Support NeoGAF

[kehs]

I'm sure some will say it's a positive talking point about deficit reduction. The reality is that it is bad news for the economy and probably for Obama's election chances. Although, given that it's April and tax payment time, I suspect there's always a spike in government receipts vs. expenditures for that month and that the reason April's receipts haven't exceeded expenditures since 2008 is a product of the stimulus spending that has been occurring over the last four years that atypically raised government spending over this period (and which has now unfortunately come to an end).

If I'm understanding that properly , a surplus is typically to be expected as a positive?
(Putting aside ideals, since I've seen a few posts about expenses/revenues from your point of view).

 

[empty vessel]

If I'm understanding that properly , a surplus is typically to be expected as a positive?
(Putting aside ideals, since I've seen a few posts about expenses/revenues from your point of view).

I'm saying it can (and likely would) be politically touted and received as positive, because Americans do not understand how their government works. Surpluses are almost always terrible, but always and especially so in a slow economy with high unemployment.

But, like I said, this may well be a fluke that occurs every April (and that hasn't occurred for the last three years only because of the atypical stimulus spending).

 

[kehs]

I'm saying it can (and likely would) be politically touted and received as positive, because Americans do not understand how their government works. Surpluses are almost always terrible, but always and especially so in a slow economy with high unemployment.

But, like I said, this may well be a fluke that occurs every April (and that hasn't occurred for the last three years only because of the atypical stimulus spending).

Ah ok, that's what I figured. Thanks.

 

[thatbox]

I like Bernstein, but this is mostly nonsense. The government doesn't borrow money. It gives the appearance of borrowing due to bookkeeping rules that Congress imposes, but it doesn't actually do it. It just operates a bank for no real discernible reason other than Congress makes it.

I forgot about you. Here's something more in your wheelhouse:

Q: Re my post of the limits of the Fed: Countries like Sweden, Israel and Australia that have pushed their own currencies’ inflation to about 4% have done the best in this recession. The Fed could just announce that they will increase money supply until they get 4% inflation, and that will set market expectations. Should the promise be held as credible, it would move the market almost immediately. The same thing happened in Switzerland, they said they would print money until the current devalued to X level, and almost overnight it went to that level. Then, their exports became more competitive.

A: Right, and not only competitive exports through currency devaluation but also faster debt deleveraging (as inflation erodes the nominal value of debt burdens). You’d have to balance this against deeper real earnings losses, however. Real wages are already down around 1% yr/yr, and this would lead to something more like 2% losses.

But it is an idea you’ll hear from a lot of folks these days, and by no means radicals—Ken Rogoff, for example, espouses this route to recovery.

But remember how the Fed works at a time like this. They’re out of room on the interest rate so they buy debt. Putting aside their stated desire not to do a lot more debt purchases right now, perhaps if they committed to numerous more rounds of QE, such liquidity flooding would raise prices as you suggest. But as I noted in the post, I suspect they’d end up “pushing on a string” and absent greater demand, nothing much would change. True, more exports and more deleveraging translates into greater demand, so this is certainly a legit idea but it’s not as surefire as some folks seem to think.​

 

[speculawyer]

Can someone explain to me the importance of the surplus in revenue since 40 something odd months ago?

It was April and people paid their taxes. The payments create a blip of revenue that was larger than the spending. Something that hasn't happened in a while.

But it really wasn't very important.

 

[Lucky Forward]

Does anyone really buy the story that Biden 'forced the hand' of Obama to make his announcement? Biden says off the cuff stuff all the time, usually about trivial stuff, but sometimes about important things like our role in Afghanistan.

I thought it was pretty clearly a trial balloon to gauge reaction.

Biden apologizes to Obama for saying he supported gay marriage last week

Vice President Joe Biden apologized to President Barack Obama for saying he supported same-sex marriage last Sunday on Meet the Press, according to the Vice President's office.

The two spoke in the Oval Office shortly before the president sat down for an ABC News interview in which he also announced his support for same sex couples to marry.

"The President has been the leader on this issue from day one and the Vice President never intended to distract from that," the vice president's press secretary Kendra Barkoff said in a written statement.

 

[thatbox]

That's a sad fucking thing to have to apologize for. It's also sad that I understand why he felt he had to.

