM
Don't worry, nobody here considers Poles to be European. :P
I know. :P
But none of the nations he is visiting is really European. Brits are their own category and neither Israelis nor Poles count either. These are all the nations that traditionally like Republicans in the US.
I'm surprised that Poles really have any preference one way or the other between Democrats and Republicans. I figured that they would still be debating Federalists vs Anti-Federalists.
;)
Well, Republican presidents since Reagan at least have been traditionally involved with this part of Europe, whereas Democrats largely ignore it.
Quote from: Neil on July 25, 2012, 11:52:43 PM
At any rate, it's my thread, and I'll do what I like with it.
Fuck you, you filthy fucking nigger.
Quote from: CountDeMoney on July 26, 2012, 01:56:07 AM
Quote from: Neil on July 25, 2012, 11:52:43 PM
At any rate, it's my thread, and I'll do what I like with it.
Fuck you, you filthy fucking nigger.
The recognized term is "nigger faggot". :contract:
He's not pandering to anyone foreign. He's using the trip to make his point that Obama abandoned and confuses America's allies, while giving hope to her enemies. A Romney Presidency will change that. Nothing is about diplomacy or convincing foreigners.
He's got a bit of a tin ear. Maybe shouldn't have made comments about the London games today :bleeding:
He's not making any friends over here, but I'm sure he doesn't care much about that as long as he can get roll out his ZOMG I saved the SLC Olympics and I can save America schitick
Quote from: CountDeMoney on July 26, 2012, 01:56:07 AM
Quote from: Neil on July 25, 2012, 11:52:43 PM
At any rate, it's my thread, and I'll do what I like with it.
Fuck you, you filthy fucking nigger.
None of those up here. It's nice.
At any rate, the whole 'Foreign policy guy' thing was tried by McCain, who at least had the credentials to claim that, and they still lost. Are they just going to run the same playbook over and over again?
Quote from: Sheilbh on July 26, 2012, 06:51:14 AM
He's got a bit of a tin ear. Maybe shouldn't have made comments about the London games today :bleeding:
It is odd that he thought he should criticize them...
QuoteREPUBLICAN presidential candidate Mitt Romney has quickly caused a stir on his overseas tour by questioning whether Britain is prepared to pull off the Olympic Games without problems.
"It's hard to know just how well it will turn out," Romney told NBC News, and he called the late-developing concerns over security staffing "disconcerting".
Romney, a former businessman and one-term governor who managed the Salt Lake City Olympics in 2002, is largely untested on the world's political stage, and he hopes to assert himself in a tight and highly expensive presidential race with foreign visits that also include Israel and Poland.
He ended up putting British Prime Minister David Cameron at least briefly on the defensive.
In response to Romney's remarks, Cameron said: "We are holding an Olympic Games in one of the busiest, most active, bustling cities anywhere in the world. Of course it's easier if you hold an Olympic Games in the middle of nowhere." :lol: :lol:
He apparently was referring to Utah, the site of the Games Romney managed. The lively British media pounced. "PM delivers Olympic putdown to Romney," The Times newspaper in London trumpeted.
Meeting with British officials is typically one of the first priorities of any new US president, and establishing those relationships beforehand can help any transition. President Barack Obama met with British leaders when he took a trip abroad while campaigning for president in 2008.
During the public portion of his meeting with Cameron, Romney tried to smooth over his earlier comments.
"It is impossible for absolutely no mistakes to occur," he said. "Of course there will be errors from time to time, but those are all overshadowed by the extraordinary demonstrations of courage, character and determination by the athletes."
After the meeting, Romney told reporters that he and Cameron spoke "at length" about Syria as well as Libya, Pakistan and other countries.
Romney also met with former prime minister Tony Blair and with Ed Miliband, the leader of the opposition Labour Party.
Meetings followed with Foreign Secretary William Hague and Deputy Prime Ministe Nick Clegg.
The meetings come a day after the Daily Telegraph newspaper published a story quoting an unidentified Romney campaign adviser saying the Republican believes the US relationship with Britain is special because of shared "Anglo-Saxon heritage" and the White House doesn't appreciate that shared history.
Romney quickly distanced himself from any such view.
"I don't agree with whoever that adviser might be," Romney told NBC News, "but do agree that we have a very common bond between ourselves and Great Britain."
Later Thursday, Romney planned to hold a high-dollar fundraiser. One of the hosts, former Barclays CEO Bob Diamond, withdrew from the event after he resigned in the wake of a rate-rigging scandal involving British banks.
Diamond had already sent a check for $US2500 ($A2430). So have 82 others who listed their employer as Barclays or Barclays Capital on US Federal Election Commission records.
http://www.dailytelegraph.com.au/news/breaking-news/romney-causes-stir-in-britain/story-e6freuz9-1226436272277
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-19006480 :lol:
/Seedy
Oh, but his day wasn't complete, Funk--
QuoteThe GOP candidate seemed to forget Labour Leader Ed Miliband's first name, simply calling him "Mr. Leader."
QuoteAnd in a big British no-no, Romney announced at 10 Downing Street that he had met the chief of MI-6. It's custom for visiting dignitaries not to announce such things, as MI-6 is highly clandestine.
Way to go, Mittens.
Quote from: dps on July 26, 2012, 12:51:43 AM
I'm surprised that Poles really have any preference one way or the other between Democrats and Republicans. I figured that they would still be debating Federalists vs Anti-Federalists.
;)
:XD:
Quote from: CountDeMoney on July 26, 2012, 06:02:02 PM
Oh, but his day wasn't complete, Funk--
QuoteThe GOP candidate seemed to forget Labour Leader Ed Miliband's first name, simply calling him "Mr. Leader."
QuoteAnd in a big British no-no, Romney announced at 10 Downing Street that he had met the chief of MI-6. It's custom for visiting dignitaries not to announce such things, as MI-6 is highly clandestine.
Way to go, Mittens.
On the bright side for the Romney camp, he can only go up from here.
I think. :lol:
Quote from: CountDeMoney on July 26, 2012, 06:02:02 PM
QuoteThe GOP candidate seemed to forget Labour Leader Ed Miliband's first name, simply calling him "Mr. Leader."
That one is only fair.
Quote from: CountDeMoney on July 26, 2012, 06:02:02 PM
QuoteAnd in a big British no-no, Romney announced at 10 Downing Street that he had met the chief of MI-6. It's custom for visiting dignitaries not to announce such things, as MI-6 is highly clandestine.
Way to go, Mittens.
Did she show him her Oscar?
Quote from: FunkMonk on July 26, 2012, 05:45:17 PM
QuoteREPUBLICAN presidential candidate Mitt Romney has quickly caused a stir on his overseas tour by questioning whether Britain is prepared to pull off the Olympic Games without problems.
"It's hard to know just how well it will turn out," Romney told NBC News, and he called the late-developing concerns over security staffing "disconcerting".
.......
In response to Romney's remarks, Cameron said: "We are holding an Olympic Games in one of the busiest, most active, bustling cities anywhere in the world. Of course it's easier if you hold an Olympic Games in the middle of nowhere." :lol: :lol:
He apparently was referring to Utah, the site of the Games Romney managed. The lively British media pounced. "PM delivers Olympic putdown to Romney," The Times newspaper in London trumpeted.
......
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-19006480 :lol:
/Seedy
Well played Sir. :bowler:
I like Cameron's soundbite. Mitt's going to have to do better than that, especially since the US media will gleefully report that the leaders of pretty much everywhere he goes are snickering at him.
Quote from: garbon on July 26, 2012, 06:18:07 PM
That one is only fair.
Duh. When you forget a man's name, you call him "bro", "dude", or "chief". :rolleyes:
Quote from: garbon on July 26, 2012, 06:18:07 PM
Quote from: CountDeMoney on July 26, 2012, 06:02:02 PM
QuoteThe GOP candidate seemed to forget Labour Leader Ed Miliband's first name, simply calling him "Mr. Leader."
That one is only fair.
Especially since there are two Milibands in the Labour Party, and both are utterly worthless caretakers with no brains or vision.
Quote from: Caliga on July 26, 2012, 07:25:01 PM
Duh. When you forget a man's name, you call him "bro", "dude", or "chief". :rolleyes:
Or buddy, pal, ace, slick, slim, homeboy, campanero, paisano, holmes, vato, my man.
It'd be ossum if the guy had said something at the press conference and Mitt agreed by saying "Quite right, slick." :cool:
I don't know if there is an easier layup in foreign trips than the pre election Olympic visit, especially to a country that Obama is theoretically neglecting and has a london mayor and PM in your party's camp. But now Cameron and Boris are publicly taking shots at Romney and I saw Boris leading a 60k crowd in "yes we can" chants. :lol:
A few more days of this and Romney is going to inspire a massive pro-Obama letter writing campaign from England to Ohio.
Quote from: alfred russel on July 26, 2012, 07:44:42 PM
A few more days of this and Romney is going to inspire a massive pro-Obama letter writing campaign from England to Ohio.
^_^
Quote from: CountDeMoney on July 25, 2012, 11:06:20 PM
Mitt Romney would restore 'Anglo-Saxon' relations between Britain and America
I prefer we stick with 'Norman' relations personally.
Yes, we all know you're a frog-lover. :mad:
Quote from: Caliga on July 26, 2012, 07:25:01 PM
Quote from: garbon on July 26, 2012, 06:18:07 PM
That one is only fair.
Duh. When you forget a man's name, you call him "bro", "dude", or "chief". :rolleyes:
It worked for Dubya.
Quote from: alfred russel on July 26, 2012, 07:44:42 PMA few more days of this and Romney is going to inspire a massive pro-Obama letter writing campaign from England to Ohio.
Maybe that's his Machiavellian goal? :D
Quote from: Martinus on July 27, 2012, 12:32:06 AM
Quote from: alfred russel on July 26, 2012, 07:44:42 PMA few more days of this and Romney is going to inspire a massive pro-Obama letter writing campaign from England to Ohio.
Maybe that's his Machiavellian goal? :D
It's "gaol". :contract:
Quote from: Caliga on July 26, 2012, 07:25:01 PM
Quote from: garbon on July 26, 2012, 06:18:07 PM
That one is only fair.
Duh. When you forget a man's name, you call him "bro", "dude", or "chief". :rolleyes:
I was thinking more like - who wants to remember the Milibands?
