Support NeoGAF

[RDreamer]

Holy cow, Mourdock is a loony

"What [Lincoln] meant by ["we are a house divided"] was that slavery was either going to be totally eliminated from the United States or it was no longer just going to be restricted to the Southern states, it was going to go everywhere. I am here to suggest to you that we are in a house divided.

"You know this past April, when our federal taxes were paid, 47 percent -- 47 percent -- of all American households paid no income tax. In fact, half of that 47 percent almost, actually got tax money back from the government that they never paid -- because a few years ago we revised the welfare program to make it part of the tax code. When 47 percent are paying no income taxes -- they do pay Social Security -- but they are not paying income taxes, and 53 percent are carrying the load, we are a house divided."

 

[Snake]

Putting the spotlight on Romney's high school antics has zero political value and is a weak personal attack in general. People can change and, as long as he isn't an unapologetic dick about it, this story cannot form into a relevant narrative going forward.

Focus on the other thousand unlikeable qualities of the man.

 

[thatbox]

Did you see my post on the last page? Don't spout this "if he cared" bullshit when his administration has done more for gay people in the US than anyone before him. You need to accept the fact that not everything important on your agenda is going to be done the moment you want it to be.

Sure. I simply wonder what's holding him back. Does he think that preventing discrimination by federal contractors will lose him more voters than saying he thinks gay people should be allowed to get married? He's obviously playing politics with this stuff rather than following his heart (which is why he's been so effective so far), but after dropping that bomb I don't see any point in leaving that executive order on the table.

 

[Tim-E]

Sure. I simply wonder what's holding him back. Does he think that preventing discrimination by federal contractors will lose him more voters than saying he thinks gay people should be allowed to get married? He's obviously playing politics with this stuff rather than following his heart (which is why he's been so effective so far), but after dropping that bomb I don't see any point in leaving that executive order on the table.

I agree with you. Hopefully now that the cat's out of the bag he won't hold back. I'd love to see it signed, too; I've just grown to accept that it's best to take things as they come because if I didn't, I'd be getting worked up over everything that wasn't being done as opposed to acknowledging what is being done.

 

[GhaleonEB]

Obama's latest wave of ads are pretty well done.

http://livewire.talkingpointsmemo.com/entries/new-obama-ads-tout-record-on-jobs-auto

 

[cartoon_soldier]

Putting the spotlight on Romney's high school antics has zero political value and is a weak personal attack in general. People can change and, as long as he isn't an unapologetic dick about it, this story cannot form into a relevant narrative going forward.

Focus on the other thousand unlikeable qualities of the man.

I don't think anybody is raising it like say, Romney's corporations are people statement. But it is a valid thing for him to address considering the spotlight on bullying of gay students and the consequences of the same.

 

[Tim-E]

Obama's latest wave of ads are pretty well done.

http://livewire.talkingpointsmemo.com/entries/new-obama-ads-tout-record-on-jobs-auto

I saw the "Go." ad for the first time on TV last night. I would be surprised that I'm seeing any ads for Obama at all in WV, but it was airing on an NBC affiliate station that borders Ohio, so that's likely it.

 

[gcubed]

Seems early to be descending into Romney 40 years ago. I assume tomorrow the right will counter with Obama being a coke head in college. Based on that timeline maybe we'll get back to talking about the men as they are now in June.

well, it went from him eating puppies, to his fake girlfriend, to Romney being a meanie in high school. I think we have one more young Romney bullshit thing to waste time on

 

[speculawyer]

Putting the spotlight on Romney's high school antics has zero political value and is a weak personal attack in general. People can change and, as long as he isn't an unapologetic dick about it, this story cannot form into a relevant narrative going forward.

Focus on the other thousand unlikeable qualities of the man.

We as far as I know, the Obama campaign has not referred to it at all. (Am I wrong?) And you can't control what the press digs up & prints. They'll do the same with Obama.

 

[Tim-E]

BREAKING: Obama says F-word in 17 year old book. Can we trust a man who speaks like that? Who is the real Barack Obama?

