Google Groups no longer supports new Usenet posts or subscriptions. Historical content remains viewable.
Dismiss
GOP Debate Tonight
8 views
Skip to first unread message
Mossingen
Oct 18, 2011, 10:12:41 PM10/18/11
to
My casual observations...
Perry's "gotcha" moment in accusing Romneyof employing illegals looked
desperate and clumsy. I hire people to mow my yard and clean my house and
many of them speak Spanish. But I don't really care to take the time to vet
them on their immigration status. Seemed like a chickenshit stunt to me and
solidified Perry's persona as a jock in a small town who is accustomed to
getting his way and is out of depth when he goes to a big school with kids
as skilled as himself. Not presidential (WTF was with him addressing Herman
Cain with "I'll bump plans with you, brother!") Bush league.
Romney did OK, no suprises. He should have probably not reacted so
aggressively to Perry; ignoring him for the most part probably would have
been a better plan, but he's going to be the nominee as long as he doesn't
do anything stupid--which he did not. He did get nailed on Ronmey-care,
IMO, but it's not going to matter.
Cain was the clear winner again in my opinion and should get even more
bounce from this. He has a way of connecting to people using clear, simple
statements, and his message---his bottom line message is basically, look,
you don't have to know the details, you just have to know that I am a
problem solver and if I am the President I will solve the problem. Powerful
to voters, I think.
Bachman actually sounded lucid and coherent most of the night, as did Newt.
Can't imagine either one of them have a chance, but Newt in particular has
come across as statesmanlike in all the debates I have seen.
Ron Paul is of course the most ideologically consistent. His message never
changes, even when it doesn't go over well with local audiences (like when
he said he would cut all foreign aid, even to Israel).
Santorum I just can't seem to like. He'll make a good point, but then start
prattling about family values and religion. I guess the bottom line with
him is that he's not enough of a statesman as the others (except Bachman),
doesn't seem more intelligent than the others on the issues (meaning having
a grasp of the issue, not whether I agree with the stance taken), and in
general seems to have less key criteria than other candidates. Nothing
stands out with him.
What happened to Huntsman? Did he drop out and no one noticed?
Perry's "gotcha" moment in accusing Romneyof employing illegals looked
desperate and clumsy. I hire people to mow my yard and clean my house and
many of them speak Spanish. But I don't really care to take the time to vet
them on their immigration status. Seemed like a chickenshit stunt to me and
solidified Perry's persona as a jock in a small town who is accustomed to
getting his way and is out of depth when he goes to a big school with kids
as skilled as himself. Not presidential (WTF was with him addressing Herman
Cain with "I'll bump plans with you, brother!") Bush league.
Romney did OK, no suprises. He should have probably not reacted so
aggressively to Perry; ignoring him for the most part probably would have
been a better plan, but he's going to be the nominee as long as he doesn't
do anything stupid--which he did not. He did get nailed on Ronmey-care,
IMO, but it's not going to matter.
Cain was the clear winner again in my opinion and should get even more
bounce from this. He has a way of connecting to people using clear, simple
statements, and his message---his bottom line message is basically, look,
you don't have to know the details, you just have to know that I am a
problem solver and if I am the President I will solve the problem. Powerful
to voters, I think.
Bachman actually sounded lucid and coherent most of the night, as did Newt.
Can't imagine either one of them have a chance, but Newt in particular has
come across as statesmanlike in all the debates I have seen.
Ron Paul is of course the most ideologically consistent. His message never
changes, even when it doesn't go over well with local audiences (like when
he said he would cut all foreign aid, even to Israel).
Santorum I just can't seem to like. He'll make a good point, but then start
prattling about family values and religion. I guess the bottom line with
him is that he's not enough of a statesman as the others (except Bachman),
doesn't seem more intelligent than the others on the issues (meaning having
a grasp of the issue, not whether I agree with the stance taken), and in
general seems to have less key criteria than other candidates. Nothing
stands out with him.
What happened to Huntsman? Did he drop out and no one noticed?
Bradley K. Sherman
Oct 18, 2011, 10:15:16 PM10/18/11
to
In article <j7lbla$pre$1...@dont-email.me>, Mossingen <jhan...@cox.net> wrote:
>My casual observations...
> ...
I can't believe that Romney put his hands on Perry. What a
condescending twit!
--bks
>My casual observations...
> ...
>Romney did OK, no suprises. He should have probably not reacted so
>aggressively to Perry; ignoring him for the most part probably would have
> ...
>aggressively to Perry; ignoring him for the most part probably would have
I can't believe that Romney put his hands on Perry. What a
condescending twit!
--bks
da pickle
Oct 18, 2011, 10:27:24 PM10/18/11
to
On Oct 18, 7:15 pm, b...@panix.com (Bradley K. Sherman) wrote:
condescending twit.
–dpns
> In article <j7lbla$pr...@dont-email.me>, Mossingen <jhanki...@cox.net> wrote:
> >My casual observations...
> > ...
> >Romney did OK, no suprises. He should have probably not reacted so
> >aggressively to Perry; ignoring him for the most part probably would have
> > ...
>
> I can't believe that Romney put his hands on Perry. What a
> condescending twit!
>
> --bks
Anybody who posts to usenet using their middle initial is a
> >My casual observations...
> > ...
> >Romney did OK, no suprises. He should have probably not reacted so
> >aggressively to Perry; ignoring him for the most part probably would have
> > ...
>
> I can't believe that Romney put his hands on Perry. What a
> condescending twit!
>
> --bks
condescending twit.
–dpns
Bradley K. Sherman
Oct 18, 2011, 10:40:38 PM10/18/11
to
In article <74826f6a-ffc6-421b...@v8g2000pro.googlegroups.com>,
critiquing people's names.
--bks
da pickle <jcpi...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>On Oct 18, 7:15 pm, b...@panix.com (Bradley K. Sherman) wrote:
>> In article <j7lbla$pr...@dont-email.me>, Mossingen <jhanki...@cox.net> wrote:
>> >My casual observations...
>> > ...
>> >Romney did OK, no suprises. He should have probably not reacted so
>> >aggressively to Perry; ignoring him for the most part probably would have
>> > ...
>>
>> I can't believe that Romney put his hands on Perry. What a
>> condescending twit!
>>
>On Oct 18, 7:15 pm, b...@panix.com (Bradley K. Sherman) wrote:
>> In article <j7lbla$pr...@dont-email.me>, Mossingen <jhanki...@cox.net> wrote:
>> >My casual observations...
>> > ...
>> >Romney did OK, no suprises. He should have probably not reacted so
>> >aggressively to Perry; ignoring him for the most part probably would have
>> > ...
>>
>> I can't believe that Romney put his hands on Perry. What a
>> condescending twit!
>>
>Anybody who posts to usenet using their middle initial is a
>condescending twit.
>
Yow! I can't believe that someone who posts as "da pickle" is
>condescending twit.
>
critiquing people's names.
--bks
Clave
Oct 18, 2011, 10:47:00 PM10/18/11
to
"Mossingen" <jhan...@cox.net> wrote in message
news:j7lbla$pre$1...@dont-email.me...
speaking. Couldn't quite distance himself from having endorsed TARP.
> Romney did OK, no suprises. He should have probably not reacted so
> aggressively to Perry; ignoring him for the most part probably would have
> been a better plan, but he's going to be the nominee as long as he doesn't
> do anything stupid--which he did not. He did get nailed on Ronmey-care,
> IMO, but it's not going to matter.
Romney made his second gaffe in as many days. It's one thing to not have
time to check for undocumenteds, but to actually *tell* his lawn care
company not to hire illegals BECAUSE HE'S RUNNING FOR OFFICE is something
that will come back to him. Amazingly, no one called him on his stated
desire for more foreclosures (NV having the highest foreclosure rate in the
country) -- look for this to come back to him as well.