(https://languish.org/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2F216.77.188.54%2FcoDataImages%2Fp%2FGroups%2F412%2F412406%2Ffolders%2F303347%2F249061674e80e10d7d311e18ca012313806b8407.jpg&hash=78bd140494321ffd6bff8a960d44f40b5987b3bf)
Mitt is +5 in Rasmussen. I don't think his London PR blitz will have much of an impact back home :)
Quote from: derspiess on July 27, 2012, 11:13:08 AM
I don't think his London PR blitz will have much of an impact back home :)
Shocking.
Quote from: derspiess on July 27, 2012, 11:13:08 AM
Mitt is +5 in Rasmussen.
Big Deal, +5 is within the margin of error; and Gallup has them dead even. So eat that, GOPfucktard fetusfucker.
QuoteI don't think his London PR blitz will have much of an impact back home :)
Wait until he fucks it all up in Israel.
I have a hard time believing that the American people care nothing at all for foreign policy, except in a prestige sense.
<insert joke about Guardian letter-writing campaign>
Quote from: derspiess on July 27, 2012, 11:13:08 AM
Mitt is +5 in Rasmussen. I don't think his London PR blitz will have much of an impact back home :)
Not immediately, but it's ammunition for the Obama campaign, at the very least.
On the plus side for Mitt he raised $2m at a dinner in London last night.
Quote from: Gups on July 27, 2012, 11:30:42 AM
Not immediately, but it's ammunition for the Obama campaign, at the very least.
On the plus side for Mitt he raised $2m at a dinner in London last night.
With London restaurant prices, however, that only leaves 23 quid after paying the bar tab.
Quote from: CountDeMoney on July 27, 2012, 11:20:27 AM
Big Deal, +5 is within the margin of error;
Still an improvement.
Quoteand Gallup has them dead even.
True-- Gallup has fluctuated between +2 either way. I'm definitely not calling it for Romney at this point, but if I were on your side I'd be a little worried.
Quote from: Gups on July 27, 2012, 11:30:42 AM
Not immediately, but it's ammunition for the Obama campaign, at the very least.
I'm not so sure that's going to resonate. One could argue that it should, but I doubt it will.
Quote from: The Minsky Moment on July 27, 2012, 11:32:22 AM
Quote from: Gups on July 27, 2012, 11:30:42 AM
Not immediately, but it's ammunition for the Obama campaign, at the very least.
On the plus side for Mitt he raised $2m at a dinner in London last night.
With London restaurant prices, however, that only leaves 23 quid after paying the bar tab.
He did a runner.
Quote from: derspiess on July 27, 2012, 11:33:04 AM
I'm definitely not calling it for Romney at this point, but if I were on your side I'd be a little worried.
I'm glad you're not on my side. I don't need your whore pills. And a presidential candidate with no policies other than a Nixonian Vietnamization "I'll fix the economy, but won't tell you how until I get there" approach? Not worrisome.
Besides, if Mittens wins, it won't be through any miracle of his own; it'll be thanks to the state level GOPtards in Ohio, Pennsylvania, Texas and Florida and the other states who've done all the advanced leg work in developing voter registration laws designed specifically to restrict and draw down the voting population.
Quote from: CountDeMoney on July 27, 2012, 11:42:11 AM
Besides, if Mittens wins, it won't be through any miracle of his own; it'll be thanks to the state level GOPtards in Ohio, Pennsylvania, Texas and Florida and the other states who've done all the advanced leg work in developing voter registration laws designed specifically to restrict and draw down the voting population.
That's it-- start crafting an excuse now. You may need it.
FWIW, my gut tells me that if the election were held today Mitt would win the popular vote and Obama would win the electoral vote by a thin margin.
Quote from: derspiess on July 27, 2012, 12:02:43 PM
That's it-- start crafting an excuse now. You may need it.
:lol: The most concerted effort to suppress the vote since the pre-civil rights era is an excuse. OK, Mr. Wallace.
QuoteFWIW, my gut tells me that if the election were held today Mitt would win the popular vote and Obama would win the electoral vote by a thin margin.
Then Mittens can chill with Al Gore and share sob stories.
Quote from: CountDeMoney on July 27, 2012, 12:08:26 PM
:lol: The most concerted effort to suppress the vote since the pre-civil rights era is an excuse. OK, Mr. Wallace.
Suppressing votes from convicted felons, illegal aliens, Donald Duck, and people who already voted? Yeah, crime of the century.
Quote from: derspiess on July 27, 2012, 12:13:04 PM
Suppressing votes from convicted felons, illegal aliens, Donald Duck, and people who already voted? Yeah, crime of the century.
Keep drinking the Kool-Aid, Strom.
The economy is only going to get worse in the next 3 months, so Obama better be campaigning hard. Of course, if Romney wins, it's going to get even worse.
Meanwhile . . .
http://www.latimes.com/news/politics/la-pn-obama-losing-a-majority-who-think-hes-a-christian-20120726,0,6779472.story
QuotePresident Obama is struggling to get to 50% — not just of voters in November -- but of Americans, at any time, who will recognize that he is a Christian.
The Pew Research Center's Forum on Religion and Public Life released a survey Thursday showing that just 49% of Americans described the president as a Christian, while 17% said they believed he was Muslim. Just before the 2008 election, a majority, 55%, described then-candidate Obama's faith as Christian, while just 12% said he was Muslim.
The lingering questions about Obama's faith likely come from people of two mind-sets. One is those who have an intense dislike of the president and find confirmation of all their fears in a fever swamp of conspiracy websites. Where a birth certificate is not accepted as proof of someone's place of birth, forget about verifying something as intangible as a statement of faith.
The second factor driving up Obama's "Muslim number" is doubtless the urge of some respondents to stick it in the pollsters' ear -- to commit a small act of defiance by giving an answer the voter knows is untrue. When the interloper in the Oval Office is deeply loathed, why credit him with anything, least that he is a Christian? Willful ignorance becomes a political act.
The result: While Pew found in October 2008 that 16% of Republicans (and the same percentage of conservative Republicans) called Obama a Muslim, the most recent survey found 30% of Republicans and 34% of conservative Republicans said it was so. Anyone I say is Muslim, is Muslim, got it, pointy-headed (and probably liberal) pollster? Having conjured something like Mullah Barack, is it any wonder that 65% of this group is then "uncomfortable" with Obama as a Muslim?
Republican challenger Mitt Romney has much less of a religion identity problem with voters. Fully 60% of those surveyed understood that the former Massachusetts governor was a Mormon and most of the rest, 32%, didn't know his faith. Of those who knew he was a member of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, a large majority either was comfortable (60%) with that notion or didn't know, or care, about it (21%.)
The long-discussed issue among some political analysts -- that evangelical Christians would not back Romney -- appears mostly unrealized, according to the Pew survey. Doubts among evangelicals do not lead to a major decline of support , but they do create an enthusiasm gap. The Pew pollsters concluded: "Among Republican and Republican-leaning voters who say they are comfortable with Romney being Mormon, 44% back him strongly. Among those who are uncomfortable with it, just 21% say they back him strongly."
Neither Obama nor Romney has made religion a major component of a campaign yoked relentlessly to jobs and the economy. It's unclear, in any event, that a lot of religious talk would change the views of each man's most ardent detractors. Romney's Mormon faith will never be Christian enough for the few. Obama could be baptized in front of his most extreme naysayers and they would just find the holy water impure.
Quote from: Syt on July 27, 2012, 01:32:05 PM
Meanwhile . . .
http://www.latimes.com/news/politics/la-pn-obama-losing-a-majority-who-think-hes-a-christian-20120726,0,6779472.story
QuotePresident Obama is struggling to get to 50% — not just of voters in November -- but of Americans, at any time, who will recognize that he is a Christian.
The Pew Research Center's Forum on Religion and Public Life released a survey Thursday showing that just 49% of Americans described the president as a Christian, while 17% said they believed he was Muslim. Just before the 2008 election, a majority, 55%, described then-candidate Obama's faith as Christian, while just 12% said he was Muslim.
The lingering questions about Obama's faith likely come from people of two mind-sets. One is those who have an intense dislike of the president and find confirmation of all their fears in a fever swamp of conspiracy websites. Where a birth certificate is not accepted as proof of someone's place of birth, forget about verifying something as intangible as a statement of faith.
The second factor driving up Obama's "Muslim number" is doubtless the urge of some respondents to stick it in the pollsters' ear -- to commit a small act of defiance by giving an answer the voter knows is untrue. When the interloper in the Oval Office is deeply loathed, why credit him with anything, least that he is a Christian? Willful ignorance becomes a political act.
The result: While Pew found in October 2008 that 16% of Republicans (and the same percentage of conservative Republicans) called Obama a Muslim, the most recent survey found 30% of Republicans and 34% of conservative Republicans said it was so. Anyone I say is Muslim, is Muslim, got it, pointy-headed (and probably liberal) pollster? Having conjured something like Mullah Barack, is it any wonder that 65% of this group is then "uncomfortable" with Obama as a Muslim?
Republican challenger Mitt Romney has much less of a religion identity problem with voters. Fully 60% of those surveyed understood that the former Massachusetts governor was a Mormon and most of the rest, 32%, didn't know his faith. Of those who knew he was a member of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, a large majority either was comfortable (60%) with that notion or didn't know, or care, about it (21%.)
The long-discussed issue among some political analysts -- that evangelical Christians would not back Romney -- appears mostly unrealized, according to the Pew survey. Doubts among evangelicals do not lead to a major decline of support , but they do create an enthusiasm gap. The Pew pollsters concluded: "Among Republican and Republican-leaning voters who say they are comfortable with Romney being Mormon, 44% back him strongly. Among those who are uncomfortable with it, just 21% say they back him strongly."
Neither Obama nor Romney has made religion a major component of a campaign yoked relentlessly to jobs and the economy. It's unclear, in any event, that a lot of religious talk would change the views of each man's most ardent detractors. Romney's Mormon faith will never be Christian enough for the few. Obama could be baptized in front of his most extreme naysayers and they would just find the holy water impure.
Well, I do remember there was a crescent moon the night he was elected.
Quote from: derspiess on July 27, 2012, 01:43:05 PM
Well, I do remember there was a crescent moon the night he was elected.