 

[Chichikov]

Obama's latest wave of ads are pretty well done.

http://livewire.talkingpointsmemo.com/entries/new-obama-ads-tout-record-on-jobs-auto

I think it's undignified and un-presidential that he spikes the ball like that on the auto-bailout.

Spoiler

solid ads.

p.s.
I want to complain about the GOP football metaphor here.
Spiking the ball is like the only TD celebration which not considered excessive.
They really should've gone with something like -
"It's un-presidential for Obama to hide a cellphone in the goalposts".

 

[Snake]

And you can't control what the press digs up & prints. They'll do the same with Obama.

Sure, I just don't think that liberal blogs and individual posters should make this a thing they routinely cycle into the conversation. It smacks of something that only partisans would bring up and gives conservatives and independents something to eyeroll at in unison.

 

[Skiptastic]

sorry, lost my train of thought (at work). Sodom and Gomorrah was destroyed not because of its rampant homosexuality and fornication, as is presumed by many religious people, but moreso because they didn't care for people as they should.

If the government is of the people, by the people, and for the people, as the famous speech goes, than why should it not be devoted to improving the lives of the sick, helping those in their later years, and caring for the poor? I am not talking about the government giving handouts to the poor necessarily, but I am talking about making healthcare something that nobody should go bankrupt over. I am also talking about social security being able to cover a real life for someone in retirement, should they not have been able to save for themselves. I am not talking about vacations, condos and cars, but much more than the meager existence these people have now in old age.

No worries, I was just giving you the razz.

I agree with most, if not all, of your thinking on this. It's a political ideology that establishes a limited baseline on creating a society in which we all want to live. I just disagree with the idea that the justification for it should be "the Bible said be nice to the disadvantaged and sick" instead of "this is the society I want to live in." When you start bringing in "the Bible said" for your government initiatives, you open yourself up to "the Bible hates gays so my government will hate gays." Cherry picking the Bible to make a political point is something I wish would go away in politics. That was my point for the Bashir/Barton thing.

EDIT: Chichikov pretty much explained why the Bashir/Barton thing was dumb above. Good post.

 

[Wolfgunblood Garopa]

I think it's undignified and un-presidential that he spikes the ball like that on the auto-bailout.

Spoiler

solid ads.

"Ok Mr. President, I'll do it for you: Thank you, auto workers. Thank you, car salesmen. Thank you, car buyers. There, was that so hard?"

 

[ChiTownBuffalo]

Putting the spotlight on Romney's high school antics has zero political value and is a weak personal attack in general. People can change and, as long as he isn't an unapologetic dick about it, this story cannot form into a relevant narrative going forward.

Focus on the other thousand unlikeable qualities of the man.

Well, too bad he's an unapologetic dick about it

I don't, I don't remember that incident. And I certainly don't believe that I, or, I can't speak for other people, of course, but thought the fellow was homosexual. That was the furthest thing from my mind back in the 1960's. That was not the case.

 

[Wolfgunblood Garopa]

He's already apologized for his behavior. Hopefully, the country can now begin the long healing process over these pranks.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/polit...gone-too-far/2012/05/10/gIQAC3JhFU_story.html

I couldn't care less about that, where is Elizabeth Warren's apology.

 

[PhoenixDark]

Obama's campaign is peddling the Romney bullying shit? Come on, that's low. Everything we know about Romney does suggest he must have been quite the status quo champion, I wouldn't be surprised if he accused the guy of being a hippie or something. Regardless it's irrelevant, and the timing of the accusation is just low.

Are we going to have to talk about Obama doing coke and weed too, and what it potentially says about his character? C'mon

 

[Snake]

Obama's campaign is peddling the Romney bullying shit?

Where did the Obama campaign do this?

 

[PhoenixDark]

Where did the Obama campaign do this?

Democrats, who are currently trying to contrast Obama’s newly announced support for gay marriage with Romney’s outspoken objections to even civil unions, sent the story to reporters on Thursday morning.

http://2012.talkingpointsmemo.com/2...ologizes-for-high-school-bullying.php?ref=fpb

 

[DasRaven]

Obama's campaign is peddling the Romney bullying shit? Come on, that's low. Everything we know about Romney does suggest he must have been quite the status quo champion, I wouldn't be surprised if he accused the guy of being a hippie or something. Regardless it's irrelevant, and the timing of the accusation is just low.