> Cain was the clear winner again in my opinion and should get even more
> bounce from this. He has a way of connecting to people using clear,
> simple statements, and his message---his bottom line message is basically,
> look, you don't have to know the details, you just have to know that I am
> a problem solver and if I am the President I will solve the problem.
> Powerful to voters, I think.
Cain was an embarrassment among embarrassments. Says earlier just today
that he'd negotiate with al Qaeda. Says tonight that he won't negotiate
with terrorists. Cooper reminds him that he really *did* say he'd negotiate
with terrorists. Cain also reminds the OWS protesters that it's their own
fault they aren't rich -- further demonstrating his ignorance of how the
rest of the world lives, as if his puerile 999 plan wasn't evidence enough.
His "joke" about a lethal electric fence on the southern border may have hit
a chord with the teabaggers in the room, but he'll feel that in the morning.
> Bachman actually sounded lucid and coherent most of the night, as did
> Newt. Can't imagine either one of them have a chance, but Newt in
> particular has come across as statesmanlike in all the debates I have
> seen.
She did promise all the American moms that she'd save them from foreclosure.
I really wonder about her exposure to paint chips as a child.
Gingrich, Paul, Santorum, Huntsman -- not worth comment, even to snark.
Like the man said, the winner tonight was Obama by TKO.
Jim
news:j7lbla$pre$1...@dont-email.me...
> My casual observations...
>
> Perry's "gotcha" moment in accusing Romneyof employing illegals looked
> desperate and clumsy. I hire people to mow my yard and clean my house and
> many of them speak Spanish. But I don't really care to take the time to
> vet them on their immigration status. Seemed like a chickenshit stunt to
> me and solidified Perry's persona as a jock in a small town who is
> accustomed to getting his way and is out of depth when he goes to a big
> school with kids as skilled as himself. Not presidential (WTF was with
> him addressing Herman Cain with "I'll bump plans with you, brother!")
> Bush league.
Perry didn't drool or shit himself onstage -- net win for him, relatively
>
> Perry's "gotcha" moment in accusing Romneyof employing illegals looked
> desperate and clumsy. I hire people to mow my yard and clean my house and
> many of them speak Spanish. But I don't really care to take the time to
> vet them on their immigration status. Seemed like a chickenshit stunt to
> me and solidified Perry's persona as a jock in a small town who is
> accustomed to getting his way and is out of depth when he goes to a big
> school with kids as skilled as himself. Not presidential (WTF was with
> him addressing Herman Cain with "I'll bump plans with you, brother!")
> Bush league.
speaking. Couldn't quite distance himself from having endorsed TARP.
> Romney did OK, no suprises. He should have probably not reacted so
> aggressively to Perry; ignoring him for the most part probably would have
> been a better plan, but he's going to be the nominee as long as he doesn't
> do anything stupid--which he did not. He did get nailed on Ronmey-care,
> IMO, but it's not going to matter.
time to check for undocumenteds, but to actually *tell* his lawn care
company not to hire illegals BECAUSE HE'S RUNNING FOR OFFICE is something
that will come back to him. Amazingly, no one called him on his stated
desire for more foreclosures (NV having the highest foreclosure rate in the
country) -- look for this to come back to him as well.
> Cain was the clear winner again in my opinion and should get even more
> bounce from this. He has a way of connecting to people using clear,
> simple statements, and his message---his bottom line message is basically,
> look, you don't have to know the details, you just have to know that I am
> a problem solver and if I am the President I will solve the problem.
> Powerful to voters, I think.
that he'd negotiate with al Qaeda. Says tonight that he won't negotiate
with terrorists. Cooper reminds him that he really *did* say he'd negotiate
with terrorists. Cain also reminds the OWS protesters that it's their own
fault they aren't rich -- further demonstrating his ignorance of how the
rest of the world lives, as if his puerile 999 plan wasn't evidence enough.
His "joke" about a lethal electric fence on the southern border may have hit
a chord with the teabaggers in the room, but he'll feel that in the morning.
> Bachman actually sounded lucid and coherent most of the night, as did
> Newt. Can't imagine either one of them have a chance, but Newt in
> particular has come across as statesmanlike in all the debates I have
> seen.
I really wonder about her exposure to paint chips as a child.
Gingrich, Paul, Santorum, Huntsman -- not worth comment, even to snark.
Like the man said, the winner tonight was Obama by TKO.
Jim
Clave
Oct 18, 2011, 10:50:21 PM10/18/11
to
Just curious -- did anyone see what order they climbed back into the little
car in? Was Mittens first or last?
Jim
popinjay999
Oct 18, 2011, 10:51:20 PM10/18/11
to
On Oct 18, 7:40 pm, b...@panix.com (Bradley K. Sherman) wrote:
>
> Yow! I can't believe that someone who posts as "da pickle" is
> critiquing people's names.
>
Yow! I can't believe that when checking your posting profile, instead
>
> Yow! I can't believe that someone who posts as "da pickle" is
> critiquing people's names.
>
of saying how many groups you post to, it just says "all groups".
Holy shit, another Clave. SOMEONE needs to step outside and get some
fresh air once in awhile.
Bradley K. Sherman
Oct 18, 2011, 11:00:45 PM10/18/11
to
In article <42e60258-fc52-492f...@d33g2000prb.googlegroups.com>,
"Posting profile"? Here's a nickel kid; get a real newsreader.
--bks
--bks
mo_ntresor
Oct 18, 2011, 11:01:41 PM10/18/11
to
it was a fun debate. the republican party is a great mix of ideology and
personalities. paul's the best candidate, but there's no upending romney
- too smart and too poised. he's not an ideal conservative, but obama's
style not substance so it won't matter much. if romney takes cain for vp,
they beat obama by a whisker in a very very close race.
mo_ntresor
-----
Bradley K. Sherman
Oct 18, 2011, 11:10:06 PM10/18/11
to
In article <l5r1n8x...@app-01.ezprovider.com>,
mo_ntresor <amontillad...@gmail.com> wrote:
> ...
In the first Romney v. Obama debate, on what issue do the
two of them differ most?
--bks
mo_ntresor <amontillad...@gmail.com> wrote:
> ...
>- too smart and too poised. he's not an ideal conservative, but obama's
>style not substance so it won't matter much. if romney takes cain for vp,
>they beat obama by a whisker in a very very close race.
> ...
>style not substance so it won't matter much. if romney takes cain for vp,
>they beat obama by a whisker in a very very close race.
In the first Romney v. Obama debate, on what issue do the
two of them differ most?
--bks
popinjay999
Oct 18, 2011, 11:50:18 PM10/18/11
to
On Oct 18, 8:00 pm, b...@panix.com (Bradley K. Sherman) wrote:
>
> "Posting profile"? Here's a nickel kid; get a real newsreader.
>
> --bks
What's this? A usenet snob?
>
> "Posting profile"? Here's a nickel kid; get a real newsreader.
>
> --bks
Bradley, do you realize I am the coordinator? Well? Seriously, did
you know that? If you had used a web-based newsreader it would
usually be clearly marked in the upper right hand corner. Also, if
you use a linux-based reader like PAN, it also shows that I am the
coordinator, on the 'properties' tab, right under the confirmation
number.
Bradley K. Sherman
Oct 19, 2011, 12:18:39 AM10/19/11
to
In article <868c6387-15d3-4805...@x16g2000prd.googlegroups.com>,
> ...
Allow this unworthy mortal to genuflect in your presence,
O Grand Poobah And Coordinator!
--bks
> ...
Allow this unworthy mortal to genuflect in your presence,
O Grand Poobah And Coordinator!
