-
Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.
PoliGAF 2012 Community Thread
- Thread starter AlteredBeast
- Start date
- Status
AlteredBeast
Fork 'em, Sparky!
Welp, hope you jerks are happy. I am now officially a PAID flak for the Obama campaign.
Go me!
Now I REALLY am going to not believe anything you say.
Welp, hope you jerks are happy. I am now officially a PAID flak for the Obama campaign.
Go me!
So now any time you post anything, we can go to the media about it? "An Obama campaign staffer said today...."
jamesinclair
Banned
...that vita is doooooooomed
Simpsons quote, yo.
Personally, I agree that Carter gets way too much flak. The oil shock had much more to do with the economic woes under his presidency than any of his policies did.
cartoon_soldier
Member
Simpsons quote, yo.
Personally, I agree that Carter gets way too much flak. The oil shock had much more to do with the economic woes under his presidency than any of his policies did.
The problem is all one term Presidents are viewed as a failure. James Fallows wrote an excellent post on this, Obama will be viewed by whether he wins another term or not.
http://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2012/03/obama-explained/8874/
Skiptastic
Member
Funny thing is that the Bush name would be less caustic than what the current GOP candidates have done to themselves. Jeb would be a much stronger candidate, have name recognition, and have had less time fighting among the current crop of lower nominees.
I'd get into it further but I'm on my phone right now lol. But I'm all for a completely new candidate arising from a brokered convention. So much more interesting.
I'd get into it further but I'm on my phone right now lol. But I'm all for a completely new candidate arising from a brokered convention. So much more interesting.
speculawyer
Member
Simpsons quote, yo.
Personally, I agree that Carter gets way too much flak. The oil shock had much more to do with the economic woes under his presidency than any of his policies did.
And Iranian hostage rescue mission failing badly. I think luck (well, random events) affects things a lot. Reagan lucked out with an oil price crash. Clinton lucked out with the internet revolution. Bush got hit with 9/11 which oddly was good luck in a twisted way but he pissed it away with the Iraq war.
eBay Huckster
Member
Invisible_Insane
Member
I find Glenn Greenwald's argument on the pardoning of Nixon and the precedent it set a pretty compelling one: http://politics.salon.com/2011/10/25/book_excerpt_with_liberty_and_justice_for_some/singleton/
I feel life I've argued this point enough times here, but I'll state once more that while it's true that Nixon is not the prototypical conservative boogeyman some people made him after Watergate, I think there's an over compensation about that among some liberal writers.
That cunt was a disgrace for the office and he near damn tore this country apart, more so than at any time since the civil war.
Fuck him.
Hall of shame first ballot.
That cunt was a disgrace for the office and he near damn tore this country apart, more so than at any time since the civil war.
Fuck him.
Hall of shame first ballot.
Not surprising when you consider his lesbian daughter.
Last I heard, he was opposed anyway.
Flying_Phoenix
Banned
I think its obvious that FDR is probably the best president over the past 100 years. His socialist polices saved this country and he took on the bakers. They even planned to overthrow him. Though he did sign the internment camps.
Kennedy should also be up there as well. He got much of the Civil Rights movement underway (from what I understand) and managed to stop World War III. Could you imagine George Bush Jr., John McCain, or Mitt Romney during the Cuban Missile Crisis?
Then again how much did Khrushchev have to do with the resolution? I mean the duder wasn't a dick enough to continue the cult of personality of Stalin onto him.
Lincoln strongly believed in the UNITED States of America. If it wasn't for him possibly America would be 2 or more separate countries.
He just wanted to help out his son.
Kennedy should also be up there as well. He got much of the Civil Rights movement underway (from what I understand) and managed to stop World War III. Could you imagine George Bush Jr., John McCain, or Mitt Romney during the Cuban Missile Crisis?
Then again how much did Khrushchev have to do with the resolution? I mean the duder wasn't a dick enough to continue the cult of personality of Stalin onto him.
Lincoln strongly believed in the UNITED States of America. If it wasn't for him possibly America would be 2 or more separate countries.