I remember being pissed that I ended up with Obama and no gay marriage in California. :angry:
Quote from: garbon on July 27, 2012, 01:45:02 PM
Quote from: derspiess on July 27, 2012, 01:43:05 PM
Well, I do remember there was a crescent moon the night he was elected.
I remember being pissed that I ended up with Obama and no gay marriage in California. :angry:
Give it a minute. The Prop 8 case is still working its way up the chain.
Quote from: derspiess on July 27, 2012, 12:02:43 PM
FWIW, my gut tells me that if the election were held today Mitt would win the popular vote
Depends.
Can dead but newly-baptized Jews vote?
Quote from: ulmont on July 27, 2012, 01:58:55 PM
Quote from: garbon on July 27, 2012, 01:45:02 PM
Quote from: derspiess on July 27, 2012, 01:43:05 PM
Well, I do remember there was a crescent moon the night he was elected.
I remember being pissed that I ended up with Obama and no gay marriage in California. :angry:
Give it a minute. The Prop 8 case is still working its way up the chain.
It's been nearly 4 years. :angry:
Quote from: garbon on July 27, 2012, 02:17:07 PM
Quote from: ulmont on July 27, 2012, 01:58:55 PM
Quote from: garbon on July 27, 2012, 01:45:02 PM
Quote from: derspiess on July 27, 2012, 01:43:05 PM
Well, I do remember there was a crescent moon the night he was elected.
I remember being pissed that I ended up with Obama and no gay marriage in California. :angry:
Give it a minute. The Prop 8 case is still working its way up the chain.
It's been nearly 4 years. :angry:
The wheels of justice turn slowly, but grind exceedingly fine.
Quote from: ulmont on July 27, 2012, 02:23:11 PM
Quote from: garbon on July 27, 2012, 02:17:07 PM
Quote from: ulmont on July 27, 2012, 01:58:55 PM
Quote from: garbon on July 27, 2012, 01:45:02 PM
Quote from: derspiess on July 27, 2012, 01:43:05 PM
Well, I do remember there was a crescent moon the night he was elected.
I remember being pissed that I ended up with Obama and no gay marriage in California. :angry:
Give it a minute. The Prop 8 case is still working its way up the chain.
It's been nearly 4 years. :angry:
The wheels of justice turn slowly, but grind exceedingly fine.
Meanwhile California falls behind several other states. :angry:
Quote from: garbon on July 27, 2012, 02:29:02 PM
Meanwhile California falls behind several other states. :angry:
As is usually the case.
Quote from: Neil on July 27, 2012, 02:45:41 PM
Quote from: garbon on July 27, 2012, 02:29:02 PM
Meanwhile California falls behind several other states. :angry:
As is usually the case.
Definitely false! :angry:
Quote from: The Minsky Moment on July 27, 2012, 02:01:16 PM
Quote from: derspiess on July 27, 2012, 12:02:43 PM
FWIW, my gut tells me that if the election were held today Mitt would win the popular vote
Depends.
Can dead but newly-baptized Jews vote?
Only in Chicago. Or I guess maybe Utah :)
False behind doesn't make sense.
Quote from: CountDeMoney on July 27, 2012, 11:42:11 AM
I'm glad you're not on my side. I don't need your whore pills.
Latex fetish?
Boris Johnson used it in his opening speech at Hyde Park :lol:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RphRkM94HEI&feature=player_embedded
The Romney bit is at about 50 seconds. But much of it's worth watching especially for the joke about Greek and Spanish bailout. Remember he's Mayor of London and possible future Tory leader (and mentioned as PM :o)... :mellow:
Quote from: CountDeMoney on July 27, 2012, 11:42:11 AM
Quote from: derspiess on July 27, 2012, 11:33:04 AM
I'm definitely not calling it for Romney at this point, but if I were on your side I'd be a little worried.
I'm glad you're not on my side. I don't need your whore pills. And a presidential candidate with no policies other than a Nixonian Vietnamization "I'll fix the economy, but won't tell you how until I get there" approach? Not worrisome.
Besides, if Mittens wins, it won't be through any miracle of his own; it'll be thanks to the state level GOPtards in Ohio, Pennsylvania, Texas and Florida and the other states who've done all the advanced leg work in developing voter registration laws designed specifically to restrict and draw down the voting population.
Eh, a lot of old white republicans will probably ended up being screwed by those laws as well, so I think it could backfire on them.
Quote from: Sheilbh on July 27, 2012, 07:49:31 PM
Boris Johnson used it in his opening speech at Hyde Park :lol:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RphRkM94HEI&feature=player_embedded
The Romney bit is at about 50 seconds. But much of it's worth watching especially for the joke about Greek and Spanish bailout. Remember he's Mayor of London and possible future Tory leader (and mentioned as PM :o)... :mellow:
That would be awesome. Someone needs to fill the Berlusconi humor void, and as a bonus he actually seems somewhat competent.
Quote from: garbon on July 27, 2012, 02:29:02 PM
Quote from: ulmont on July 27, 2012, 02:23:11 PM
Quote from: garbon on July 27, 2012, 02:17:07 PM
It's been nearly 4 years. :angry:
The wheels of justice turn slowly, but grind exceedingly fine.
Meanwhile California falls behind several other states. :angry:
Yes. Like Iowa. :)
Quote from: alfred russel on July 27, 2012, 10:43:25 PM
Quote from: Sheilbh on July 27, 2012, 07:49:31 PM
Boris Johnson used it in his opening speech at Hyde Park :lol:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RphRkM94HEI&feature=player_embedded
The Romney bit is at about 50 seconds. But much of it's worth watching especially for the joke about Greek and Spanish bailout. Remember he's Mayor of London and possible future Tory leader (and mentioned as PM :o)... :mellow:
That would be awesome. Someone needs to fill the Berlusconi humor void, and as a bonus he actually seems somewhat competent.
To improve on berlusconi it is merely required not to be actively criminal; competence is not required.
Quote from: garbon on July 26, 2012, 12:22:14 AM
Quote from: Barrister on July 26, 2012, 12:05:39 AM
Quote from: CountDeMoney on July 25, 2012, 11:35:46 PM
Quote from: Neil on July 25, 2012, 11:33:44 PM
Do we have to point out, yet again, that you're the one who wishes that you had my gun control, socialized medicine, fewer blacks and no Republicans?
Not at the expense of using Monopoly colored money and coins with ducks on them. You only wish you had a passport with big eagle on it.
The one that everyone sneers at around the world? I'll pass.
They sneer because they wish they had it. :D
Sure they do, little one. Sure they do. :console:
Quote from: jimmy olsen on July 27, 2012, 10:35:53 PM
Quote from: CountDeMoney on July 27, 2012, 11:42:11 AM
Quote from: derspiess on July 27, 2012, 11:33:04 AM
I'm definitely not calling it for Romney at this point, but if I were on your side I'd be a little worried.
I'm glad you're not on my side. I don't need your whore pills. And a presidential candidate with no policies other than a Nixonian Vietnamization "I'll fix the economy, but won't tell you how until I get there" approach? Not worrisome.
Besides, if Mittens wins, it won't be through any miracle of his own; it'll be thanks to the state level GOPtards in Ohio, Pennsylvania, Texas and Florida and the other states who've done all the advanced leg work in developing voter registration laws designed specifically to restrict and draw down the voting population.
Eh, a lot of old white republicans will probably ended up being screwed by those laws as well, so I think it could backfire on them.
That's why you choose which counties to have it in. You don't pick methlab land to look for voter fraud amongst the rednecks. You look for it in the urban areas.
So, Mitt is visiting Poland today. I hope he tries to tell a Polish joke.
Quote from: garbon on July 27, 2012, 11:16:11 AM
Quote from: derspiess on July 27, 2012, 11:13:08 AM
I don't think his London PR blitz will have much of an impact back home :)
Shocking.
Well, if so, why the hell do it? Not to mention, I'm pretty sure the soundbites of Cameron and Johnson dissing him will find a way into some Obama ad.
So, the right wing Catholic group associated with PiS (and having the biggest sway among the US-based Polish immigrants) is going to call on Mitt to "help solve the Smolensk plane crash conspiracy". These guys also hate Walesa and consider him a Russian spy (Romney is meeting Walesa tomorrow) and the PO government for being traitors (Romney is meeting prime minister Tusk whom he considers - and rightly so - a conservative Atlanticist).
It's going to be fun watching Romney try to blindly navigate Polish politics' idiocy.
Quote from: Martinus on July 30, 2012, 05:23:53 AM
These guys also hate Walesa and consider him a Russian spy
:lol:
Quote from: Martinus on July 30, 2012, 05:23:53 AM
So, the right wing Catholic group associated with PiS (and having the biggest sway among the US-based Polish immigrants) is going to call on Mitt to "help solve the Smolensk plane crash conspiracy". These guys also hate Walesa and consider him a Russian spy (Romney is meeting Walesa tomorrow) and the PO government for being traitors (Romney is meeting prime minister Tusk whom he considers - and rightly so - a conservative Atlanticist).
It's going to be fun watching Romney try to blindly navigate Polish politics' idiocy.
It's only fair, as many Americans have had to navigate the idiocy that is Romney's politics these last few months.
Quote from: Martinus on July 30, 2012, 05:19:39 AM
Well, if so, why the hell do it? Not to mention, I'm pretty sure the soundbites of Cameron and Johnson dissing him will find a way into some Obama ad.
Why? What sort of American would change his vote based on the words of some foreigners they've never heard of?
Keep hammering on the out of touch blue-blood thing. That's how you beat him.
Quote from: Neil on July 30, 2012, 07:40:46 AM
Keep hammering on the out of touch blue-blood thing. That's how you beat him.
Which is why he's going to pick Pawlenty as his running mate. He's plain folk, and locks up the evangelicals.
Quote from: Neil on July 30, 2012, 07:40:46 AM
Quote from: Martinus on July 30, 2012, 05:19:39 AM
Well, if so, why the hell do it? Not to mention, I'm pretty sure the soundbites of Cameron and Johnson dissing him will find a way into some Obama ad.
Why? What sort of American would change his vote based on the words of some foreigners they've never heard of?
Why the hell is he doing the trip then? He is doing it for domestic consumption, sure, but the purpose is to show voters that he is capable in foreign politics (implied: unlike Obama). If Obama shows that the people he actually visited laugh at him and consider him a moron, that goal is not met.