 

[ToxicAdam]

Biden apologizes to Obama for saying he supported gay marriage last week

So Biden either leaked something they intended to do anyways or this was their plan all along to provide cover if there was a backlash. That's how I see it.

 

[PhoenixDark]

So Biden either leaked something they intended to do anyways or this was their plan all along to provide cover if there was a backlash. That's how I see it.

The story I read is that the campaign planned to roll out the gay marriage announcement close to the DNC convention

 

[kehs]

So Biden either leaked something they intended to do anyways or this was their plan all along to provide cover if there was a backlash. That's how I see it.

They've been pretty obvious about their intended support of gay marriage, especially after their stephenepolous interview about not making news now .

 

[The Librarian]

So Biden either leaked something they intended to do anyways or this was their plan all along to provide cover if there was a backlash. That's how I see it.

They were planning to come out for it before the election in November.

 

[GhaleonEB]

The whole thing was way too sloppy to have been planned this way. Obama was already facing mounting pressure, including from donors. Biden forced the topic, and Obama respond with a hastily called request for an interview. His campaign has been way too organized to let such an issue be handled that way unless they were scrambling a bit.

 

[NullPointer]

Sorry if I'm late to this, but...

Mitt Romney said Thursday that same-sex couples should be allowed to adopt children, but they should not be married because children should be raised by a mother and a father.

WHAT. THE. FLYING. FUCK.

Mitt Romney said Thursday that same-sex couples should be allowed to adopt children

but they should not be married because children should be raised by a mother and a father.

Edit: OT thread here. My mind is still reeling.

 

[kehs]

Sorry if I'm late to this, but...



WHAT. THE. FUCK??!!1

Republicans gonna be bigotans.

 

[NullPointer]

Republicans gonna be bigotans.

No surprise there, but this is truly some 1+1=Derp happening here. Real-time cognitive dissonance of epic proportions. The flip has fused with the flop and they are one.

I don't know how his circuitry can take it.

 

[thezerofire]

Sorry if I'm late to this, but...



WHAT. THE. FLYING. FUCK.

Quantum Romney, holding all possible positions at once

 

[Officerrob]

Sorry if I'm late to this, but...



WHAT. THE. FLYING. FUCK.

What the.......I'm not even sure how to respond to that

 

[kehs]

No surprise there, but this is truly some 1+1=Derp happening here. Real-time cognitive dissonance of epic proportions. The flip has fused with the flop and they are one.

I don't know how his circuitry can take it.

They're pretty much in a position where they can't say anything except what they really believe, and that is, undoubtedly "gay people are inferior".

It's for the better in the end.

 

[Aaron Strife]

The whole thing was way too sloppy to have been planned this way. Obama was already facing mounting pressure, including from donors. Biden forced the topic, and Obama respond with a hastily called request for an interview. His campaign has been way too organized to let such an issue be handled that way unless they were scrambling a bit.

Oh yeah, this probably wasn't their preferred timing. But I think the Obama camp handled it extremely well.

If they'd punted, it would have looked bad. Obama wasted no time clarifying his new position, and now they have Romney playing defense.

 

[GhaleonEB]

Sorry if I'm late to this, but...

WHAT. THE. FLYING. FUCK.


Edit: OT thread here. My mind is still reeling.

That makes my brain hurt.

 

[PantherLotus]

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.

Sorry if this is pages back at this point, still catching up on today's reading. Anyway, I'm moved to comment because I can't help but think of how a Dem-Rove would frame Republican objections to touting the Bid Laden raid:

ONE YEAR AGO,
PRESIDENT OBAMA STOOD UP FOR AMERICA
AND ORDERED THE RAID THAT KILLED THE MOST WANTED MAN IN HISTORY.

NOW, MITT ROMNEY SAYS AMERICA SHOULDN'T BE PROUD OF OUR TRIUMPH.

ARE YOU PROUD OF AMERICA, KNOWING THAT YOU ARE SAFER WITH THE MAN BEHIND 9/11 FINALLY RECEIVING JUSTICE? STAND WITH US, AND STAND WITH THE PRESIDENT.

SAY NO TO BEING ASHAMED OF AMERICA'S SUCCESS! SAY NO TO ROMNEY!


###

The key is to conflate "America" with Obama at every turn, then preying on manufactured patriotism make Romney look like a complete pussy. "Wait, no, I'm glad we got him, just...I'll take credit for it."