--bks
popinjay999
Oct 19, 2011, 12:31:57 AM10/19/11
to
On Oct 18, 9:18 pm, b...@panix.com (Bradley K. Sherman) wrote:
>
> Allow this unworthy mortal to genuflect in your presence,
> O Grand Poobah And Coordinator!
>
I sense a degree of sarcasm, your referring to me as"poobah" is what
>
> Allow this unworthy mortal to genuflect in your presence,
> O Grand Poobah And Coordinator!
>
gives that away. I'm pretty perceptive like that. But I'm just
saying that I am the coordinator. If you don't believe me then you
can ask almost anyone else who posts on rec.gambling.poker. They'll
tell you. And you obviously don't have to go overboard, but a simple
showing of basic respect to me, and the title, is warranted. That is,
IF you want to continue reading my posts. I can stop you any time.
Beldin the Sorcerer
Oct 19, 2011, 12:33:43 AM10/19/11
to
"popinjay999" <paulpo...@sbcglobal.net> wrote in message
news:868c6387-15d3-4805...@x16g2000prd.googlegroups.com...
Peepee, do you realize you're a pathalogical nutbag?
Von Fourche
Oct 19, 2011, 12:44:07 AM10/19/11
to
"Bradley K. Sherman" <b...@panix.com> wrote in message
news:j7lf2e$ida$1...@reader1.panix.com...
religion to scare young girls into bed with him.
Plus the named their college after another sexual pervert who probably
killed members of his own religion when they threatened
to leave the church.
Bradley K. Sherman
Oct 19, 2011, 12:51:45 AM10/19/11
to
In article <5276a445-ce6e-433d...@27g2000prq.googlegroups.com>,
popinjay999 <paulpo...@sbcglobal.net> wrote:
> ...
"Almost"? Hmmmm ... time to get back to the topic
at hand:
It must have been really disheartening for Herman Cain to
be told by Michele Bachmann that his foreign policy ideas
are "naive" just minutes after she said of Obama: "He put
us in Libya and now he's putting us in Africa."
--bks
popinjay999 <paulpo...@sbcglobal.net> wrote:
> ...
>saying that I am the coordinator. If you don't believe me then you
>can ask almost anyone else who posts on rec.gambling.poker. They'll
>tell you. ...
>can ask almost anyone else who posts on rec.gambling.poker. They'll
"Almost"? Hmmmm ... time to get back to the topic
at hand:
It must have been really disheartening for Herman Cain to
be told by Michele Bachmann that his foreign policy ideas
are "naive" just minutes after she said of Obama: "He put
us in Libya and now he's putting us in Africa."
--bks
Frostbite
Oct 19, 2011, 12:58:20 AM10/19/11
to
On 18/10/2011 7:12 PM, Mossingen wrote:
> Cain was the clear winner again in my opinion and should get even more
> bounce from this. He has a way of connecting to people using clear, simple
> statements, and his message---his bottom line message is basically, look,
> you don't have to know the details, you just have to know that I am a
> problem solver and if I am the President I will solve the problem. Powerful
> to voters, I think.
Cain persuaded me by touting his parking lot cleaning experience.
> Cain was the clear winner again in my opinion and should get even more
> bounce from this. He has a way of connecting to people using clear, simple
> statements, and his message---his bottom line message is basically, look,
> you don't have to know the details, you just have to know that I am a
> problem solver and if I am the President I will solve the problem. Powerful
> to voters, I think.
popinjay999
Oct 19, 2011, 1:08:31 AM10/19/11
to
On Oct 18, 9:51 pm, b...@panix.com (Bradley K. Sherman) wrote:
..
>
> "Almost"? Hmmmm ... time to get back to the topic
> at hand:
>
That's right. I said 'almost' because there are a couple people on
..
>
> "Almost"? Hmmmm ... time to get back to the topic
> at hand:
>
this newsgroup who will deny that I am coordinator just to spite me.
But let's say at least 98% of the people will verify that I am the
coordinator.
Bradley K. Sherman
Oct 19, 2011, 1:35:41 AM10/19/11
to
In article <fdf340fd-53b2-4c20...@31g2000prt.googlegroups.com>,
|
| CAIN: This is an example of mixing apples and oranges.
| The state tax is an apple. We are replacing the current
| tax code with oranges. So it's not correct to mix apples
| and oranges.
|
| Secondly, it is not a value-added tax. If you take most of
| the products -- take a loaf of bread. It does have five
| taxes in it right now. What the 9 percent does is that we
| take out those five invisible taxes and replace it with one
| visible 9 percent.
|
| So you're absolutely wrong. It's not a value-added tax.
| ...
<http://nation.foxnews.com/herman-cain/2011/10/18/apples-and-oranges-mitt-rings-cains-bell>
--bks
popinjay999 <paulpo...@sbcglobal.net> wrote:
>>
>But let's say at least 98% of the people will verify that I am the
>coordinator.
So is this your fault, then?
>>
>But let's say at least 98% of the people will verify that I am the
>coordinator.
|
| CAIN: This is an example of mixing apples and oranges.
| The state tax is an apple. We are replacing the current
| tax code with oranges. So it's not correct to mix apples
| and oranges.
|
| Secondly, it is not a value-added tax. If you take most of
| the products -- take a loaf of bread. It does have five
| taxes in it right now. What the 9 percent does is that we
| take out those five invisible taxes and replace it with one
| visible 9 percent.
|
| So you're absolutely wrong. It's not a value-added tax.
| ...
<http://nation.foxnews.com/herman-cain/2011/10/18/apples-and-oranges-mitt-rings-cains-bell>
--bks
Beldin the Sorcerer
Oct 19, 2011, 1:40:51 AM10/19/11
to
news:fdf340fd-53b2-4c20...@31g2000prt.googlegroups.com...
***
Bulllshit
99% will admit you're a delusional troll
Bulllshit
99% will admit you're a delusional troll
popinjay999
Oct 19, 2011, 1:47:48 AM10/19/11
to
I don't mean 98% of the people in the world, Bradley, what I mean is
98% of the people on rec.gambling.poker. duh fucking duh! I'm quite
sure Cain doesn't even know me. He probably doesn't even know what a
newsgroup coordinator is. C'mon, Bradley, use your head.
98% of the people on rec.gambling.poker. duh fucking duh! I'm quite
sure Cain doesn't even know me. He probably doesn't even know what a
newsgroup coordinator is. C'mon, Bradley, use your head.
bratt
Oct 19, 2011, 7:08:34 AM10/19/11
to
On Oct 18 2011 10:12 PM, Mossingen wrote:
> My casual observations...
>
> Perry's "gotcha" moment in accusing Romneyof employing illegals looked
> desperate and clumsy. I hire people to mow my yard and clean my house and
> many of them speak Spanish. But I don't really care to take the time to vet
> them on their immigration status. Seemed like a chickenshit stunt to me and
> solidified Perry's persona as a jock in a small town who is accustomed to
> getting his way and is out of depth when he goes to a big school with kids
> as skilled as himself. Not presidential (WTF was with him addressing Herman
> Cain with "I'll bump plans with you, brother!") Bush league.
>
> Romney did OK, no suprises. He should have probably not reacted so
> aggressively to Perry; ignoring him for the most part probably would have
> been a better plan, but he's going to be the nominee as long as he doesn't
> do anything stupid--which he did not. He did get nailed on Ronmey-care,
> IMO, but it's not going to matter.
>
> Cain was the clear winner again in my opinion and should get even more
> bounce from this. He has a way of connecting to people using clear, simple
> statements, and his message---his bottom line message is basically, look,
> you don't have to know the details, you just have to know that I am a
> problem solver and if I am the President I will solve the problem. Powerful
> to voters, I think.