Quote from: CountDeMoney on July 30, 2012, 05:25:22 AM
Quote from: Martinus on July 30, 2012, 05:23:53 AM
These guys also hate Walesa and consider him a Russian spy
:lol:
It's our birther equivalent.
Incidentally, I wonder if nations like the UK or France also have a vocal minority of conspiracy theory retards in their politics? It does not seem to be the case - probably another way in which Poles are more similar to Americans than to Western Europeans.
Not vocal, but I've seen a few internet comments recently that Adenauer was an idiot anf irresponsible towards future generations for getting Germany into this whole EU mess. :lol:
Quote from: Martinus on July 30, 2012, 07:52:04 AM
Quote from: Neil on July 30, 2012, 07:40:46 AM
Quote from: Martinus on July 30, 2012, 05:19:39 AM
Well, if so, why the hell do it? Not to mention, I'm pretty sure the soundbites of Cameron and Johnson dissing him will find a way into some Obama ad.
Why? What sort of American would change his vote based on the words of some foreigners they've never heard of?
Why the hell is he doing the trip then? He is doing it for domestic consumption, sure, but the purpose is to show voters that he is capable in foreign politics (implied: unlike Obama). If Obama shows that the people he actually visited laugh at him and consider him a moron, that goal is not met.
His campaign is making a grave miscalculation. Because foreign policy was one area where McCain trounced Obama in every possible respect, they're trying to show that Mitt is also a foreign policy guy. Just the fact that he's going and meeting with people is enough. It doesn't matter that they laugh at him, or that nothing substantial is said. None of that will fit into the soundbite. The only thing that matters is that the Republicans continue to be seen as the party of sound foreign policy. It's not really important because most (but not all) of the US voters for whom foreign policy was important were Republican-leaners looking to justify a McCain/Palin vote.
Quote from: Neil on July 30, 2012, 08:02:34 AM
Quote from: Martinus on July 30, 2012, 07:52:04 AM
Quote from: Neil on July 30, 2012, 07:40:46 AM
Quote from: Martinus on July 30, 2012, 05:19:39 AM
Well, if so, why the hell do it? Not to mention, I'm pretty sure the soundbites of Cameron and Johnson dissing him will find a way into some Obama ad.
Why? What sort of American would change his vote based on the words of some foreigners they've never heard of?
Why the hell is he doing the trip then? He is doing it for domestic consumption, sure, but the purpose is to show voters that he is capable in foreign politics (implied: unlike Obama). If Obama shows that the people he actually visited laugh at him and consider him a moron, that goal is not met.
His campaign is making a grave miscalculation. Because foreign policy was one area where McCain trounced Obama in every possible respect, they're trying to show that Mitt is also a foreign policy guy. Just the fact that he's going and meeting with people is enough. It doesn't matter that they laugh at him, or that nothing substantial is said. None of that will fit into the soundbite. The only thing that matters is that the Republicans continue to be seen as the party of sound foreign policy. It's not really important because most (but not all) of the US voters for whom foreign policy was important were Republican-leaners looking to justify a McCain/Palin vote.
I don't think this trip is intended to make Romney out as a foreign policy genius (and indeed if it was it is failing miserably).
I suspect the trip is just to show that he is competent on foreign policy. Nobody is going to vote for Romney for his foreign policy skills, but people might vote against him unless satisfied he has sufficient chops to be the Leader of the Free World(tm).
Isn't that what Neil said? :huh:
Quote from: garbon on July 30, 2012, 10:12:18 AM
Isn't that what Neil said? :huh:
No, because he said Romney's campaign is making a miscalculation. I think Romney's campaign is aware of the factors Neil mentioned, which is why they're making this trip in the dog days of summer.
I thought that bit was towards Obama as the rest of Neil's post seems congruent to what you said.
Quote from: Martinus on July 30, 2012, 07:52:04 AM
Why the hell is he doing the trip then? He is doing it for domestic consumption, sure, but the purpose is to show voters that he is capable in foreign politics (implied: unlike Obama). If Obama shows that the people he actually visited laugh at him and consider him a moron, that goal is not met.
He's showing that he's got some foreign policy competence. This isn't in implied contrast to Obama, but for its own sake. Romney's a Governor running against a sitting President. His political record is entirely domestic. This trip is just to burnish his foreign policy credentials.
The implied contrast with Obama is that the Republican critique of Obama has been (don't laugh) that he's insufficiently respectful to American allies. That he kind of left them to do their own thing and doesn't return their calls. Obama's too interested in new friends and apology tours.
In terms of showing his foreign policy skills and ability to travel nimbly through potential controversies and of respecting America's allies, this trip seems to have been a disaster. That won't matter at all in the election.
Quote from: Sheilbh on July 30, 2012, 10:41:07 AM
In terms of showing his foreign policy skills and ability to travel nimbly through potential controversies and of respecting America's allies, this trip seems to have been a disaster. That won't matter at all in the election.
Well, the latest polls indicate that Obama's -10 points behind in the Jew vote, as compared to the numbers he carried with in 2008; apparently by asking Israel to try to do their part in the peace process, Obama's abandoned them to their fate to Iran and the Arab Wilderness.
Then again, there's really nothing Romney has said to the Jews that actually separates him from the current US policy towards Iran. Since he offers no doctrinal or policy points of substance to say what he's going to do or how he's going to do it that hasn't already been done by the previous two administrations, the only thing Mittens has going for him is increased and overblown rhetoric, which carries its own baggage.
Quote from: CountDeMoney on July 30, 2012, 10:49:59 AM
Quote from: Sheilbh on July 30, 2012, 10:41:07 AM
In terms of showing his foreign policy skills and ability to travel nimbly through potential controversies and of respecting America's allies, this trip seems to have been a disaster. That won't matter at all in the election.
Well, the latest polls indicate that Obama's -10 points behind in the Jew vote, as compared to the numbers he carried with in 2008; apparently by asking Israel to try to do their part in the peace process, Obama's abandoned them to their fate to Iran and the Arab Wilderness.
Then again, there's really nothing Romney has said to the Jews that actually separates him from the current US policy towards Iran. Since he offers no doctrinal or policy points of substance to say what he's going to do or how he's going to do it that hasn't already been done by the previous two administrations, the only thing Mittens has going for him is increased and overblown rhetoric, which carries its own baggage.
But at least Romney's people are trying to secure some sort of salvation for dead Jews, rather than being happy with them being condemned for eternity for killing Jesus.
Only the Mormons and Benedict XVI now care about dead Jews, really.
Apparently, Romney was greeted at the Lech Walesa airport by "Obama, Obama" cries and a huge banner reading "Poland's choice: Ron Paul". :lol:
Quote from: Martinus on July 30, 2012, 12:12:18 PM
a huge banner reading "Poland's choice: Ron Paul". :lol:
There is a Polish joke in here somewhere.
Quote from: Martinus on July 30, 2012, 12:12:18 PM
Apparently, Romney was greeted at the Lech Walesa airport by "Obama, Obama" cries and a huge banner reading "Poland's choice: Ron Paul". :lol:
Confused Poles aren't particularly noteworthy.
Quote from: DGuller on July 30, 2012, 12:23:21 PM
Quote from: Martinus on July 30, 2012, 12:12:18 PM
a huge banner reading "Poland's choice: Ron Paul". :lol:
There is a Polish joke in here somewhere.
Poles are the only country stupid enough to elect Ron Paul as their leader.
Quote from: Neil on July 30, 2012, 05:23:35 PM
Quote from: DGuller on July 30, 2012, 12:23:21 PM
Quote from: Martinus on July 30, 2012, 12:12:18 PM
a huge banner reading "Poland's choice: Ron Paul". :lol:
There is a Polish joke in here somewhere.
Poles are the only country stupid enough to elect Ron Paul as their leader.
:pinch: That's not funny, that's just a nasty slur.
Ah, Mittenses. :lol:
QuotePalestinians attack Mitt Romney for 'racist' comments
Mitt Romney has been accused of racism for suggesting to Jewish donors that "culture" might explain Palestinians' income inferiority to Israel.
A senior Palestinian aide said the Republican presidential candidate had failed to note economic restrictions placed by the Israeli occupation.
But the Romney campaign said his remarks in Israel were misinterpreted.
The former Massachusetts governor is now in Poland, for the third and final leg of a week-long foreign tour.
Mr Romney is set to face Barack Obama in November's presidential election.
'Hand of providence'
Speaking at a breakfast of about 40 donors in Jerusalem on Monday, Mr Romney said he had thought about how Israel had achieved greater prosperity than its neighbours.
"As you come here and you see the GDP [Gross Domestic Product] per capita, for instance, in Israel which is about $21,000 dollars, and compare that with the GDP per capita just across the areas managed by the Palestinian Authority, which is more like $10,000 per capita, you notice such a dramatically stark difference in economic vitality," Mr Romney is reported to have said.
He referred to a book called The Wealth And Poverty Of Nations, by David Landes, which examines how some societies became more prosperous than those of their neighbours.
Mr Romney said he had concluded from the book that "if you could learn anything from the economic history of the world it's this: culture makes all the difference.
He added: "And as I come here and I look out over this city and consider the accomplishments of the people of this nation, I recognise the power of at least culture and a few other things."
Mr Romney also said he recognised "hand of providence in selecting this place [Israel]".
The economic disparity between Israel and the Palestinian Authority is even wider than Mr Romney's remarks suggest.
According to a World Bank report, in 2011 Israel's GDP was $31,000 per head, compared with just over $1,500 in the West Bank and Gaza.
'Scratching their heads'
Saeb Erekat, an aide to Palestinian Authority President Mahmoud Abbas, responded quickly to the comments.
"It is a racist statement and this man doesn't realise that the Palestinian economy cannot reach its potential because there is an Israeli occupation," Mr Erekat said.
"It seems to me this man lacks information, knowledge, vision and understanding of this region and its people.
"He also lacks knowledge about the Israelis themselves. I have not heard any Israeli official speak about cultural superiority," he added.
Romney campaign spokeswoman Andrea Saul said his remarks had been "grossly mischaracterised".
His campaign added that the candidate's comments had been more general and had included examples of income disparities between the US and Mexico, and Chile and Ecuador.