Are we going to have to talk about Obama doing coke and weed too, and what it potentially says about his character? C'mon

Edit: I see, Cutter taking the shot on twitter is a direct link.

BTW: Romney campaign embeds are saying that the Romney campaign is looking for old school buddies to come to Mitt's defense.

 

[Tim-E]

http://2012.talkingpointsmemo.com/2...ologizes-for-high-school-bullying.php?ref=fpb

Democrats =/= Obama campaign

 

[Invisible_Insane]

Democrats =/= Obama campaign

The difference isn't terribly meaningful.

Seriously, guys, this is chickenshit.

 

[ToxicAdam]

Democrats =/= Obama campaign

hahaha ... my god.

 

[Wolfgunblood Garopa]

Democrats =/= Obama campaign

It could have been the campaign. They are Democrats. I think that's where PD was going with that.

 

[Invisible_Insane]

It could have been the campaign. They are Democrats. I think that's where PD was going with that.

No, I think Tim is trying to say that OFA gets to wash its hands of this nonsense if it comes directly from the DNC, which might represent a new high in spurious bullshit.

If this keeps up I'm going to exceed my limit on scatalogical comparisons.

 

[Aaron Strife]

Moody projects unemployment will be 7.9% before the election, an average of 182,000 jobs added per month.

History suggests that this year’s election is likely to be very close if the economy adds 100,000 to 175,000 jobs a month in the six months before Election Day. (These benchmarks come from work by Nate Silver, of The Times’s FiveThirtyEight blog.) Job growth above 175,000 would tend to make President Obama a favorite. Growth below 100,000 would make Mitt Romney, the presumptive Republican nominee, the favorite.

The current economic forecast suggests that Mr. Obama is better positioned than Mr. Romney, but only slightly. Moody’s Analytics predicts that the economy will add an average of 182,000 between now and October. By comparison, it added 188,000 jobs a month in the first four months of the year but only 115,000 in April.

...

The Moody’s forecast also projects the unemployment rate to be 8 percent in September and 7.9 percent in October. That would be down from 8.1 percent last month and 8.3 percent in Mr. Obama’s first full month in office.

If it holds, Obama's got this. European doomsday is looking less likely as the days go by, as is any war in Israel or Iran. HCR being overturned could still be a major wrench, but I think Roberts cares too much about his legacy to actually do it. Still betting on 6-3 in favor of the law.

Also, the federal government posted its first budget surplus since September 2008:

Receipts topped outlays by $59.1 compared with a deficit of $40.4 billion in April 2011, the Treasury Department said today. Economists projected a $35 billion surplus, according to the median estimate in a Bloomberg News survey. It was the first surplus since September 2008 and the biggest since April 2008.

 

[DasRaven]

On a more substantive note, we have a Federal budget surplus this month. and unemployment claims are down once again.

 

[GhaleonEB]

Democrats =/= Obama campaign

Obama is the head of the party.

It's petty. A much better contrast is the one already set up: Obama's (new) position versus Romney's current position. No need to dig up high school stories. They may be telling of who Romney became, but talking about him in the present is ample contrast enough. I can see the argument about building a longer case against Romney, but it feels like the kind of crap dug up to drive a 24-hour news cycle, the day after Obama altered a major part of the entire campaign. Poor strategy, and a poor tactic.

 

[PhoenixDark]

Moody projects unemployment will be 7.9% before the election, an average of 182,000 jobs added per month.


If it holds, Obama's got this. European doomsday is looking less likely as the days go by, as is any war in Israel or Iran. HCR being overturned could still be a major wrench, but I think Roberts cares too much about his legacy to actually do it. Still betting on 6-3 in favor of the law.

Where are people getting this nonsense? If Roberts is a right wing judge, why wouldn't he want to overturn the law?

 

[Tim-E]

I didn't take the use of "democrats" to mean the DNC or OFA, but just the democrat base. I just read the excerpt quoted by PD and not the rest of the story. I retract my statement. Dear fucking god, people, calm down.