Except for Cain, I agree. Did you hear him say he would trade all the
> My casual observations...
>
> Perry's "gotcha" moment in accusing Romneyof employing illegals looked
> desperate and clumsy. I hire people to mow my yard and clean my house and
> many of them speak Spanish. But I don't really care to take the time to vet
> them on their immigration status. Seemed like a chickenshit stunt to me and
> solidified Perry's persona as a jock in a small town who is accustomed to
> getting his way and is out of depth when he goes to a big school with kids
> as skilled as himself. Not presidential (WTF was with him addressing Herman
> Cain with "I'll bump plans with you, brother!") Bush league.
>
> Romney did OK, no suprises. He should have probably not reacted so
> aggressively to Perry; ignoring him for the most part probably would have
> been a better plan, but he's going to be the nominee as long as he doesn't
> do anything stupid--which he did not. He did get nailed on Ronmey-care,
> IMO, but it's not going to matter.
>
> Cain was the clear winner again in my opinion and should get even more
> bounce from this. He has a way of connecting to people using clear, simple
> statements, and his message---his bottom line message is basically, look,
> you don't have to know the details, you just have to know that I am a
> problem solver and if I am the President I will solve the problem. Powerful
> to voters, I think.
prisoners in Gitmo for one American (ie those stupid hikers who
*accidentally* cross borders and get apprehended) He said this
pre-debate, and it soured the whole thing for me.
> Bachman actually sounded lucid and coherent most of the night, as did Newt.
> Can't imagine either one of them have a chance, but Newt in particular has
> come across as statesmanlike in all the debates I have seen.
>
> Ron Paul is of course the most ideologically consistent. His message never
> changes, even when it doesn't go over well with local audiences (like when
> he said he would cut all foreign aid, even to Israel).
>
> Santorum I just can't seem to like. He'll make a good point, but then start
> prattling about family values and religion. I guess the bottom line with
> him is that he's not enough of a statesman as the others (except Bachman),
> doesn't seem more intelligent than the others on the issues (meaning having
> a grasp of the issue, not whether I agree with the stance taken), and in
> general seems to have less key criteria than other candidates. Nothing
> stands out with him.
>
> What happened to Huntsman? Did he drop out and no one noticed?
Obama, February 2009: If this economy hasn’t rebounded in three years, I’m
a one-termer
______________________________________________________________________
Mossingen
Oct 19, 2011, 11:35:48 AM10/19/11
to
"Frostbite" <bo...@shaw1.ca> wrote in message
news:UNsnq.10833$UI7....@newsfe11.iad...
I suspect sarcasm here, but I like the idea of a powerful man knowing what
it's like to clean parking lots. I've done it before. Gives you a
different perspective on things.
news:UNsnq.10833$UI7....@newsfe11.iad...
it's like to clean parking lots. I've done it before. Gives you a
different perspective on things.
Mossingen
Oct 19, 2011, 11:46:23 AM10/19/11
to
"bratt" <a89...@webnntp.invalid> wrote in message
news:imn2n8x...@app-01.ezprovider.com...
That's not what he said. He said he would look at all the facts and then
make a decision, which I took to mean that he would see if the trade was
worth it. Surely you can imagine an American getting captured who has
special knowledge, skill, or status that we would want him or her back, even
if we had to trade.
What I heard him say was that his basic, general policy is no negotiation
with terrorists, but since there are always exceptions to every rule then
each case must be looked at on the facts. Doesn't sound unreasonable to me.
All of that is beside the point anyway. Cain's powerful appeal is his "I am
a problem solver" mantra. I like to think that I have a grasp of the issues
for the most part, but I'm not an economist and don't fully understand the
999 plan, nor am I a military expert who understands the strategis location
of military bases, nor am I an experienced diplomat who can navigate through
foreign policy.
I don't really expect the President to be an expert in all of these areas.
I expect him to find the people who are and then use his power to solve
problems, and I really like it when Cain says that is what he would do.
news:imn2n8x...@app-01.ezprovider.com...
make a decision, which I took to mean that he would see if the trade was
worth it. Surely you can imagine an American getting captured who has
special knowledge, skill, or status that we would want him or her back, even
if we had to trade.
What I heard him say was that his basic, general policy is no negotiation
with terrorists, but since there are always exceptions to every rule then
each case must be looked at on the facts. Doesn't sound unreasonable to me.
All of that is beside the point anyway. Cain's powerful appeal is his "I am
a problem solver" mantra. I like to think that I have a grasp of the issues
for the most part, but I'm not an economist and don't fully understand the
999 plan, nor am I a military expert who understands the strategis location
of military bases, nor am I an experienced diplomat who can navigate through
foreign policy.
I don't really expect the President to be an expert in all of these areas.
I expect him to find the people who are and then use his power to solve
problems, and I really like it when Cain says that is what he would do.
Iceman
Oct 19, 2011, 11:48:19 AM10/19/11
to
Wall Street, or health care. The two areas where they do differ would be
social issues and court appointments, but I don't think Romney would
emphasize that to the general election audience.
phlash74
Oct 19, 2011, 11:54:55 AM10/19/11
to
On Oct 18, 9:51 pm, b...@panix.com (Bradley K. Sherman) wrote:
> In article <5276a445-ce6e-433d-8766-21eb45e1c...@27g2000prq.googlegroups.com>,
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lj3iNxZ8Dww
Michael
> In article <5276a445-ce6e-433d-8766-21eb45e1c...@27g2000prq.googlegroups.com>,
>
> popinjay999 <paulpopin...@sbcglobal.net> wrote:
> > ...
> >saying that I am the coordinator. If you don't believe me then you
> >can ask almost anyone else who posts on rec.gambling.poker. They'll
> >tell you. ...
>
> "Almost"? Hmmmm ... time to get back to the topic
> at hand:
>
> It must have been really disheartening for Herman Cain to
> be told by Michele Bachmann that his foreign policy ideas
> are "naive" just minutes after she said of Obama: "He put
> us in Libya and now he's putting us in Africa."
>
> --bks
Didn't see the debate. Is this the clip you're referring to?
> popinjay999 <paulpopin...@sbcglobal.net> wrote:
> > ...
> >saying that I am the coordinator. If you don't believe me then you
> >can ask almost anyone else who posts on rec.gambling.poker. They'll
> >tell you. ...
>
> "Almost"? Hmmmm ... time to get back to the topic
> at hand:
>
> It must have been really disheartening for Herman Cain to
> be told by Michele Bachmann that his foreign policy ideas
> are "naive" just minutes after she said of Obama: "He put
> us in Libya and now he's putting us in Africa."
>
> --bks
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lj3iNxZ8Dww
Michael
bratt
Oct 19, 2011, 11:53:08 AM10/19/11
to
social stratus - a parkling lot cleaner would probably fall in the same
category as people who cleans others homes, make pizzas, and live in
trailers. I fear you are now on the caca list.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Obama, February 2009: If this economy hasn’t rebounded in three years, I’m
a one-termer
mo_ntresor
Oct 19, 2011, 12:00:45 PM10/19/11
to
On Oct 19 2011 9:46 AM, Mossingen wrote:
> > Except for Cain, I agree. Did you hear him say he would trade all the
> > prisoners in Gitmo for one American (ie those stupid hikers who
> > *accidentally* cross borders and get apprehended) He said this
> > pre-debate, and it soured the whole thing for me.
>
> That's not what he said. He said he would look at all the facts and then
> make a decision, which I took to mean that he would see if the trade was
> worth it. Surely you can imagine an American getting captured who has
> special knowledge, skill, or status that we would want him or her back, even
> if we had to trade.
>
> What I heard him say was that his basic, general policy is no negotiation
> with terrorists, but since there are always exceptions to every rule then
> each case must be looked at on the facts. Doesn't sound unreasonable to me.