Meanwhile, a White House spokesman said Mr Romney's comments had left some people "scratching their heads a little bit".
At the breakfast, Mr Romney sat next to casino billionaire Sheldon Adelson, who has given millions of dollars to Republican presidential campaigns.
The owner of the American football team New York Jets, Woody Johnson, and hedge fund manager Paul Singer were also guests at the breakfast, which is thought to have raised about $1m.
Deputy Israeli Foreign Minister Danny Ayalon came to Mr Romney's defence.
"It is unfortunate that the Palestinians find every reason and opportunity to discomfit or to criticise or to attack Israel or anyone who pays respect to Israel and Jewish culture," he said, reports the Associated Press.
On Sunday, Mr Romney caused controversy when he described Jerusalem as the country's capital.
He said in an interview with CNN that he would favour moving the US embassy to Jerusalem from Tel Aviv, where it is currently located.
The status of Jerusalem is a key issue in peace negotiations between the Israelis and the Palestinians.
Mr Romney's visit to Israel followed a three-day visit to London. There, he was criticised in the British press for expressing doubt about whether Britain was ready to stage the Olympic Games.
Quote from: CountDeMoney on July 30, 2012, 10:49:59 AM
Then again, there's really nothing Romney has said to the Jews that actually separates him from the current US policy towards Iran.
He has surrogates do that for him.
Quote from: CountDeMoney on July 30, 2012, 05:30:01 PM
Ah, Mittenses. :lol:
I doubt he really read through Landes' book (which I'm not a huge fan of).
When Landes talks about culture, he talks about "political culture" things like intellectual freedom (from both political and religious sanction), the scientific method, and the relative status of women. Romney himself is probably fine with all those things, and one might be able to construct an argument about differentials of economic performance in the Levant based on some or all those factors, but they sit rather uncomfortably with the nature of his present political base, which (as a collective) does not do a very good job of valuing these "cultural" attributes.
Quote from: The Minsky Moment on July 30, 2012, 05:52:10 PM
When Landes talks about culture, he talks about "political culture" things like intellectual freedom (from both political and religious sanction), the scientific method, and the relative status of women. Romney himself is probably fine with all those things, and one might be able to construct an argument about differentials of economic performance in the Levant based on some or all those factors, but they sit rather uncomfortably with the nature of his present political base, which (as a collective) does not do a very good job of valuing these "cultural" attributes.
Yeah, but a particular economic theory of cultural relativism is one thing, and another to apply it to the Palestinian situation as a presidential candidate.
I'm pretty sure that Mitt won't be hurt by pointing out that the Palestinians are inferior to the Israelis.
Quote from: Neil on July 30, 2012, 06:15:03 PM
I'm pretty sure that Mitt won't be hurt by pointing out that the Palestinians are inferior to the Israelis.
Yeah I don't see the problem.
Quote from: garbon on July 30, 2012, 06:30:31 PM
Yeah I don't see the problem.
It's not very statesman-like.
We all know whose side we're on--just like we know whose side the Euros are on--but if you're going to be a major player in a peace process, you don't openly play favorites.
And you certainly don't come out and say, "Gee, you Jews are really good at making money...you know, being Jewish!" I mean, c'mon.
Nigga needs more money from Uncle Sheldon. :)
Quote from: CountDeMoney on July 30, 2012, 06:48:35 PM
Quote from: garbon on July 30, 2012, 06:30:31 PM
Yeah I don't see the problem.
It's not very statesman-like.
We all know whose side we're on--just like we know whose side the Euros are on--but if you're going to be a major player in a peace process, you don't openly play favorites.
And you certainly don't come out and say, "Gee, you Jews are really good at making money...you know, being Jewish!" I mean, c'mon.
Yeah. If Obama had said that, you'd be all "YEAH PREACH DA TROOF MAH PRESIDIZZY"
Quote from: derspiess on July 30, 2012, 07:02:18 PM
Yeah. If Obama had said that, you'd be all "YEAH PREACH DA TROOF MAH PRESIDIZZY"
The President would never compliment Jews on their success on being Jewish.
Quote from: CountDeMoney on July 30, 2012, 07:03:31 PM
Quote from: derspiess on July 30, 2012, 07:02:18 PM
Yeah. If Obama had said that, you'd be all "YEAH PREACH DA TROOF MAH PRESIDIZZY"
The President would never compliment Jews on their success on being Jewish.
I notice how you avoid directly refuting my claim.
I guess we saw your Mitt and raised you a Walesa (our own malapropism master). E.g. he said that Mitt Romney and him are very much alike, both having 5 children and all (I'll remind you Walesa is a working class uneducated trade union leader). :D
QuoteMitt Romney to rekindle cold war spirit with speech in Poland attacking RussiaAfter gaffe-strewn UK visit and controversial remarks in Israel, US presidential hopeful turns to symbol of anti-Soviet triumph
Share 151 Email Ian Traynor, Europe editor
guardian.co.uk, Monday 30 July 2012 16.58 BST US Republican presidential candidate Mitt Romney meets former Polish president Lech Walesa in Gdansk Link to this video
Mitt Romney is to round off his campaign to boost his presidential foreign policy credentials by returning to a cold war symbol of anti-Soviet triumph and western-backed liberty in Poland.
Following a gaffe-strewn visit to Britain, where he queried the Olympic host's fitness to stage the Games, and after stirring controversy in Israel by calling Jerusalem the Israeli capital and seeming to back unilateral Israeli strikes against Iran, the Republican White House contender arrived on Monday in Poland, where he is to deliver a setpiece speech on democracy and freedom.
The speech on the "values of liberty" at Warsaw University on Tuesday is expected to seek to rekindle the flames of US cold war righteousness by featuring a strong attack on Russia and President Vladimir Putin's rollback of democratic gains, while also criticising the US president, Barack Obama, for allegedly sacrificing the interests and security of central European democracy in favour of realpolitik with the Kremlin.
Romney has previously described Russia as America's "No 1 geopolitical foe", in contrast with Obama, who has sought to press "the reset button" in relations with Moscow.
Romney arrived on Monday in Gdansk, Solidarity's birthplace, where Soviet communism was punctured 32 years ago. The Republican contender was invited by Lech Walesa, the ex-shipyard electrician, former Solidarity leader and unsuccessful post-communist Polish president. In Gdansk, where affection for US Republican cold warriors is strong and which is home to a Ronald Reagan park featuring a statue of the former president, Romney also met the Polish prime minister, Donald Tusk, a native of the port city.
Romney is expected to seek to use the visit to Gdansk and Warsaw to canvass for the votes of the big Polish diaspora in the US and more broadly for the support of those of east European origin in the US.
Despite the emphasis on the west's cold war victory and Poland and Solidarity's pivotal roles in the revolutions of 1989, Romney will find himself in a country that is quickly moving on, less receptive to US rhetoric, seeing its key alliances in the European Union, and dismayed that its traditional attachment to American values and outlook are taken for granted in Washington.
The only country in the EU to escape recession since the financial and then the euro crises erupted in 2008, Poland is thriving at a time of universal European gloom, using a new-found confidence to build European alliances to encourage democratic reforms in neighbouring Ukraine and Belarus and to contest Putin's proprietorial policies towards parts of the former Soviet Union.
Romney is to see the Polish foreign minister, Radoslaw Sikorski, a previously Americanophile politician who increasingly sees the Polish national interest best served by new European security structures.
"The aim of Sikorski's meeting will be to get to know Mitt Romney's position on US foreign policy. Global and regional challenges of key global importance in the near future will also be discussed," said the Polish foreign ministry.
An Oxford graduate married to an American and previously employed at a neo-conservative US thinktank, Sikorski's earlier ardent anglophilia and pro-Americanism have been tempered by disappointment with the Obama administration over the US visa waiver policy for Poles, under-appreciation of Polish military contributions in Iraq and Afghanistan, the dilution of US missile defence plans in central Europe, and US policy towards Putin.
The disenchantment with Washington is unlikely to be reversed by a charm offensive and a more hawkish line from Romney. Instead, the Poles are keener to boost European foreign and security policy capacities, using their EU presidency last year to try to push common EU defence policies and running into a British brick wall.
With Sweden, Italy and Spain, the Poles have just launched an initiative for a more robust European foreign policy.
Gaurniad coverage.
The current leadership of Solidarity trade union have already distanced himself from Romney, btw, saying that he stands for values opposed to workers rights. It does not help that these guys are viciously pro-PiS and hate Walesa for reasons I already mentioned. :D
Do you perhaps mean The Guardian?
QuoteThe aim of Sikorski's meeting will be to get to know Mitt Romney's position on US foreign policy.
That his campaign's top foreign policy adviser still refers to Russia as the Soviet Union, another one criticizes Obama's "Czechoslovakia" defense policy, and that Mittens is so off kilter calling Russia our "number one geopolitical foe" that even a sweetheart like Colin Powell mocks him about it? That's what he wants to know?
Quote from: garbon on July 31, 2012, 06:30:05 AM
Do you perhaps mean The Guardian?
The Gaurniad is a very prestigious publication in Padlon.
I just got a boner when a Mittens press aide told the press off.
Quote from: Ed Anger on July 31, 2012, 07:05:04 AM
I just got a boner when a Mittens press aide told the press off.
Considering the work load those guys have to deal with over their boss's Gaffapolooza Tour this week, I'd be short-tempered as well.
Quote from: CountDeMoney on July 31, 2012, 06:32:48 AM
QuoteThe aim of Sikorski's meeting will be to get to know Mitt Romney's position on US foreign policy.
That his campaign's top foreign policy adviser still refers to Russia as the Soviet Union, another one criticizes Obama's "Czechoslovakia" defense policy, and that Mittens is so off kilter calling Russia our "number one geopolitical foe" that even a sweetheart like Colin Powell mocks him about it? That's what he wants to know?
Sikorski is an Oxford-educated neocon who is married to Anne Applebaum, sends his children to an Opus Dei school, and once referred to the Nordstream pipeline as a new Ribbentrop-Molotov pact.
So, he is a privileged, hawkish, pro-Israeli Russophobe with cooky religious views. Think he will get along with Mitt?
Mitt lauds the Israeli health care system :lol:
All the Olympic diving events put together have less flips than this guy.