 

[Chichikov]

I wasn't actually being sarcastic or trying to be Rovian.
I would like the dems to run ads along those lines.
The audacity of the whole "spiking the ball" talking point just pisses me off, and I'm certain the american public would be fine with seeing pictures like this again -

Oh, and before the partisan warriors come and poop all over this post, let me say that I have no doubt that we would've seen similar sentiment from the left had Bush killed Bin Laden.

It would've had a slightly different flavor.
More stuff like "it's barbaric to celebrate death" and "we should've brought him to trail".
But the conspiracy theories about the body and timing would've been pretty much the same.

It's not a conservative vs. liberals issues.
It's politicians, and the fact that their number one priority is getting elected.
It's important we stop rewarding that stupidity.

 

[PantherLotus]

What Romney did as a teen/young adult is irrelevant to who he is as a person now. Kids of all stripes do cruel things to their classmates, me included. These people grow up and learn from what they've done and become completely different adults, not at all defined by the mistakes they made as youngsters.

Yes, Romney is disingenuous to try to call them "pranks" and pretend he doesn't remember them, and yes they are very cruel, but that's what kids are - cruel.

Just like it was retarded for Romney to call out Obama for eating dog meat as a kid, it's silly for Obama or any of the Democrats to call out incidents as a child. Including experimentation with drugs or whatever. This is called growing up.

Again, I'm late to the party, but this defense is bullshit. Sorry Ami. All kids aren't cruel, much less most of them.

The reason this story holds water, the reason this is important (politically), and the reason why it matters (psychologically) is because, just like abusing animals, it reveals an intense disassociation and complete lack of empathy.

There's a difference between making fun of people and rounding up a gang of WASPs to jump on and maim someone because they're different.

The responses I've read from liberal GAF dismissing this story or thinking this is beneath the Obama campaign to exploit (at least so far, I'm a couple pages back), really don't grasp the gravity of what was done.

Maybe I've always been a bleeding heart while being blind to childhood cruelty. I've known what it's like to be an outsider (though most teens believe the same thing), but I've never known a non-pyschopath to assault a gay person.

That this is coming from the same man that doesn't understand the implication of firing people (or why you shouldn't joke about it), doesn't see anything wrong with zero-accountability free market cronyism, doesn't see anything wrong with evading taxes while running for President, and doesn't understand equality or justice or suffering under absolutely any pretense is no coincidence.

This story doesn't mean much to most of you guys, I guess, nor will it probably move the needle anywhere other than those that were bullied or those that knew someone that was bullied but were still on the fence. But it does change my opinion. I used to think he was just a rich, oblivious and entitled bastard with a streak of moderation, but now I think he's a rich, oblivious and entitled bastard with a streak of cruelty.

 

[Chichikov]

Again, I'm late to the party, but this defense is bullshit. Sorry Ami. All kids aren't cruel, much less most of them.

The reason this story holds water, the reason this is important (politically), and the reason why it matters (psychologically) is because, just like abusing animals, it reveals an intense disassociation and complete lack of empathy.

There's a difference between making fun of people and rounding up a gang of WASPs to jump on and maim someone because they're different.

The responses I've read from liberal GAF dismissing this story or thinking this is beneath the Obama campaign to exploit (at least so far, I'm a couple pages back), really don't grasp the gravity of what was done.

Maybe I've always been a bleeding heart while being blind to childhood cruelty. I've known what it's like to be an outsider (though most teens believe the same thing), but I've never known a non-pyschopath to assault a gay person.

That this is coming from the same man that doesn't understand the implication of firing people (or why you shouldn't joke about it), doesn't see anything wrong with zero-accountability free market cronyism, doesn't see anything wrong with evading taxes while running for President, and doesn't understand equality or justice or suffering under absolutely any pretense is no coincidence.

This story doesn't mean much to most of you guys, I guess, nor will it probably move the needle anywhere other than those that were bullied or those that knew someone that was bullied but were still on the fence. But it does change my opinion. I used to think he was just a rich, oblivious and entitled bastard with a streak of moderation, but now I think he's a rich, oblivious and entitled bastard with a streak of cruelty.

I can already see we will never reach an agreement on this, I'm guessing because we had very different childhoods.