He just wanted to help out his son.
empty vessel
Member
Agreed. The lesson to be learned from Nixon is not that he was a good or even respectable person for signing legislation enacting the EPA, but that even shitty, despicable people are susceptible to the influence of organized political action.
It's what we do that matters. Who gets elected is practically irrelevant in comparison.
If Nixon should be praised for anything, it's his foreign policy.
Kennedy created NASA too!
In retrospect, this might not have been such a good idea. For that he should be demoted to the top 5 WORST presidents ever bracket.
In retrospect, this might not have been such a good idea. For that he should be demoted to the top 5 WORST presidents ever bracket.
Kennedy actually has a pretty bad record when it comes to civil rights. He spoken out in favor of integration during his campaign, but he wanted to stay clear of it once he was in office. It wasn't until the months leading up to his assassination that he did anything on that front.
Flying_Phoenix
Banned
What I find weird about this site is that the premiere rightest is homosexual and the premiere leftist is an entrepreneur. Does anybody else find that intriguing?
I don't know. Could you imagine if this country didn't have states like Texas, Alabama, Mississippi, Florida, Georgia, and....God damn it Lincoln!
What made Nixon so bad? I'm too young to be alive then.
You voted for him?
I don't know. Could you imagine if this country didn't have states like Texas, Alabama, Mississippi, Florida, Georgia, and....God damn it Lincoln!
What made Nixon so bad? I'm too young to be alive then.
You voted for him?
So here's something that's turned out to be a pleasant surprise. One of the ways congress was going to pay for the payroll tax/unemployment benefits extension was to auction off the broadcast spectrum. While I'm not against all privatization efforts by the government, it seems that most of the time it's for the worse. But it seems in this case, it's an actual positive thing:
http://blog.broadcastengineering.co...ss-paves-way-for-broadcast-spectrum-auctions/
A compromise that actually BENEFITS the dems in some way? The world's gone mad, I say.
http://blog.broadcastengineering.co...ss-paves-way-for-broadcast-spectrum-auctions/
A compromise that actually BENEFITS the dems in some way? The world's gone mad, I say.
If you're curios about Nixon and got 3 hours to kill, go watch the nice American Experience about him.
By the way, it's quite a favorable documentary, but it's as good of a primer on the man as I know.
Make your own mind.
My voting rights were revoked after the Zachary Taylor incident.
Mortrialus
Banned
50 minutes in and this documentary is fantastic.
Him and Clinton have been putting pressure on state legislatures
It truly is amazing how gay marriage is quickly sweeping through the country, and yet Obama is getting no flack from conservatives for allowing it to happen. Not only are gays getting the rights they want, but Obama has inoculated himself from any conservative criticism because the states are legalizing gay marriage, not the federal government.
If the Obama administration is somehow engineering all of this in the background.....
Wow.
How would the obama admin be engineering this? Taking credit from the actual people making this happen in spite of the things obama has done is pretty sick.
Manmademan
Member
yep. a particularly vicious breed of ultra-capitalists who believe in making dough, above all else.
American Experience is just rock solid.
And I know it's on the communist heart of darkness known as PBS, but seriously, I cannot imagine anyone seeing them as biased or anything.
They don't gloss over shit, but they try hard (some may say too hard) to be fair.
Yes, the show is just fantastic.
Which is like the least surprising thing in history.
And since we're on the subject of TV, I'll once again recommend Fareed Zakaria's GPS on CNN.
Invisible_Insane
Member
Every time I read something written by him, I wonder at how he's writing for CNN and Time, of all outlets.
For example: http://www.washingtonpost.com/opini...sion/2012/02/15/gIQA6UVcGR_print.html?hpid=z8
Fareed Zakaria said:
speculawyer
Member
Obama has nothing to do with it. Public opinion just hit a tipping point. Dems pretty much all support it and you just need one or two Republicans with a gay son/daughter/nephew/etc and boom, gay marriage bill passes.