Quote from: The Minsky Moment on July 31, 2012, 08:42:01 AM
Mitt lauds the Israeli health care system :lol:
No kidding. MAN YOU SOCIALISTS SURE KNOW HOW TO RUN YOUR HEALTHCARE SYSTEM
You know, I always thought Dubya was the biggest moron the GOP could ever proffer, but this guy...man.
In this particular case, though, the problem is that he's not stupid enough.
Quote from: DGuller on July 31, 2012, 09:01:44 AM
In this particular case, though, the problem is that he's not stupid enough.
It's like they're two types of moron: acquired and congenital.
Doesn't matter. Conservatives won't notice and he'll still win.
Or perhaps they'll view as a non-issue. :)
Quote from: CountDeMoney on July 31, 2012, 08:50:14 AM
Quote from: The Minsky Moment on July 31, 2012, 08:42:01 AM
Mitt lauds the Israeli health care system :lol:
No kidding. MAN YOU SOCIALISTS SURE KNOW HOW TO RUN YOUR HEALTHCARE SYSTEM
You know, I always thought Dubya was the biggest moron the GOP could ever proffer, but this guy...man.
He praised the results, not the type of system. I've always said that socialized medicine might work great for other countries, but that it's just not the right system for us (though arguably it's less bad than the Obamacare system).
Quote from: garbon on July 31, 2012, 09:57:47 AM
Or perhaps they'll view as a non-issue. :)
I'm not sure its' a non issue. "Your healthcare system is great and more cost effective because of. Umm. Err."
I agree this is too complicated to explain to American voters, but it's weird for him to come out and call a government controlled healthcare system better.
I don't see why Israel or Canada or the United Kingdom are radically different such that their systems couldn't be emulated here, but I have more faith in America than the Republican party does, I guess.
Quote from: Faeelin on July 31, 2012, 11:40:27 AM
Quote from: garbon on July 31, 2012, 09:57:47 AM
Or perhaps they'll view as a non-issue. :)
I'm not sure its' a non issue. "Your healthcare system is great and more cost effective because of. Umm. Err."
I agree this is too complicated to explain to American voters, but it's weird for him to come out and call a government controlled healthcare system better.
I don't see why Israel or Canada or the United Kingdom are radically different such that their systems couldn't be emulated here, but I have more faith in America than the Republican party does, I guess.
It is a non-issue for me because I don't care what pandering statements he makes.
Quote from: derspiess on July 31, 2012, 11:39:03 AM
He praised the results, not the type of system. I've always said that socialized medicine might work great for other countries, but that it's just not the right system for us (though arguably it's less bad than the Obamacare system).
Well we have been using socialized medicine for decades. I sure hope we transition over to this other system that works sometime. Could you describe it for me?
It's an issue for this reason: health care is one of the single most important domestic issues for the US, comprosing 18% of the US economy.
And I have no idea what Romney plans to do about it, and neither does anyone else. Probably including Romney himself.
This is not mere flip-flopping, it is a gaping abyss of ambiguity and confusion.
Quote from: Valmy on July 31, 2012, 11:58:55 AM
Quote from: derspiess on July 31, 2012, 11:39:03 AM
He praised the results, not the type of system. I've always said that socialized medicine might work great for other countries, but that it's just not the right system for us (though arguably it's less bad than the Obamacare system).
Well we have been using socialized medicine for decades. I sure hope we transition over to this other system that works sometime. Could you describe it for me?
:mellow:
Quote from: derspiess on July 31, 2012, 12:00:51 PM
:mellow:
We either have poor people who get health care from the state, old people who get health care from the state, or a system where employers provide health care to the working people which is heavily subsidized by tax breaks from the state. So in each and every case it is socialized medicine and has been. That is just a fact. So throwing out that label as something radically different than what we do now always baffles me.
But again if there is a system that works that is not like this I will be happy to hear what it is. It seems to me we are rejecting socialized medicine systems that work better in favor of our current system which is not just incredibly expensive but a time bomb destined to seriously damage us. You know Medicare and all that.
So flipping out about what appears to me to be a minor adjustment like Obama Care compared to the whole disastrous thing kind of ticks me off. It makes no sense and it is like we cannot even address the very serious underlying problems.
Quote from: Valmy on July 31, 2012, 12:11:22 PM
So throwing out that label as something radically different than what we do now always baffles me.
It doesn't baffle me in the least. :huh:
Quote from: DGuller on July 31, 2012, 12:12:34 PM
It doesn't baffle me in the least. :huh:
Ok I am sure there is some cynical reason for it but Spicey is not lobbying me to vote for some candidate or some bill he is talking to me on a message board. He knows I am not an idiot but he seemed puzzled when I stated the obvious.
Quote from: Valmy on July 31, 2012, 12:17:34 PM
Quote from: DGuller on July 31, 2012, 12:12:34 PM
It doesn't baffle me in the least. :huh:
Ok I am sure there is some cynical reason for it but Spicey is not lobbying me to vote for some candidate or some bill he is talking to me on a message board. He knows I am not an idiot but he seemed puzzled when I stated the obvious.
He's not exactly the mastermind behind the propaganda. He's an enthusiastic victim.
Quote from: Valmy on July 31, 2012, 12:11:22 PM
Quote from: derspiess on July 31, 2012, 12:00:51 PM
:mellow:
We either have poor people who get health care from the state, old people who get health care from the state, or a system where employers provide health care to the working people which is heavily subsidized by tax breaks from the state. So in each and every case it is socialized medicine and has been. That is just a fact. So throwing out that label as something radically different than what we do now always baffles me.
But again if there is a system that works that is not like this I will be happy to hear what it is. It seems to me we are rejecting socialized medicine systems that work better in favor of our current system which is not just incredibly expensive but a time bomb destined to seriously damage us. You know Medicare and all that.
So flipping out about what appears to me to be a minor adjustment like Obama Care compared to the whole disastrous thing kind of ticks me off. It makes no sense and it is like we cannot even address the very serious underlying problems.
I'm more curious by his statement that the system may work for others but will not work for Americans. Are Americans so different from Brits or Canadians?
Quote from: Martinus on July 31, 2012, 12:26:10 PM
Are Americans so different from Brits or Canadians?
Uh, duh. :rolleyes:
Quote from: Valmy on July 31, 2012, 12:11:22 PM
We either have poor people who get health care from the state, old people who get health care from the state, or a system where employers provide health care to the working people which is heavily subsidized by tax breaks from the state. So in each and every case it is socialized medicine and has been. That is just a fact.
I know that there are different definitions for socialism, but such a system doesn't seem to be socialism to me.
Quote from: Faeelin on July 31, 2012, 11:40:27 AM
I don't see why Israel or Canada or the United Kingdom are radically different such that their systems couldn't be emulated here, but I have more faith in America than the Republican party does, I guess.
Lawyers.
Quote from: alfred russel on July 31, 2012, 12:36:18 PM
I know that there are different definitions for socialism, but such a system doesn't seem to be socialism to me.
Well Socialism I thought meant nationalizing the means of production but the word gets pretty loosely thrown around these days. So if the state providing money for people's health care is not socialism what exactly is it that makes socialized medicine socialist?
Quote from: Valmy on July 31, 2012, 12:17:34 PM
Quote from: DGuller on July 31, 2012, 12:12:34 PM
It doesn't baffle me in the least. :huh:
Ok I am sure there is some cynical reason for it but Spicey is not lobbying me to vote for some candidate or some bill he is talking to me on a message board. He knows I am not an idiot but he seemed puzzled when I stated the obvious.
I'm not in the mood to debate healthcare. Besides, don't you have some size 0 diapers to change? :P
Quote from: derspiess on July 31, 2012, 12:43:00 PM
I'm not in the mood to debate healthcare. Besides, don't you have some size 0 diapers to change? :P
:lol:
Why do you think I didn't post much this weekend?
I am at work right now eating lunch :P but I will be chaning diapers extensively tonight!
Quote from: Valmy on July 31, 2012, 12:40:40 PM
Quote from: alfred russel on July 31, 2012, 12:36:18 PM
I know that there are different definitions for socialism, but such a system doesn't seem to be socialism to me.
Well Socialism I thought meant nationalizing the means of production but the word gets pretty loosely thrown around these days. So if the state providing money for people's health care is not socialism what exactly is it that makes socialized medicine socialist?
I would think true socialism would be government providing doctors salaries. That would involve nationalizing the means of production.
Now we have primarily private providers of medical services, with funding coming from both private and public sources. It isn't a libertarian paradise by any means, but I wouldn't call it, or Obamacare, socialist.
Socialism, at the very least, would involve health care being available to everyone according to their needs rather than their means. Even if such a system involved a number of components operating as private businesses (doctors, clinics, whatever) rather than acting as employees or agencies of the state, I'd consider it reasonably socialistic in nature.
Of course for it to be completely socialistic, the doctors would have to be employees of the state, and clinics and hospitals would be state funded and run.
Quote from: Martinus on July 31, 2012, 12:26:10 PM
I'm more curious by his statement that the system may work for others but will not work for Americans. Are Americans so different from Brits or Canadians?
Could the UK or Canadian systems handle the enormous quantities of gunshot wounds that American culture generates?
Quote from: Neil on July 31, 2012, 01:27:14 PM
Could the UK or Canadian systems handle the enormous quantities of gunshot wounds that American culture generates?
We make up for it with our lower rates of knife wounds.
So Harry Reid says Romney didn't pay any taxes at all for 10 years: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/07/31/harry-reid-romney-taxes_n_1724027.html
Your opinion about some possible scenarios, please.
1. It's true and it is eventually established as a fact beyond dispute. How does it affect Romney? Do independents and Republican voters think it's a bad thing that Romney avoided taxes altogether for a decade? Or will it turn into a positive? Conversely, will Democrats and other independents see it as bad enough that it'll increase the turnout?
2. Whether it's true or not, Romney keeps dodging it. How much legs does the story have?
3. It's not true, and eventually Romney comes clean with his tax records and whatever negative content it may have, it's less dramatic than the worst of the speculation. Will that effectively defang the criticism?
What's the likely outcome in each scenario?
There was an amnesty for people with offshore accounts a couple of years ago...if Romney took advantage of that it is a reason not to come clean.