I just don't see anything shocking or terrible in those stories.
Shit like that happened all the time when I was a kid, and even worse.
I'm not saying it's a good thing, I'm saying kids are stupid and don't know better.
And I'm saying you can do such things and grow up to be a normative person, at least I hope I am.

 

[PantherLotus]

Do you find Obama's admitted drug usage or Bill Clinton's philandering to be similarly informative about their capacity for effective governance? He's not running for relater-to-people-in-chief.

It should be clear that I think Romney would be a terrible president, but the idea that we should use his bad behavior in high school to inform that conclusion is absolutely risible.

I've seen this defense a lot as well. I think there's a difference between experimenting with drugs -- a personal choice -- and inflicting physical, emotional, and permanent pyschological pain by torturing someone.

I could be wrong, but ask a room of 1000 people how many assaulted a gay person and ask the same room how many smoked a blunt and snorted a few lines and I think you'll see a teeny-tiny difference. Or, all of them.

I mean, how many people in PoliGAF have assaulted gay people in their lives? You can put me on the "didn't particpate in assaulting gay people ever" column.

 

[RDreamer]

So, a video of Scott Walker came out today. In it his biggest donor asks if he's going to make this a completely red state and become a right-to-work state. He said it's part of his strategy, and he's going to divide and conquer. The first step in his plan was to hit the public unions.

 

[PantherLotus]

Yeah.

This reminds me of a big post I made a while back comparing the (crazily, unbelievably shitty) Romney campaign site to Obama's site. It's one of the most well-crafted sites I've ever seen and I come from a web design background.

I would like to note that your use of drop shadow on the text you've used throughout your design critique is particularly appalling, but your comments are salient.

 

[PhoenixDark]

So, a video of Scott Walker came out today. In it his biggest donor asks if he's going to make this a completely red state and become a right-to-work state. He said it's part of his strategy, and he's going to divide and conquer. The first step in his plan was to hit the public unions.

I respect Walker's drive do big stuff and worry about the politics later. I wish more democrats would behave like that on a state and federal level, especially early in terms.

 

[Snake]

The responses I've read from liberal GAF dismissing this story or thinking this is beneath the Obama campaign to exploit (at least so far, I'm a couple pages back), really don't grasp the gravity of what was done.

I came out pretty early in saying that this line of attack shouldn't be pursued, but a large part of that hesitance is based on our inability to prove the particulars of the event rather than a dismissal of the cruel implications behind it.

If it was 100% clear that (a) Romney did this, (b) he targeted this kid because he was gay, (c) this was malicious rather than a dumb prank, and (d) he chooses not to atone for this, then I would be loudly and proudly pursuing this story.

Out of those 4 points, (d) is the clincher but it is also the hardest to ascertain. We can't read Romney's mind. And even though his apology was weak and muddled it wasn't revealing enough to form alternative conclusions. I've seen so many people on the right spend the last four years pulling witch hunts out of thin air by claiming to know Obama's "true" intent, and maybe I'm too burned out by that kind of thinking to make sweeping judgments about Romney based on the current information.

 

[speculawyer]

I can already see we will never reach an agreement on this, I'm guessing because we had very different childhoods.

I just don't see anything shocking or terrible in those stories.
Shit like that happened all the time when I was a kid, and even worse.
I'm not saying it's a good thing, I'm saying kids are stupid and don't know better.
And I'm saying you can do such things and grow up to be a normative person, at least I hope I am.

But how old was he when he did this? I saw 18 somewhere but I don't know if that is true.

But he was probably at least as old as many teens who were tried as adults and are now locked up for life for committing murder.

If he was 12 or 13 . . . whatever.

Was he 15?

But if he was 16 or older, he knew better. You can certainly change . . . or . . . you could put your dog on your roof and have no issues with firing thousands of people.

 

[Oblivion]

Has this ad been posted?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=wnspxInJxHs

Very nice, concise, simple and effective.

 

[Diablos]

Dick fucking Lugar:

He and I share many positions, but his embrace of an unrelenting partisan mindset is irreconcilable with my philosophy of governance and my experience of what brings results for Hoosiers in the Senate. In effect, what he has promised in this campaign is reflexive votes for a rejectionist orthodoxy and rigid opposition to the actions and proposals of the other party. His answer to the inevitable roadblocks he will encounter in Congress is merely to campaign for more Republicans who embrace the same partisan outlook. He has pledged his support to groups whose prime mission is to cleanse the Republican party of those who stray from orthodoxy as they see it.