>
> All of that is beside the point anyway. Cain's powerful appeal is his "I am
> a problem solver" mantra. I like to think that I have a grasp of the issues
> for the most part, but I'm not an economist and don't fully understand the
> 999 plan, nor am I a military expert who understands the strategis location
> of military bases, nor am I an experienced diplomat who can navigate through
> foreign policy.
>
> I don't really expect the President to be an expert in all of these areas.
> I expect him to find the people who are and then use his power to solve
> problems, and I really like it when Cain says that is what he would do.
he was asked by anderson again about the hostage trade. he said he
> > Except for Cain, I agree. Did you hear him say he would trade all the
> > prisoners in Gitmo for one American (ie those stupid hikers who
> > *accidentally* cross borders and get apprehended) He said this
> > pre-debate, and it soured the whole thing for me.
>
> That's not what he said. He said he would look at all the facts and then
> make a decision, which I took to mean that he would see if the trade was
> worth it. Surely you can imagine an American getting captured who has
> special knowledge, skill, or status that we would want him or her back, even
> if we had to trade.
>
> What I heard him say was that his basic, general policy is no negotiation
> with terrorists, but since there are always exceptions to every rule then
> each case must be looked at on the facts. Doesn't sound unreasonable to me.
>
> All of that is beside the point anyway. Cain's powerful appeal is his "I am
> a problem solver" mantra. I like to think that I have a grasp of the issues
> for the most part, but I'm not an economist and don't fully understand the
> 999 plan, nor am I a military expert who understands the strategis location
> of military bases, nor am I an experienced diplomat who can navigate through
> foreign policy.
>
> I don't really expect the President to be an expert in all of these areas.
> I expect him to find the people who are and then use his power to solve
> problems, and I really like it when Cain says that is what he would do.
misunderstood, misspoke, then stated what he meant. of course it isn't
good enough for fleabaggers and poverty pimps who can't stand the idea of
a successful black republican, but i never will be, will it?
mo_ntresor
--------
Frostbite
Oct 19, 2011, 2:06:59 PM10/19/11
to
On 19/10/2011 8:53 AM, bratt wrote:
> I fear you are now on the caca list.
Huh??
> I fear you are now on the caca list.
When has Mossingen ever been disrespectful toward me, or called me vile
names? Never.
When have I ever been disrespectful to him or called him vile names? Never.
Are you starting to see a pattern here?
DDawgster
Oct 19, 2011, 6:16:06 PM10/19/11
to
to here was his first attempt at "re-writing" it
> Apparently I see no reason for Perry to have lied well over a year ago..
Another gem from Alim Nassor
-------
Tom White
Oct 19, 2011, 6:41:07 PM10/19/11
to
On 2011-10-19, mo_ntresor <amontillad...@gmail.com> wrote:
> he was asked by anderson again about the hostage trade. he said he
> misunderstood, misspoke, then stated what he meant. of course it isn't
> good enough for fleabaggers and poverty pimps who can't stand the idea of
> a successful black republican, but i never will be, will it?
John King introduced his question to Cain by citing Netanyahu's
> he was asked by anderson again about the hostage trade. he said he
> misunderstood, misspoke, then stated what he meant. of course it isn't
> good enough for fleabaggers and poverty pimps who can't stand the idea of
> a successful black republican, but i never will be, will it?
exchange of a thousand Palestinian detainees for one Israeli
soldier. I got the impression Cain felt invited to criticize
Netanyahu's decision, then, trying to decline that invitation,
found himself almost endorsing acceding to al Qaeda demands.
I'm sure he didn't mean to get there.
Mossingen
Oct 19, 2011, 9:03:07 PM10/19/11
to
"DDawgster" <a1e...@webnntp.invalid> wrote in message
news:6qu3n8x...@app-01.ezprovider.com...
> his original answer left absolutely no wriggle-room .. what you referred
> to here was his first attempt at "re-writing" it
Not at all. It's not a question that can be answered definitively without a
very specific factual analysis. Saying that the rule is never negotiate
with terrorists without any exceptions is foolhardy. There are *always*
exceptions to these types of things and gray areas. Cain's position is
clear. The general policy statement is no negotiation. He's open to
looking at specific facts to see if the trade would be worth it in an
exceptional situation. Nothing particularly troubling about that is there?
news:6qu3n8x...@app-01.ezprovider.com...
> his original answer left absolutely no wriggle-room .. what you referred
> to here was his first attempt at "re-writing" it
very specific factual analysis. Saying that the rule is never negotiate
with terrorists without any exceptions is foolhardy. There are *always*
exceptions to these types of things and gray areas. Cain's position is
clear. The general policy statement is no negotiation. He's open to
looking at specific facts to see if the trade would be worth it in an
exceptional situation. Nothing particularly troubling about that is there?
Travel A
Oct 20, 2011, 1:27:11 AM10/20/11
to
Huntsman, Newt and Rick Santorum are boycotting the Nevada Caucus in
protest over Nevada having moved it's caucus up to January 14th: which
forces New Hampshire to hold their primary in early to mid December,
instead of a desired February 16th or 18th date.
Huntsman took the protest a little further, by boycotting the debate in
Vegas. That's why Huntsman wasn't there.
There's no real sacrifice in these candidates giving-up the Nevada
Caucus, btw.
Romney is the only candidate with an actual campaign organization in
Nevada, and it's a serious one: Romney won the Nevada Republican primary
caucus in 2008, (it was his firewall) and he's kept this
Mormon-rich-voter state in play, since.
Rick is polling at half of Cain's numbers, and his obvious strategy was
to attack the front-runners and create some buzz for himself.
What Rick did with regard to the illegal immigration issue and attacking
Romney on personal, domestic workers (i.e., at his home, not his
company) was actually in line with some very effective precedent: how
many political appointments have been shot-down due to a
domestic-worker, illegal immigrant problem of the appointee (i.e., a
couple of Clinton's appointments). This issue hurt Meg Whitman in her
recent run for governor of California, more recently. There are quite a
few examples.
Rick was successful in rattling Romney's cage, and it really showed:
previously, no one has really been able to lay a glove on Romney. So,
that's a win for Rick under the circumstances. If Rick were in close
contention, or on the rise and not on the decline, it probaby would be a
net loss, because confrontations of that sort aren't "presidential:" at
the least, Romney had more to lose than Rick.
This (the confrontation strategy) has to be looked upon with a couple of
things in mind: Romney isn't liked by 75% of the Republican electorate,
and Rick causing mittens composure to crack, is likely to be appreciated
by that same majority block of voters to which Rick is playing.
Ya know, those voters are thinking: "okay, Romney may not have actually,
knowingly, employed illegal aliens, but he's flip-flopped and deceived
on so many other issues, go get 'im Rick!"
Which leads the other thing to keep in mind: Rick actually "came alive"
in a debate for a change.
Rick also attacked Romney on conservative credentials, by declaring
himself a real conservative and not a "conservative of convenience"
(directed meaning, at Romney).
Rick also directly attacked the other front-runner, Herman, on his "999
Plan." He went on the attack in general, plain and simple.
It'll be interesting to see if Rick gets a bump after this in
post-debate polling.
Bachmann, (who I no longer particulary dislike, now that her underming
of Sarah's candidacy is a moot point) with her usual out-of-turn "debate
crashing" applause line stunts, is really starting to look pathetic
(Anderson Cooper, in his annoynce, cut her off at the end of the debate;
earlier he, correctly, had to refuse her intense pleading for a 30
second rebuttal, because her name wasn't even mentioned by the other
candidate).
protest over Nevada having moved it's caucus up to January 14th: which
forces New Hampshire to hold their primary in early to mid December,
instead of a desired February 16th or 18th date.