The reality probably is that if there is anything ugly in the returns they will never be released. If Romney didn't pay taxes (legally) the past 10 years a good person to pillory would be Harry Reid (along with other congressmen), not Romney. Parts of the public wouldn't see it that way though.
If it's 1, then Romney is a bigger idiot than Edwards for running. If it's 2, then the speculation just keeps getting worse. In two months, Romney would be hiding his tax returns because he wrote off the payments to mob hit men as business expenses. If it's 3, then who knows?
Quote from: Jacob on July 31, 2012, 03:21:10 PM
So Harry Reid says Romney didn't pay any taxes at all for 10 years: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/07/31/harry-reid-romney-taxes_n_1724027.html
Your opinion about some possible scenarios, please.
1. It's true and it is eventually established as a fact beyond dispute. How does it affect Romney? Do independents and Republican voters think it's a bad thing that Romney avoided taxes altogether for a decade? Or will it turn into a positive? Conversely, will Democrats and other independents see it as bad enough that it'll increase the turnout?
2. Whether it's true or not, Romney keeps dodging it. How much legs does the story have?
3. It's not true, and eventually Romney comes clean with his tax records and whatever negative content it may have, it's less dramatic than the worst of the speculation. Will that effectively defang the criticism?
What's the likely outcome in each scenario?
1. Very bad for Romney.
2. It's a perfect pig fucker accusation. Now the story becomes Mitt telling everyone he doesn't fuck pigs.
3. Bad for Romney. The left gets to pound him even harder on carried interest, dividend and capital gains tax rates, and other "loopholes that hard working middle class Americans like you and me can't use."
Link didn't work for me. Natural question that comes to me is: how the hell does an investor in Bain know how much taxes Mitt paid? How the hell does anyone besides Mitt and his accountant know?
Yeah, Reid's story sounds dodgy to me. I can't imagine how someone of Romney's wealth and visibility can pay no taxes at all for 10 years, and not be in prison right now. Maybe it's just Reid accusing Romney of pig fucking, using conveniently unverifiable sources.
Quote from: DGuller on July 31, 2012, 03:49:07 PM
If it's 1, then Romney is a bigger idiot than Edwards for running. If it's 2, then the speculation just keeps getting worse. In two months, Romney would be hiding his tax returns because he wrote off the payments to mob hit men as business expenses. If it's 3, then who knows?
The thing is, short of taking advantage of an amnesty or something similar, his tax records aren't going to show anything illegal. You prepare your tax return and provide it to the IRS. His accountants knew those returns would get a lot of scrutiny--aside from the fact he is in public life, he has enough net worth that the IRS would be all over his returns. If he paid no taxes he probably had no income--which is possible. But Harry Reid is almost certainly just throwing shit at the wall. How would a business partner of Romney's know the contents of his personal returns the past 10 years?
Unless Harry is taking a play out of his good friend Kirchner's playbook. :ph34r:
Quote from: Admiral Yi on July 31, 2012, 03:57:00 PM
Unless Harry is taking a play out of his good friend Kirchner's playbook. :ph34r:
Can you share a couple of excerpts? :huh:
Quote from: DGuller on July 31, 2012, 04:06:06 PM
Can you share a couple of excerpts? :huh:
Argentina has taken to unleashing the tax authority on critics of the present government, but I was insinuating that Harry took a peak at Mitt's IRS records.
Not seriously.
We know that Romney's tax records won't make him look good, because he has been so coy about releasing them.
I am in the camp that says he paid embarrassingly little tax, not no taxes at all. In other words, the pigfucker-scenario camp (and a big "thanks" to Yi for reviving that metaphor).
At least Romney practices what he preaches. He's just as devoted to destroying the United States through low taxation in his personal life as he is in his political life.
Quote from: Admiral Yi on July 31, 2012, 04:13:47 PM
Quote from: DGuller on July 31, 2012, 04:06:06 PM
Can you share a couple of excerpts? :huh:
Argentina has taken to unleashing the tax authority on critics of the present government, but I was insinuating that Harry took a peak at Mitt's IRS records.
Not seriously.
Norway publishes everybody's tax records annually online.
:lol:
QuoteMitt Romney Adviser to Press: 'Kiss My Ass ... Shove It'
Mitt Romney's Offend the World megatour continued in Poland today, where the gaffe outbreak is apparently now contagious. Fresh off putdowns of the British and Palestinians, Romney aide Rick Gorka chipped in today by giving the press a lashing for ... asking about all of the gaffes abroad. While leaving the Tomb of the Unknown Soldier in Warsaw, reporters from CNN and the New York Times sent some questions in Romney's direction, causing Gorka to snap, "Have some respect." When a journalist noted, "We haven't had another chance to ask a question ... " Gorka shot back, "Kiss my ass. This is a holy site for the Polish people. Show some respect." Then he told a Politico reporter to "Shove it."
CNN has a full transcript of the testy exchange, which included the press complaining that Romney has only taken three questions throughout his entire trip, all of which were at 10 Downing Street in London last Thursday. Yesterday on her blog, Greta Van Susteren wrote, "There has been no press access to Governor Romney since we landed in Poland. We (press) are in a holding pattern (I can't help but feel a bit like the press is a modified petting zoo since we are trapped in a bus while Polish citizens take pictures of us.)"
Soon after today's freak-out, Gorka called two reporters to apologize for losing it. "It was inappropriate," he said.
But that's not going to salvage this disaster of a world tour, which is even pissing off Republicans at this point. Before today's temper tantrum, a senior Republican strategist told the Washington Post, "I find this entire trip borderline lunacy," adding, "Why on earth is he seeking to improve his foreign policy cred when there will not be a single vote cast on that subject?"
"[Romney's] like the guy who is a competent-but-not-gifted athlete who learns to play golf," said another GOP consultant. "He works really hard at it, and most of the time he's perfectly competent, if not stellar. But once each round he is going to shank one and break a window on a house lining the golf course." When a Republican goes for the bad golfer metaphor, you know things are ugly.
Quote from: Viking on July 31, 2012, 07:14:44 PM
Norway publishes everybody's tax records annually online.
Yeah, but that's because Norwegian society is based on hate.
Quote from: CountDeMoney on July 31, 2012, 10:05:50 PM
Quote"Kiss my ass. This is a holy site for the Polish people. Show some respect." Then he told a Politico reporter to "Shove it."
:lmfao:
Quote from: alfred russel on July 31, 2012, 12:46:23 PM
Quote from: Valmy on July 31, 2012, 12:40:40 PM
Quote from: alfred russel on July 31, 2012, 12:36:18 PM
I know that there are different definitions for socialism, but such a system doesn't seem to be socialism to me.
Well Socialism I thought meant nationalizing the means of production but the word gets pretty loosely thrown around these days. So if the state providing money for people's health care is not socialism what exactly is it that makes socialized medicine socialist?
I would think true socialism would be government providing doctors salaries. That would involve nationalizing the means of production.
Now we have primarily private providers of medical services, with funding coming from both private and public sources. It isn't a libertarian paradise by any means, but I wouldn't call it, or Obamacare, socialist.
I think by this definition the UK is more or less the only country with socialised healthcare.
QuoteBefore today's temper tantrum, a senior Republican strategist told the Washington Post, "I find this entire trip borderline lunacy," adding, "Why on earth is he seeking to improve his foreign policy cred when there will not be a single vote cast on that subject?"
"[Romney's] like the guy who is a competent-but-not-gifted athlete who learns to play golf," said another GOP consultant. "He works really hard at it, and most of the time he's perfectly competent, if not stellar. But once each round he is going to shank one and break a window on a house lining the golf course." When a Republican goes for the bad golfer metaphor, you know things are ugly.
This bit is good. :D
Harry is taking a beating for his comment from Jon Stewart and the NYT. :thumbsup:
Harry's response when asked for proof was that the burden of proof should be on Mitt Romney since he's the one who is accused of not paying any taxes. :lol:
Clint Eastwood has come out in support of Romney.
Quote from: Admiral Yi on August 04, 2012, 10:19:53 PM
Harry is taking a beating for his comment from Jon Stewart and the NYT. :thumbsup:
Yeah, you don't drag Dear Old Dead Dad into the picture. That's was a yellow card right there,
QuoteHarry's response when asked for proof was that the burden of proof should be on Mitt Romney since he's the one who is accused of not paying any taxes. :lol:
Out of all the responses Mittens could say, considering his reticence in divulging any information about anything, the best he could do was "Put up or shut up"? Really Mittens? Ugh, man. Ugh.
Harry gave you a softball, and you foul-tipped it, you horse-dancing faggit.
So is this tax thing going to fuck him? Without releasing the taxes anyone can say anything about it and claim they had a "source". It's hard to defend yourself from attacks like that when you are withholding evidence that would exculpate you. I imagine Obama's boys have something worse line up for a later attack. You don't use your ace before the convention.
Quote from: grumbler on July 31, 2012, 07:05:30 PM
We know that Romney's tax records won't make him look good, because he has been so coy about releasing them.
I am in the camp that says he paid embarrassingly little tax, not no taxes at all. In other words, the pigfucker-scenario camp (and a big "thanks" to Yi for reviving that metaphor).
If Mitt were an actual pig-fucker, I'd be more inclined to vote for him.
It'd show a hidden tender side to him.
:huh:
Will Romney reset his relationship with the ROTW if he becomes president?
Quote from: Admiral Yi on August 04, 2012, 10:19:53 PM
Harry is taking a beating for his comment from Jon Stewart and the NYT. :thumbsup:
Harry's response when asked for proof was that the burden of proof should be on Mitt Romney since he's the one who is accused of not paying any taxes. :lol:
Reed has petty much killed the chances that anyone but the most tribal types will now give this assertion any cred at all.
What has Grumbler just sorta merged with Berkut or something?
Quote from: CountDeMoney on August 05, 2012, 03:13:22 AM
Yeah, you don't drag Dear Old Dead Dad into the picture. That's was a yellow card right there,
What now?
Quote from: DGuller on July 31, 2012, 10:43:00 PM
Quote from: CountDeMoney on July 31, 2012, 10:05:50 PM
Quote"Kiss my ass. This is a holy site for the Polish people. Show some respect." Then he told a Politico reporter to "Shove it."
:lmfao:
Other than implying, by a bad choice of words, that his ass is a holy site for the Polish people, I think this is seriously overblown. Sort of gotcha journalism at its worst.