I tip my hat.

http://2012.talkingpointsmemo.com/2012/05/dick-lugar-doesnt-go-quietly.php?ref=fpnewsfeed

 

[speculawyer]

Dick fucking Lugar:


I tip my hat.

http://2012.talkingpointsmemo.com/2012/05/dick-lugar-doesnt-go-quietly.php?ref=fpnewsfeed

Damn. Maybe Donnelly can get an endorsement from Senator Lugar.

 

[Black Republican]

Dick fucking Lugar:


I tip my hat.

http://2012.talkingpointsmemo.com/2012/05/dick-lugar-doesnt-go-quietly.php?ref=fpnewsfeed

dat ether

 

[RobotChant]

Has it been mentioned that Ann Romney's comments about Mitt being a prankster, ect., was pre-spin in preparation for the WaPo story? According to Lawrence O'Donnell the Romney campaign was aware of the story before it was published. They knew the story was out there and yet Romney still struggled to explain himself.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=x8Q_2GFQ6SI


At first I felt the story was tabloid fodder- even though it fit Mitt's profile. As small things like this are revealed, I do see this as legit story, another piece of the puzzle.

 

[Rocket Scientist]

Has this ad been posted?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=wnspxInJxHs

Very nice, concise, simple and effective.

Hot.

 

[Chumly]

Again, I'm late to the party, but this defense is bullshit. Sorry Ami. All kids aren't cruel, much less most of them.

The reason this story holds water, the reason this is important (politically), and the reason why it matters (psychologically) is because, just like abusing animals, it reveals an intense disassociation and complete lack of empathy.

There's a difference between making fun of people and rounding up a gang of WASPs to jump on and maim someone because they're different.

The responses I've read from liberal GAF dismissing this story or thinking this is beneath the Obama campaign to exploit (at least so far, I'm a couple pages back), really don't grasp the gravity of what was done.

Maybe I've always been a bleeding heart while being blind to childhood cruelty. I've known what it's like to be an outsider (though most teens believe the same thing), but I've never known a non-pyschopath to assault a gay person.

That this is coming from the same man that doesn't understand the implication of firing people (or why you shouldn't joke about it), doesn't see anything wrong with zero-accountability free market cronyism, doesn't see anything wrong with evading taxes while running for President, and doesn't understand equality or justice or suffering under absolutely any pretense is no coincidence.

This story doesn't mean much to most of you guys, I guess, nor will it probably move the needle anywhere other than those that were bullied or those that knew someone that was bullied but were still on the fence. But it does change my opinion. I used to think he was just a rich, oblivious and entitled bastard with a streak of moderation, but now I think he's a rich, oblivious and entitled bastard with a streak of cruelty.

Talking about the situation with my wife I would have to agree. All this talk about how this stuff happened all the time is bullshit. Everyone has said things that they regret but to actually assault someone hold them down and cut there hair as a "prank". Most of the biggest assholes from my high school back in the day didn't even pull crap like this. I do believe in forgiveness for what has happened in the past but that only matters if your a changed man and Romney has shown none of that. Acting like bullying is ok because it happens to everyone is a load of crap.

 

[Bulbo Urethral Baggins]

According to Ashley Parker of the NY Times, the family of the kid who was allegedly bullied says it's bullshit.

From John Lauber’s family, the bullied victim in WaPo story: “We are aggrieved that John would be used to further a political agenda.”
Also from John Lauber’s family: “The portrayal of John is factually incorrect.”
This comes after one source for the story, a man the Washington Post says has “long been bothered” by the incident, said he wasn’t even present and had no idea it had happened until the Post contacted him.

How fucking low will these newspapers go to support their liberal agenda?

 

[Particle Physicist]

According to Ashley Parker of the NY Times, the family of the kid who was allegedly bullied says it's bullshit.

From John Lauber’s family, the bullied victim in WaPo story: “We are aggrieved that John would be used to further a political agenda.”
Also from John Lauber’s family: “The portrayal of John is factually incorrect.”
This comes after one source for the story, a man the Washington Post says has “long been bothered” by the incident, said he wasn’t even present and had no idea it had happened until the Post contacted him.

How fucking low will these newspapers go to support their liberal agenda?