 

[GhaleonEB]

I didn't take the use of "democrats" to mean the DNC or OFA, but just the democrat base. I just read the excerpt quoted by PD and not the rest of the story. I retract my statement. Dear fucking god, people, calm down.

I am calm, and was responding in part to your post and in part to others defending the story. You didn't read the full context and were mistaken and have not set that straight. No need to get defensive about it.

 

[thatbox]

So you guys may be getting tired of hearing about my newspaper's awful cartoonist, but I can't help myself.

Yesterday's cartoon:

Today's cartoon:

 

[RustyNails]

Are we going to have to talk about Obama doing coke and weed too, and what it potentially says about his character? C'mon

Yes, smoking dope is absolutely comparable to bullying a teen.

Regardless, the story has no legs.

 

[DasRaven]

Where are people getting this nonsense? If Roberts is a right wing judge, why wouldn't he want to overturn the law?

I think the concept goes like this:
1. Roberts' court is already most known for being highly pro-corporate and anti-individual (which the ACA is in spades)
2. People think that Roberts doesn't want another explosive politically charged decision after Citizens United.
3. The whole court knows that the striking down the whole ACA causes legislative armageddon the next day as Congress scrambles to put back all the parts that people like about the ACA in an election year.

I don't buy most of it since it isn't as though we've not had highly charged courts for years no.
But I really think it's down to a coin flip for Kennedy and if he's for it, it is a 6-3, not 5-4 victory.

 

[Tim-E]

I am calm, and was responding in part to your post and in part to others defending the story. You didn't read the full context and were mistaken and have not set that straight. No need to get defensive about it.

I hadn't even seen your comment when I posted. It was mostly directed at the "a new high in spurious bullshit" comment from Invisible_Insane.

 

[reggieandTFE]

So you guys may be getting tired of hearing about my newspaper's awful cartoonist, but I can't help myself.

Yesterday's cartoon:


Today's cartoon:

As an Obama supporter I kind of like that latter one.

 

[GhaleonEB]

I hadn't even seen your comment when I posted. It was mostly directed at the "a new high in spurious bullshit" comment from Invisible_Insane.

Well, that's what the quote funtion is for.

It's a silly story that will (and should) be forgotten come tomorrow.

 

[Suikoguy]

Yes, smoking dope is absolutely comparable to bullying a teen.

Regardless, the story has no legs.

I'm undecided on the story...

But, with bullying being such a big story lately, it could have more legs then you think.

 

[Aaron Strife]

Where are people getting this nonsense? If Roberts is a right wing judge, why wouldn't he want to overturn the law?

I think he also understands the optics of overturning it.

SCOTUS is still held in somewhat high regard by the average American. Not as much as it used to, but it's viewed as a fairly nonpartisan, deliberative body.

Overturning HCR would see the Court engaging in partisan bullshit by opening up a can of worms for the Republicans and Democrats alike. Basically it would tarnish their reputation, and I don't think Roberts wants to take it to the president like that.

Yes, they already kind of did with Citizens United. But that's advancing the interest of businesses looking to influence elections, not necessarily Republicans. I don't need to tell you how many of the Democrats are bought and sold by Wall Street.

Of course, if Kennedy does vote against the law, I feel Roberts will as well and the whole thing will be overturned, or at least the mandate will. However, if Kennedy did vote for the law, then Roberts would sort of look like a fool if he didn't side with him. From what I've heard, he's not a fan of losing.

 

[kehs]

Bill Clinton speaking at CTIA Wireless (tech conference).

http://www.engadget.com/2012/05/10/live-from-president-bill-clintons-ctia-keynote/

 

[PhoenixDark]

I think he also understands the optics of overturning it.

SCOTUS is still held in somewhat high regard by the average American. Not as much as it used to, but it's viewed as a fairly nonpartisan, deliberative body.

Overturning HCR would see the Court engaging in partisan bullshit by opening up a can of worms for the Republicans and Democrats alike. Basically it would tarnish their reputation, and I don't think Roberts wants to take it to the president like that.

Yes, they already kind of did with Citizens United. But that's advancing the interest of businesses looking to influence elections, not necessarily Republicans. I don't need to tell you how many of the Democrats are bought and sold by Wall Street.