Huntsman took the protest a little further, by boycotting the debate in
Vegas. That's why Huntsman wasn't there.
There's no real sacrifice in these candidates giving-up the Nevada
Caucus, btw.
Romney is the only candidate with an actual campaign organization in
Nevada, and it's a serious one: Romney won the Nevada Republican primary
caucus in 2008, (it was his firewall) and he's kept this
Mormon-rich-voter state in play, since.
Rick is polling at half of Cain's numbers, and his obvious strategy was
to attack the front-runners and create some buzz for himself.
What Rick did with regard to the illegal immigration issue and attacking
Romney on personal, domestic workers (i.e., at his home, not his
company) was actually in line with some very effective precedent: how
many political appointments have been shot-down due to a
domestic-worker, illegal immigrant problem of the appointee (i.e., a
couple of Clinton's appointments). This issue hurt Meg Whitman in her
recent run for governor of California, more recently. There are quite a
few examples.
Rick was successful in rattling Romney's cage, and it really showed:
previously, no one has really been able to lay a glove on Romney. So,
that's a win for Rick under the circumstances. If Rick were in close
contention, or on the rise and not on the decline, it probaby would be a
net loss, because confrontations of that sort aren't "presidential:" at
the least, Romney had more to lose than Rick.
This (the confrontation strategy) has to be looked upon with a couple of
things in mind: Romney isn't liked by 75% of the Republican electorate,
and Rick causing mittens composure to crack, is likely to be appreciated
by that same majority block of voters to which Rick is playing.
Ya know, those voters are thinking: "okay, Romney may not have actually,
knowingly, employed illegal aliens, but he's flip-flopped and deceived
on so many other issues, go get 'im Rick!"
Which leads the other thing to keep in mind: Rick actually "came alive"
in a debate for a change.
Rick also attacked Romney on conservative credentials, by declaring
himself a real conservative and not a "conservative of convenience"
(directed meaning, at Romney).
Rick also directly attacked the other front-runner, Herman, on his "999
Plan." He went on the attack in general, plain and simple.
It'll be interesting to see if Rick gets a bump after this in
post-debate polling.
Bachmann, (who I no longer particulary dislike, now that her underming
of Sarah's candidacy is a moot point) with her usual out-of-turn "debate
crashing" applause line stunts, is really starting to look pathetic
(Anderson Cooper, in his annoynce, cut her off at the end of the debate;
earlier he, correctly, had to refuse her intense pleading for a 30
second rebuttal, because her name wasn't even mentioned by the other
candidate).
Travel A
Oct 20, 2011, 1:48:15 AM10/20/11
to
Re: GOP Debate Tonight
Group: rec.gambling.poker
Date: Tue, Oct 18, 2011, 9:58pm
From: Frostbite <bo...@shaw1.ca>
On 18/10/2011 7:12 PM, Mossingen wrote:
Cain was the clear winner again in my opinion and should get even more
bounce from this. He has a way of connecting to people using clear,
simple statements, and his message---his bottom line message is
basically, look, you don't have to know the details, you just have to
know that I am a problem solver and if I am the President I will solve
the problem. Powerful to voters, I think.
Cain persuaded me by touting his parking lot cleaning experience.
......................................................................................
I wrote:
I'm not committing until the details come out of whether he operated a
street cleaning truck for the purpose, or walked around with one of
those sticks with the ice pick thing on the end.
Mossingen
Oct 20, 2011, 11:40:37 AM10/20/11
to
"Travel A" <nin...@webtv.net> wrote in message
news:331-4E9F...@baytvnwsxa002.msntv.msn.com...
crap. That's why Zoe Baird and the others had problems. The American
people don't give two shits about stuff like that. Who the hell hasn't had
a bunch of brown-skinned workers on their roofs or mowing their lawns? Does
anyone check out their immigration status? It's a cheap shot gotcha tactic
from Perry and seemed desperate to me. It made for good political theater
on TV, but will translate into nothing for Perry.
You think Perry changes his own motor oil in his car? I wonder if the guy
at JiffyLube under the bay is illegal? Shit, he might even be gay, and not
believe in God! What if the guy who changes Perry's engine oil is a black,
illegal immigrant who likes other men and is an atheist? What THEN?!
> Rick was successful in rattling Romney's cage, and it really showed:
> previously, no one has really been able to lay a glove on Romney. So,
> that's a win for Rick under the circumstances. If Rick were in close
> contention, or on the rise and not on the decline, it probaby would be a
> net loss, because confrontations of that sort aren't "presidential:" at
> the least, Romney had more to lose than Rick.
>
> This (the confrontation strategy) has to be looked upon with a couple of
> things in mind: Romney isn't liked by 75% of the Republican electorate,
> and Rick causing mittens composure to crack, is likely to be appreciated
> by that same majority block of voters to which Rick is playing.
>
> Ya know, those voters are thinking: "okay, Romney may not have actually,
> knowingly, employed illegal aliens, but he's flip-flopped and deceived
> on so many other issues, go get 'im Rick!"
>
> Which leads the other thing to keep in mind: Rick actually "came alive"
> in a debate for a change.
If you call puffing out his chest and calling the black candidate "brother"
a couple of times coming alive. Perry looked like a buffoon. Romney less
so, but the real winner was Cain. He took hits and remained above the fray.
news:331-4E9F...@baytvnwsxa002.msntv.msn.com...
> Huntsman, Newt and Rick Santorum are boycotting the Nevada Caucus in
> protest over Nevada having moved it's caucus up to January 14th: which
> forces New Hampshire to hold their primary in early to mid December,
> instead of a desired February 16th or 18th date.
>
> Huntsman took the protest a little further, by boycotting the debate in
> Vegas. That's why Huntsman wasn't there.
>
> There's no real sacrifice in these candidates giving-up the Nevada
> Caucus, btw.
> Romney is the only candidate with an actual campaign organization in
> Nevada, and it's a serious one: Romney won the Nevada Republican primary
> caucus in 2008, (it was his firewall) and he's kept this
> Mormon-rich-voter state in play, since.
>
> Rick is polling at half of Cain's numbers, and his obvious strategy was
> to attack the front-runners and create some buzz for himself.
>
> What Rick did with regard to the illegal immigration issue and attacking
> Romney on personal, domestic workers (i.e., at his home, not his
> company) was actually in line with some very effective precedent: how
> many political appointments have been shot-down due to a
> domestic-worker, illegal immigrant problem of the appointee (i.e., a
> couple of Clinton's appointments). This issue hurt Meg Whitman in her
> recent run for governor of California, more recently. There are quite a
> few examples.
Senators and government functionaries are the only ones who care about that
> protest over Nevada having moved it's caucus up to January 14th: which
> forces New Hampshire to hold their primary in early to mid December,
> instead of a desired February 16th or 18th date.
>
> Huntsman took the protest a little further, by boycotting the debate in
> Vegas. That's why Huntsman wasn't there.
>
> There's no real sacrifice in these candidates giving-up the Nevada
> Caucus, btw.
> Romney is the only candidate with an actual campaign organization in
> Nevada, and it's a serious one: Romney won the Nevada Republican primary
> caucus in 2008, (it was his firewall) and he's kept this
> Mormon-rich-voter state in play, since.
>
> Rick is polling at half of Cain's numbers, and his obvious strategy was
> to attack the front-runners and create some buzz for himself.