I read the whole comment. And she doesn't say it's bullshit at all, just that she was unaware it happened and it would have been like her brother to keep it from her. She did say he was not gay though, just eccentric.

 

[Particle Physicist]

Christine Lauber, who is a few years older than John Lauber, was at college when the alleged incident happened, and said the brother and sister were "doing our own thing" at the time.

She described her brother as a "very unusual person."

"He didn't care about running with the peer group," Christine Lauber said. "What's wrong with that?"

"Even if it did happen, John probably wouldn't have said anything," Christine Lauber said.

Here

 

[Chumly]

According to Ashley Parker of the NY Times, the family of the kid who was allegedly bullied says it's bullshit.

From John Lauber’s family, the bullied victim in WaPo story: “We are aggrieved that John would be used to further a political agenda.”
Also from John Lauber’s family: “The portrayal of John is factually incorrect.”
This comes after one source for the story, a man the Washington Post says has “long been bothered” by the incident, said he wasn’t even present and had no idea it had happened until the Post contacted him.

How fucking low will these newspapers go to support their liberal agenda?

lol..... How would the family know? Seriously? From his own sister

"Even if it did happen, John probably wouldn't have said anything," Christine Lauber said.

 

[Wolfgunblood Garopa]

According to Ashley Parker of the NY Times, the family of the kid who was allegedly bullied says it's bullshit.

From John Lauber’s family, the bullied victim in WaPo story: “We are aggrieved that John would be used to further a political agenda.”
Also from John Lauber’s family: “The portrayal of John is factually incorrect.”
This comes after one source for the story, a man the Washington Post says has “long been bothered” by the incident, said he wasn’t even present and had no idea it had happened until the Post contacted him.

How fucking low will these newspapers go to support their liberal agenda?

Such a sadness

 

[Bulbo Urethral Baggins]

I read the whole comment. And she doesn't say it's bullshit at all, just that she was unaware it happened and it would have been like her brother to keep it from her. She did say he was not gay though, just eccentric.

What part of "factually incorrect" do you not understand?
Also:
Funny how a guy who wasn't there and never heard of the incident has been troubled for a long time by this incident. This story is really embarrassing for not only the Wash Post but for all the seemingly desperate people trumping it up.

 

[Rocket Scientist]

I would like to read these stories as I've only found the NYT article so far, which only talks about the political agenda blabla. Also found the ABC one now.

 

[eznark]

The writer portraying the guy as "long troubled by the incident" when he wasn't even there is the significant part of that story. Seems early for the WaPo to start Dan Rathering stories.

 

[cartoon_soldier]

Multiple people have confirmed the incident, so anyone saying it didn't happen is kidding themselves.

 

[Bulbo Urethral Baggins]

The writer portraying the guy as "long troubled by the incident" when he wasn't even there is the significant part of that story. Seems early for the WaPo to start Dan Rathering stories.

Not only wasn't he there. He had never even HEARD of it until the WP contacted him.
Is this what political journalism has come to? Is this what we want to talk about for the next 6 months? Why do sensationalist stories like this seem to overshadow the actual important things we should be talking about?
Dog eating, dogs on car roof, composite girlfriends... Holy fuck. When will this country get serious? We have REAL problems and differences of opinions that need our full attention.
I think I'm going crazy here.

 

[Owzers]

No surprise there, but this is truly some 1+1=Derp happening here. Real-time cognitive dissonance of epic proportions. The flip has fused with the flop and they are one.

I don't know how his circuitry can take it.

It's close to when Mitt said America should never apologize, but if we do something wrong we should say we're sorry.

 

[Rocket Scientist]

Bulbo are you implying that the story is false, because nothing in the abc news articles or the NYT articles makes the incident or Romney's handling of the news any better.

 

[Chumly]

Not only wasn't he there. He had never even HEARD of it until the WP contacted him.
Is this what political journalism has come to? Is this what we want to talk about for the next 6 months? Why do sensationalist stories like this seem to overshadow the actual important things we should be talking about?
Dog eating, dogs on car roof, composite girlfriends... Holy fuck. When will this country get serious? We have REAL problems and differences of opinions that need our full attention.
I think I'm going crazy here.

Are you that desperate to prove it false? Maybe Romney should have handled the situation better and we wouldn't have the issue we have currently.