And there is a certain poetic justice how this wedge issue for the right has turned into a wedge issue on the left.
speculawyer
Member
golfcap.gif
Invisible_Insane
Member
speculawyer
Member
Again, podcast is also available. The most recent show was a snoozefest but the earlier shows were fantastic. Listen to the ones with Bruce Bartlett, David Stockman, and the professors that wrote about wealth inequality.
And I'll point out that there is free podcast available.
http://globalpublicsquare.blogs.cnn.com/
He certainly doesn't get everything right. He views everything through a political lens. He did a short bit on oil and seemed to conclude that oil is just expensive because the various OPEC producers need high oil prices just to meet their budgets. But he is ignoring the fact that Chinese demand is huge & growing and that pretty much all of those OPEC nations are unable to boost production.
A few probably can boost production in the long term but are slowed by local problems. Venezuela could boost production but is blocked by the Chavez government that prevents foreign investment. Iraq can boost production but is slowed by unstable government and some continued violence. Saudia Arabia is probably the only one that could boost production in the short term but does not to keep prices up. The rest are all pumping at full speed.
PhoenixDark
Banned
So when do we attack Iran. Gas will probably be near $4 without an attack, perhaps $10 won't be so bad!
Manmademan
Member
no one is attacking Iran.
Invisible_Insane
Member
I wish I could share your confidence.
PhoenixDark
Banned
I just hope I'm in the sama platoon as Jason Ultimatum when the draft is reinstated.
Apparently Santorum gave a speech in 2008 where he essentially declared Protestants weren't "real Christians."
Wonder if Romney can use that without it blowing up in his face.
Wonder if Romney can use that without it blowing up in his face.
Refrigerator
Member
An attack would be foolish. Iran's nuclear program is already dispersed and I doubt the intelligence community is certain they have all the sites inventoried. I'm confident that Obama wouldn't agree to a pre-emptive strike on their facilities considering the lack of any plausibly beneficial exit strategy, but I wouldn't put it past Nety to order an attack and drag the US unwillingly into this.
Phoenician_Viking
Banned
Actually, Iran is looking a lot like Iraq looked in 2002. The war with Iran seems inevitable. The excuse of nuclear weapons is exactly the same what Bush said about Iraq´s WMD. There might not be an invasion but the repercussion of an air strike would be severe on the Middle East.
Invisible_Insane
Member
No shit it would be foolish. It almost seems more likely to happen for that reason.
Seriously, it smells like the same bullshit run-up of 2002. Gods help us if Romney gets elected.
That's not what he's saying there.
And it's not like there's not enough crazy in this speech, there's no reason to add an inflammatory title.
Though I do agree with him about the dangers of the NBA, Mike D'Antoni has been holding this country back for too long.
Manmademan
Member
Getting public support for an Iran war after just winding down fruitless conflicts in Iraq and Afghanistan is basically impossible, no matter what Israel says.
And Iraq only happened because the right wing was able to tie it to the (totally unrelated) september 11th attacks. Good luck with that this time around. I could see a President Romney pushing for one, but Obama? nooooooooooo
The only way the US attack Iran is if it get roped into that by an Israeli attack (or other regional conflict).
I can't see an american president, even a Republican, going to another war in the gulf.
As for Israel, this is mostly saber rattling in order to squelch the social justice protests that were going on there last year.
The winter kinda killed them, but there was no serious change, expect them to come back in the spring, and note how Israel is already setting the ground to a possible attack around that time.
But that's not to say that it couldn't deteriorate into war, as both Netanyahu and Barak care about retaining their power more than anything else.
I can't see an american president, even a Republican, going to another war in the gulf.
As for Israel, this is mostly saber rattling in order to squelch the social justice protests that were going on there last year.
The winter kinda killed them, but there was no serious change, expect them to come back in the spring, and note how Israel is already setting the ground to a possible attack around that time.
But that's not to say that it couldn't deteriorate into war, as both Netanyahu and Barak care about retaining their power more than anything else.
- Status
Similar threads
- Locked
- Locked
- Locked
- Locked