>
> What Rick did with regard to the illegal immigration issue and attacking
> Romney on personal, domestic workers (i.e., at his home, not his
> company) was actually in line with some very effective precedent: how
> many political appointments have been shot-down due to a
> domestic-worker, illegal immigrant problem of the appointee (i.e., a
> couple of Clinton's appointments). This issue hurt Meg Whitman in her
> recent run for governor of California, more recently. There are quite a
> few examples.
crap. That's why Zoe Baird and the others had problems. The American
people don't give two shits about stuff like that. Who the hell hasn't had
a bunch of brown-skinned workers on their roofs or mowing their lawns? Does
anyone check out their immigration status? It's a cheap shot gotcha tactic
from Perry and seemed desperate to me. It made for good political theater
on TV, but will translate into nothing for Perry.
You think Perry changes his own motor oil in his car? I wonder if the guy
at JiffyLube under the bay is illegal? Shit, he might even be gay, and not
believe in God! What if the guy who changes Perry's engine oil is a black,
illegal immigrant who likes other men and is an atheist? What THEN?!
> Rick was successful in rattling Romney's cage, and it really showed:
> previously, no one has really been able to lay a glove on Romney. So,
> that's a win for Rick under the circumstances. If Rick were in close
> contention, or on the rise and not on the decline, it probaby would be a
> net loss, because confrontations of that sort aren't "presidential:" at
> the least, Romney had more to lose than Rick.
>
> This (the confrontation strategy) has to be looked upon with a couple of
> things in mind: Romney isn't liked by 75% of the Republican electorate,
> and Rick causing mittens composure to crack, is likely to be appreciated
> by that same majority block of voters to which Rick is playing.
>
> Ya know, those voters are thinking: "okay, Romney may not have actually,
> knowingly, employed illegal aliens, but he's flip-flopped and deceived
> on so many other issues, go get 'im Rick!"
>
> Which leads the other thing to keep in mind: Rick actually "came alive"
> in a debate for a change.
a couple of times coming alive. Perry looked like a buffoon. Romney less
so, but the real winner was Cain. He took hits and remained above the fray.
DDawgster
Oct 20, 2011, 11:57:14 AM10/20/11
to
unequivocally said that he WOULD make that call, later after he was
advised that he had fucked up.. he qualified it with the other bullshit
Frostbite
Oct 20, 2011, 1:02:16 PM10/20/11
to
On 20/10/2011 8:40 AM, Mossingen wrote:
> You think Perry changes his own motor oil in his car? I wonder if the guy
> at JiffyLube under the bay is illegal? Shit, he might even be gay, and not
> believe in God! What if the guy who changes Perry's engine oil is a black,
> illegal immigrant who likes other men and is an atheist? What THEN?!
I'm trying to picture you as a multi-millionaire governor, living in a
> You think Perry changes his own motor oil in his car? I wonder if the guy
> at JiffyLube under the bay is illegal? Shit, he might even be gay, and not
> believe in God! What if the guy who changes Perry's engine oil is a black,
> illegal immigrant who likes other men and is an atheist? What THEN?!
mansion on a big ol' estate.
I have to think that when the time came to hire gardening and
landscaping staff, you'd be on the ball enough to say to your assistants
that they need to let contractors know that Mr. Hankins is very firm
that everyone working on his property be legally entitled to work in the
United States. That's all that would have been reasonably required. Did
that happen?
If he doesn't have even that minimal level of foresight and common sense...
mo_ntresor
Oct 20, 2011, 1:05:18 PM10/20/11
to
mo_ntresor
---
Pepe Papon
Oct 20, 2011, 5:42:01 PM10/20/11
to
Look how you write your title! All lower case letters! If you want
to make clear the official nature of your title, "Newsgroup
Coordinator", you need to capitalize it.
They probably taught that in 9th grade in your school district, so
it's understandable why you didn't know. I'm just trying to help
out, as always.
Travel A
Oct 20, 2011, 8:11:08 PM10/20/11
to
Re: GOP Debate Tonight
Group: rec.gambling.poker
From: Mossingen <jhan...@cox.net>
I wrote:
Huntsman, Newt and Rick Santorum are boycotting the Nevada Caucus in
protest over Nevada having moved it's caucus up to January 14th: which
forces New Hampshire to hold their primary in early to mid December,
instead of a desired February 16th or 18th date.
Huntsman took the protest a little further, by boycotting the debate in
Vegas. That's why Huntsman wasn't there.
There's no real sacrifice in these candidates giving-up the Nevada
Caucus, btw.
Romney is the only candidate with an actual campaign organization in
Nevada, and it's a serious one: Romney won the Nevada Republican primary
caucus in 2008, (it was his firewall) and he's kept this
Mormon-rich-voter state in play, since.
Rick is polling at half of Cain's numbers, and his obvious strategy was
to attack the front-runners and create some buzz for himself.
What Rick did with regard to the illegal immigration issue and attacking
Romney on personal, domestic workers (i.e., at his home, not his
company) was actually in line with some very effective precedent: how
many political appointments have been shot-down due to a
domestic-worker, illegal immigrant problem of the appointee (i.e., a
couple of Clinton's appointments). This issue hurt Meg Whitman in her
recent run for governor of California, more recently. There are quite a
few examples.
Hankins:
Huntsman, Newt and Rick Santorum are boycotting the Nevada Caucus in
protest over Nevada having moved it's caucus up to January 14th: which
forces New Hampshire to hold their primary in early to mid December,
instead of a desired February 16th or 18th date.
Huntsman took the protest a little further, by boycotting the debate in
Vegas. That's why Huntsman wasn't there.
There's no real sacrifice in these candidates giving-up the Nevada
Caucus, btw.
Romney is the only candidate with an actual campaign organization in
Nevada, and it's a serious one: Romney won the Nevada Republican primary
caucus in 2008, (it was his firewall) and he's kept this
Mormon-rich-voter state in play, since.
Rick is polling at half of Cain's numbers, and his obvious strategy was
to attack the front-runners and create some buzz for himself.
What Rick did with regard to the illegal immigration issue and attacking
Romney on personal, domestic workers (i.e., at his home, not his
company) was actually in line with some very effective precedent: how
many political appointments have been shot-down due to a
domestic-worker, illegal immigrant problem of the appointee (i.e., a
couple of Clinton's appointments). This issue hurt Meg Whitman in her
recent run for governor of California, more recently. There are quite a
few examples.
Senators and government functionaries are the only ones who care about
that crap. That's why Zoe Baird and the others had problems. The
American people don't give two shits about stuff like that.
I wrote:
that crap. That's why Zoe Baird and the others had problems. The
American people don't give two shits about stuff like that.
You mean you wish only senators, etc., cared about it and not the
American people, because you're obviously not among the majority of the
American people on this issue.
The American people most certainly do care about "stuff like that."
That's exactly why Zoe baird did have trouble: Her illegal immigrant
problem went public, and that's exactly when the "senators and
government functionaries" DO care.
Hankins:
Who the hell hasn't had a bunch of brown-skinned workers on their roofs
or mowing their lawns? Does anyone check out their immigration status?
I wrote:
or mowing their lawns? Does anyone check out their immigration status?
If they're in public life, they had better check.
Hankins:
It's a cheap shot gotcha tactic from Perry and seemed desperate to me.
I wrote:
Of course it was, but it's a hot button issue in the Republican
electorate and could serve Rick's purposes. Romney throws "cheap shot
gottcha tactics" at Rick, too. They all do this, but you're against
Rick, so of course you overlook this and spout one-sided charactizations
as it suits your agenda.
Elective politics IS about cheap shot tactics, especially in the
political ads. It depends on who's on the receiving end with regard to
who's doing the squawking. Where have you been?
Hankins:
It made for good political theater on TV, but will translate into
nothing for Perry.
I wrote:
nothing for Perry.
You're kinda contradicting yourself there, Hankins, in an obvious
attempt to cover yourself. Good political theater is what Rick was
"going for:" mission accomplished; it was the major "take-away" from the
debate in all the media coverage. Rick made a play to the 73%
conservative voters in the Republican electorate, he wasn't trying to
convert Romney supporters.