Of course, if Kennedy does vote against the law, I feel Roberts will as well and the whole thing will be overturned, or at least the mandate will. However, if Kennedy did vote for the law, then Roberts would sort of look like a fool if he didn't side with him. From what I've heard, he's not a fan of losing.

Given how right wing Roberts is, I'm not sure he'll view it that way. To him this will just be striking down government overreach, and the crowning achievement of right wing court stacking that's been going on for decades

Is there any evidence that Roberts is dismayed by the public's response to the Citizen's United decision? I think

 

[markatisu]

Given how right wing Roberts is, I'm not sure he'll view it that way. To him this will just be striking down government overreach, and the crowning achievement of right wing court stacking that's been going on for decades

Is there any evidence that Roberts is dismayed by the public's response to the Citizen's United decision? I think

Roberts will go for whatever Kennedy decides, you don't become the head of the Court and shrug off how your overall court reaches a decision.

The evidence is history, you never want to be on the losing side of a big decision as the head of the court

 

[Particle Physicist]

I think it's pretty lame for the media to drag up stuff Romney did or didn't do in high school. Then again, the GOPers are attacking Obama for eating dog as a child. Fuck 'em lol

I agree, but just to note, the Obama ate a dog crap came from Romney's camp, not the media... which I feel makes it more petty.

 

[Wolfgunblood Garopa]

The audacity of using the other team's playbook

 

[Particle Physicist]

I think it's undignified and un-presidential that he spikes the ball like that on the auto-bailout.

Spoiler

solid ads.

p.s.
I want to complain about the GOP football metaphor here.
Spiking the ball is like the only TD celebration which not considered excessive.
They really should've gone with something like -
"It's un-presidential for Obama to hide a cellphone in the goalposts".

What's funny is that Republicans keep saying that Obama will have to run on his record! But when he does, and he highlights some of his great accomplishments, they get all pissy. lol No, no, not that record!!

 

[Opiate]

The audacity of using the other team's playbook

Sometimes I feel it's appropriate (for example, if Republicans are going to rely heavily on SuperPACs, I don't feel Obama has any choice in the matter even if he openly opposes their existence). However, there are times when I would recommend taking the high road, and this is one of them.

 

[Chichikov]

What's funny is that Republicans keep saying that Obama will have to run on his record! But when he does, and he highlights some of his great accomplishments, they get all pissy. lol No, no, not that record!!

Also, it's such an easy attack to counter.
If I was in Obama's campaign I would run an ad that goes like this -

"The GOP want us to not talk about killing Bin Laden
We respect their opinion, and their entitled to it, but we're going to have an disagree on that".

Then cut to this.

 

[cartoon_soldier]

Josh Marshall says it well on the Romney story today

http://talkingpointsmemo.com/archives/2012/05/is_mitt_romney_a_bully.php?ref=fpblg

The striking part about this story is:

What strikes me most about this story is Romney’s intense equivocation. First he didn’t remember the incidents. Then he apologized to anyone who was offended but without saying he remembered anything specific. Then he said that he definitely didn’t know or think the kid they attacked was gay, even though he apparently didn’t remember the attack.

It is obvious that he remembers the incident, and it is not what I would call a prank. But it would be difficult for him to talk about it at all considering what Obama said yesterday.

 

[Wolfgunblood Garopa]

Sometimes I feel it's appropriate (for example, if Republicans are going to rely heavily on SuperPACs, I don't feel Obama has any choice in the matter even if he openly opposes their existence). However, there are times when I would recommend taking the high road, and this is one of them.

This is how it has to be, given the severity of Republicans' methods and how they have preyed on the uninformed voter, poisoned our political discourse. It will be handled skillfully enough without too much backlash.

Maybe when the right gets a little more sane, actually participates in governing and cuts back on the Rovian tactics, we can get back to taking the high road.

 

[Aaron Strife]

Probably the more substantial example of Romney being a bully. He acted cool towards an LGBT anti-bullying group set up by a Republican governor, then took a 180, cut off their funding and ultimately disbanded them.

What a putrid pile of shit.