Quote from: Admiral Yi on August 05, 2012, 02:52:03 PM
Quote from: CountDeMoney on August 05, 2012, 03:13:22 AM
Yeah, you don't drag Dear Old Dead Dad into the picture. That's was a yellow card right there,
What now?
Harry goofed, Mittens called him on it, but then he dropped the ball. The calls for his disclosures aren't going anywhere.
Quote from: Martinus on August 05, 2012, 03:05:28 PM
Quote from: DGuller on July 31, 2012, 10:43:00 PM
Quote from: CountDeMoney on July 31, 2012, 10:05:50 PM
Quote"Kiss my ass. This is a holy site for the Polish people. Show some respect." Then he told a Politico reporter to "Shove it."
:lmfao:
Other than implying, by a bad choice of words, that his ass is a holy site for the Polish people, I think this is seriously overblown. Sort of gotcha journalism at its worst.
What's the difference between gotcha jounali and journalism?
Also I think what makes that so beautiful is the sentence starts 'kiss my ass' and ends 'show some respect' :lol:
Quote from: Sheilbh on August 05, 2012, 03:25:07 PM
Quote from: Martinus on August 05, 2012, 03:05:28 PM
Quote from: DGuller on July 31, 2012, 10:43:00 PM
Quote from: CountDeMoney on July 31, 2012, 10:05:50 PM
Quote"Kiss my ass. This is a holy site for the Polish people. Show some respect." Then he told a Politico reporter to "Shove it."
:lmfao:
Other than implying, by a bad choice of words, that his ass is a holy site for the Polish people, I think this is seriously overblown. Sort of gotcha journalism at its worst.
What's the difference between gotcha jounali and journalism?
Also I think what makes that so beautiful is the sentence starts 'kiss my ass' and ends 'show some respect' :lol:
Yeah, definately some dissonace between the 2 parts of what he said to the press.
"Gotcha journalism" basically consists of waiting for a public figure to mis-speak, or use inappropriate language, and then pretending that the mis-statement is actually newsworthy. I'm not entirely sure this is a good example.
Quote from: dps on August 05, 2012, 05:45:59 PM
Yeah, definately some dissonace between the 2 parts of what he said to the press.
Rick Gorka, like so many other people on Romney's campaign, has consistently been in over his head from the moment Mittens announced his candidacy.
I mean, I get how difficult it must be to be a press secretary and chief message-carrier for a campaign that has no message, but he's been a total lightweight. I doubt his forced sabbatical for a while will change things.
Pfft. UNLV grads. :rolleyes:
Quote from: CountDeMoney on August 05, 2012, 05:56:04 PM
Quote from: dps on August 05, 2012, 05:45:59 PM
Yeah, definately some dissonace between the 2 parts of what he said to the press.
Rick Gorka, like so many other people on Romney's campaign, has consistently been in over his head from the moment Mittens announced his candidacy.
I mean, I get how difficult it must be to be a press secretary and chief message-carrier for a campaign that has no message, but he's been a total lightweight. I doubt his forced sabbatical for a while will change things.
Pfft. UNLV grads. :rolleyes:
Given how so many modern journalists are nothing more than parasites, I have a good bit of sympathy for anyone whose job requires them to work with them a lot.
Also keep in mind that for a press secretary on the GOP side every game is an away game.
Quote from: dps on August 05, 2012, 06:02:53 PM
Given how so many modern journalists are nothing more than parasites, I have a good bit of sympathy for anyone whose job requires them to work with them a lot.
Doesn't matter; your job in working with assholes in the public eye isn't to be one. You know better than that.
Quote from: CountDeMoney on August 05, 2012, 06:05:04 PM
Quote from: dps on August 05, 2012, 06:02:53 PM
Given how so many modern journalists are nothing more than parasites, I have a good bit of sympathy for anyone whose job requires them to work with them a lot.
Doesn't matter; your job in working with assholes in the public eye isn't to be one. You know better than that.
Sure, not saying otherwise.
Quote from: Admiral Yi on August 05, 2012, 06:04:02 PM
Also keep in mind that for a press secretary on the GOP side every game is an away game.
Yeah, that's why GOP guys fuck up. A conspiracy. :rolleyes:
Quote from: Razgovory on August 05, 2012, 06:41:01 PM
Yeah, that's why GOP guys fuck up. A conspiracy. :rolleyes:
We've been over the conspiracy talking point about 6 times already.
No conspiracy-- just simple bias.
Quote from: derspiess on August 05, 2012, 06:51:10 PM
No conspiracy-- just simple bias.
Like the crowd at an away game, which is the analogy Yi made. There is no "conspiracy" to assemble a crowd hostile to the away team - that's just the way it is.
I think there's less political bias and more professional bias. They want candidates who are either clubbable and give them lots of time (McCain 2000 and 2008 during the primaries) or provide good copy. Despite maybe being more politically simpatico I remember a lot of media frustration at how tightly the Obama and Clinton campaigns controlled their messages, at how 'professional' they all were.
Quote from: Admiral Yi on August 05, 2012, 06:45:42 PM
Quote from: Razgovory on August 05, 2012, 06:41:01 PM
Yeah, that's why GOP guys fuck up. A conspiracy. :rolleyes:
We've been over the conspiracy talking point about 6 times already.
Yes, but still seems to be in the conservative bible.
Quote from: Razgovory on August 05, 2012, 06:58:32 PM
Yes, but still seems to be in the conservative bible.
Even after Raz has presented his case six times! Shocking! :lol:
Quote from: Sheilbh on August 05, 2012, 06:56:45 PM
I think there's less political bias and more professional bias. They want candidates who are either clubbable and give them lots of time (McCain 2000 and 2008 during the primaries) or provide good copy. Despite maybe being more politically simpatico I remember a lot of media frustration at how tightly the Obama and Clinton campaigns controlled their messages, at how 'professional' they all were.
I think it's simply a clever way of telling the base "Who are you going to believe, me or your lying eyes?". You can't censor the media very easily in the US but you can convince people to self censor.
Quote from: Razgovory on August 05, 2012, 07:02:31 PM
I think it's simply a clever way of telling the base "Who are you going to believe, me or your lying eyes?". You can't censor the media very easily in the US but you can convince people to self censor.
What? I don't understand what this means.
Quote from: Sheilbh on August 05, 2012, 07:06:45 PM
Quote from: Razgovory on August 05, 2012, 07:02:31 PM
I think it's simply a clever way of telling the base "Who are you going to believe, me or your lying eyes?". You can't censor the media very easily in the US but you can convince people to self censor.
What? I don't understand what this means.
Did I leave a word out?
Quote from: Sheilbh on August 05, 2012, 07:06:45 PM
What? I don't understand what this means.
He's saying conservatives try to discredit an unbiased media because their objective reporting disproportionately hurts their causes.
Quote from: derspiess on August 05, 2012, 06:51:10 PM
No conspiracy-- just simple bias.
Right, and Gorka's superior interpersonal relationship strengths help by permanently cock blocking the press corps' access to the candidate, or refusing to answer direct questions on policy, has nothing to do with being a dick, just media "bias".
Here's a typical video of him not answering questions, but being an ignorant cock blocker.
http://www.cbsnews.com/video/watch/?id=7412896n
The best press secretaries know how to handle the press, give them what they think they want, and position their candidate positively.
It's got nothing to do with bias, it's got everything to do with being able to handle the dogs. You show fear or be a dick, they'll smell it and turn on you.
James Brady had no problem with winning over the media with Reagan '80; Mari Maseng, Jim Brady acolyte, had no problem with the media falling in love with Bob Dole, '88; Melissa Scuffield had absolutely no problem with winning their hearts and minds with McCain '00. So don't blame it on "bias" from the "lamestream media", or any of your other typical Limbaugh whack-off material.
Quote from: Admiral Yi on August 05, 2012, 07:09:31 PM
Quote from: Sheilbh on August 05, 2012, 07:06:45 PM
What? I don't understand what this means.
He's saying conservatives try to discredit an unbiased media because their objective reporting disproportionately hurts their causes.
Incorrect.
Quote from: Razgovory on August 05, 2012, 07:08:58 PM
Did I leave a word out?
Maybe more a sentence or two. I'm not sure what you're trying to say :mellow:
Quote from: Sheilbh on August 05, 2012, 07:11:59 PM
Quote from: Razgovory on August 05, 2012, 07:08:58 PM
Did I leave a word out?
Maybe more a sentence or two. I'm not sure what you're trying to say :mellow:
I'm saying that claiming there is media bias is a political strategy to convince people to ignore facts and events you don't want them to think about. Instead of trying to deny a gaff or a scandal or damaging facts you simply tell people that an entire class of people (journalists) are biased against you, and untrustworthy. Whether it's Spiro Agnew going on about "nattering nabobs of negativism" or Christine O'Donnell scolding her base for listening to the liberal media, it's an excellent strategy to get people to ignore stuff you don't want them to know about. You don't even have to actually deny it, you just say it's liberal media bias and leave it at that. It's not limited to the media. Teachers, Professors, and scientists can't be trusted because of that liberal media bias. Hell even Wikipedia has a "liberal bias" and so some enterprising conservatives created "Conservapedia, as a alternate source of information. It's strategy to convince people to self censor information and it works like a charm.
A well-played card Raz.
Your next step would be to show that the existence of a false positive invalidates all positives, since Spiro Agnew is dead and Christine O'Donnel doesn't post here.
It would be a good idea to do something about the conspiracy argument as well. Like throw it under the bus.
Languish has a liberal bias!!!111
Quote from: Admiral Yi on August 06, 2012, 04:33:50 AM
A well-played card Raz.
Your next step would be to show that the existence of a false positive invalidates all positives, since Spiro Agnew is dead and Christine O'Donnel doesn't post here.
It would be a good idea to do something about the conspiracy argument as well. Like throw it under the bus.
I'll let you make the next move.
My next move is to mock your conspiracy theory again and remind you that Spiro Agnew is dead.
Or is he!!!!!
Quote from: Admiral Yi on August 06, 2012, 05:31:49 PM
My next move is to mock your conspiracy theory again and remind you that Spiro Agnew is dead.
Fortunately there are more then two Republicans that push the liberal media bias thing. Spiro Agnew might have been one of the first. Didn't help him much. They still got him for tax evasion.