Hankins:
You think Perry changes his own motor oil in his car? I wonder if the
guy at JiffyLube under the bay is illegal? Shit, he might even be gay,
and not believe in God! What if the guy who changes Perry's engine oil
is a black, illegal immigrant who likes other men and is an atheist?
What THEN?!
I wrote:
guy at JiffyLube under the bay is illegal? Shit, he might even be gay,
and not believe in God! What if the guy who changes Perry's engine oil
is a black, illegal immigrant who likes other men and is an atheist?
What THEN?!
What are you shitting us: Romney doesn't have a multitude of
contradictions and hypocrisy?
How about Romney climing to be a life long member of the NRA, and then
it turns out that he just joined two weeks ago: he said to the effect,
when caught: "oh, no, no, I meant that I signed up for a "lifetime
membership," not that I've been a member all my life." How about all the
Romney flip flops?
How about Romney taking the line out of his paperback edition book about
how Romneycare would be a good program for the entire country (that he
stated in his original, hardcover book)
I wrote:
Rick was successful in rattling Romney's cage, and it really showed:
previously, no one has really been able to lay a glove on Romney. So,
that's a win for Rick under the circumstances. If Rick were in close
contention, or on the rise and not on the decline, it probaby would be a
net loss, because confrontations of that sort aren't "presidential:" at
the least, Romney had more to lose than Rick.
This (the confrontation strategy) has to be looked upon with a couple of
things in mind: Romney isn't liked by 75% of the Republican electorate,
and Rick causing mittens composure to crack, is likely to be appreciated
by that same majority block of voters to which Rick is playing.
Ya know, those voters are thinking: "okay, Romney may not have actually,
knowingly, employed illegal aliens, but he's flip-flopped and deceived
on so many other issues, go get 'im Rick!"
alive" in a debate for a change.
Hankins:
If you call puffing out his chest and calling the black candidate
"brother" a couple of times coming alive.
I wrote:
"brother" a couple of times coming alive.
Where did I say that?
The coming alive part was Rick directly, face to face, attacking Cain on
his "999 Plan."
What was wrong with Rick's "bother" comment to Cain, btw? It seemed
obvious that Rick was making it clear that his attack wasn't personal,
but rather on the "999 Plan."
Hankins:
Perry looked like a buffoon. Romney less so,
I wrote:
But Romney still looked bad, and flustered.
Joe Trippi calls that sort of Rick tactic in the Romney/Rick
confrontation a "murder-suicide."
It's simiar to the Pawlenty/Bachmann confrontation in the Iowa debate,
where Pawlenty was desperate for some buzz and attacking the
front-runner(Bachmann, at the time) was the only option.
Hankins:
but the real winner was Cain. He took hits and remained above the fray.
I wrote:
Cain had a good debate, especially as he was the main target this time,
but so did Newt with his substantive answers.
I wrote:
Rick also attacked Romney on conservative credentials, by declaring
himself a real conservative and not a "conservative of convenience"
(directed meaning, at Romney).
Rick also directly attacked the other front-runner, Herman, on his "999
Plan." He went on the attack in general, plain and simple.
It'll be interesting to see if Rick gets a bump after this in
post-debate polling.
Bachmann, (who I no longer particulary dislike, now that her underming
of Sarah's candidacy is a moot point) with her usual out-of-turn "debate
crashing" applause line stunts, is really starting to look pathetic
(Anderson Cooper, in his annoynce, cut her off at the end of the debate;
earlier he, correctly, had to refuse her intense pleading for a 30
second rebuttal, because her name wasn't even mentioned by the other
candidate).
Travel A
Oct 21, 2011, 8:17:32 PM10/21/11
to
The Iowa Caucus: it's now been decided to be on Jan. 3rd.
So, the New Hampshire primary is still undecided but will probably be on
Jan. 10th and, therefore, December dates will be avoided.
The Nevada Caucus is Jan 14th, as I've mentioned, above.
The South Carolina primary is Jan 21st.
The Florida primary is Jan. 31st.
Feb. 7th-Colorado and Minnesota Caucuses.
Feb. 11th- the Maine Caucus.
Feb. 28th- Arizona and Michigan primaries.
March 6th is "Super Tuesday."
New RNC rule: All the above contests are "proportioned" delegates.
All states' contests after April 1st are eligible for "winner-take-all"
delegates.
Note:
The states, Nevada and Florida, by breaking the the RNC rules with
regard to jumping ahead of the established "first states to hold
contests," which are: Iowa, New Hampshire and South Carolina, are
supposed to cost Nevada and Florida half their delegates as a penalty
for breaking the "date rule." Whether the RNC ends up enforcing their
stated penalty, we'll see.
So, the New Hampshire primary is still undecided but will probably be on
Jan. 10th and, therefore, December dates will be avoided.
The Nevada Caucus is Jan 14th, as I've mentioned, above.
The South Carolina primary is Jan 21st.
The Florida primary is Jan. 31st.
Feb. 7th-Colorado and Minnesota Caucuses.
Feb. 11th- the Maine Caucus.
Feb. 28th- Arizona and Michigan primaries.
March 6th is "Super Tuesday."
New RNC rule: All the above contests are "proportioned" delegates.
All states' contests after April 1st are eligible for "winner-take-all"
delegates.
Note:
The states, Nevada and Florida, by breaking the the RNC rules with
regard to jumping ahead of the established "first states to hold
contests," which are: Iowa, New Hampshire and South Carolina, are
supposed to cost Nevada and Florida half their delegates as a penalty
for breaking the "date rule." Whether the RNC ends up enforcing their
stated penalty, we'll see.
Travel A
Oct 22, 2011, 3:46:23 AM10/22/11
to
Lol, Nevada is having a meeting today about their caucus date, and it
looks like they're switching again, and going back to February (probably
February, 4th).
http://www.google.com/gwt/x?wsc=vb&wsi=54bec16f6e6b565c&source=m&u=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.msnbc.compolitics.salon.com/topic/2012_elections/&ei=52iiTpj0M8vGmgep-qSrAw
Pepe Papon
Oct 23, 2011, 1:15:46 AM10/23/11
to
On Wed, 19 Oct 2011 08:54:55 -0700 (PDT), phlash74 <phla...@msn.com>
wrote:
No, it's this one:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1FEm5VwrgQY&feature=related
wrote:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1FEm5VwrgQY&feature=related
Pepe Papon
Oct 23, 2011, 1:19:38 AM10/23/11
to
On Wed, 19 Oct 2011 10:35:48 -0500, "Mossingen" <jhan...@cox.net>
wrote:
You haven't lived 'till you've cleaned toilets. Washing dishes is
also quite the life.
wrote:
also quite the life.
Frostbite
Oct 23, 2011, 1:56:30 AM10/23/11
to
On 22/10/2011 10:19 PM, Pepe Papon wrote:
> You haven't lived 'till you've cleaned toilets. Washing dishes is
> also quite the life.
haha..my first job was doing dishes at a big restaurant (along with
> You haven't lived 'till you've cleaned toilets. Washing dishes is
> also quite the life.
making pizza dough). $2.15/hr. I'll never forget that. It wasn't *that*
bad though. Sure, my child labor was being exploited by the bourgeoisie
owners, but I had a friend helping me on Friday and Saturday nights, and
we always had a good time. You'd get one meal a shift, and I always had
the New York steak, baked potato and garlic bread. That was the only
time I could afford to eat like that.
When I lived in Whistler many years later my friend had a fairly
lucrative (for a ski bum) cleaning contract at The Keg. I'd help him
once in while, but I'd draw the line at doing the toilets and urinals,
or as he used to call it, donning the rubber gloves.
0 new messages