Romney's The Man

[jimmy eat jazz]

So basically it is wrong because you say so? That is as stupid as everything you were just going off about.

I was talking more about this part: "There is a pretty amazing, interesting and incredibly, wonderfully complex world out there outside of the right wing echo chamber. I know it's scary to think that the entire world cannot be reduced to simple minded right wing ideological soundbites, but I strongly suggest giving it a try. "

How about you ask him why he holds these views? Perhaps he has real world experiences that have led him to his views. But no, you are not interested in what his opinion is and how he got there. You are only interested in tearing down any view that is not your own.

As for you being an independent voter. I. Do. Not. Care. Never brought it up and it has no bearing on anything to do with what we are talking about. You used a standard response to attack any opinion other than your own. Your political affiliation is pointless.

No, basically he's wrong because he's wrong. It's not my opinion that Obama isn't a socialist, it's true by definition, given the meaning of socialist. So, if I were to call Romney a Nazi, and you said I was wrong, given how Nazi is defined, is that merely your opinion, or is it true by definition. Here's a hint--it's the latter.

I repeat, those who call Obama a socialist are overwhelming drawn from the more extreme, ideological wing of the Republican party, who strongly tend as well to get their information from right wing sources. So it's a reasonable inference that someone here on this board who makes this claim is (a) highly conservative Republican and (b) gets a good chunk of his/her information from right wing sources than confirm his/her pre-existing biases.

No, I attack opinions I think are stupid, bigoted, ignorant, or based on faulty information. I much less inclined to attack people who actually show evidence of independent or reasoned thought, such as Colton, with whom I disagree on the lottery issue but whom I've treated, I think, with respect. You on the other hand give every evidence of being an unreflective partisan hack so I take a more aggressive approach with you.

I mention by independence because you have on more than one occasion accused me of partisanship. Although I have opinons on matters, they are not driven by party identification or identification with a particular ideological tradition. This does not appear to be the case with you.

 

[default]

At this point it is clear that either Obama or Romney will win, but I really am not excited about either option. I know the options could be worse, but they aren't that great either. I have a feeling that a significant percentage of the population agrees from online reports and comments that I've been reading and people with whom I've spoken.

 

[TroutBum]

How is it that nobody has ever heard of, or given two ****s about "jimmy eat jazz" since June 2010, but all of a sudden he learned the word "empirical" from Bubble Guppies and now he's worse than Craig2112?

Here's a newsflash for you, J.E.J.: You're a moron.

Please, stop posting.

 

[jimmy eat jazz]

How is it that nobody has ever heard of, or given two ****s about "jimmy eat jazz" since June 2010, but all of a sudden he learned the word "empirical" from Bubble Guppies and now he's worse than Craig2112?

Here's a newsflash for you, J.E.J.: You're a moron.

Please, stop posting.

Ummm, let me think about it.

Thought about it. Nope. Sorry.

Being called a moron by the likes of you is really quite flattering. Like being called a moron by a tea bagger.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[babe]

I wasn't speaking to you specifically or even generally. I apologize if that's the way it sounded.

If you want to question Obama's performance or leadership - I'm all ears; and I would probably agree with you on a few points.

But in these PC times, I am more than certain that all this talk of him being a Muslim or a Non-American or a socialist is coming from folks who, for the most part, are just ticked off a black guy is in The White House.

I've had a few black friends, workmates. . . . and even some actual marxist friends. . . . along my weary little road in life. Some of them could have sung in the choir at Rev. Wright's little church where Obama attended. I disagree with your reverse sort of racist analysis of the white and conservative voting blocks because I know some of them too, who do vote for conservative blacks, and who have formed business partnerships with blacks and who hire blacks and who treat blacks with respect.

I think it's pretty ordinary that a lot of black folk will feel the way you do, and I realize that I'm just as human and short-sighted a lot of the time. We will all stick up for one of our own, in any sense of the idea, when we feel others are downing him/her with prejudice or ignorance.

A lot of whites nowadays will parade with their PC poses pretty good. And a lot of whites are getting sore at it, too. Fundamentally, I don't think it's useful to force people of any kind to conform to any ideal within their little personal sphere of what's inside the mind or heart, and I consider that intelligence and understanding are the thing to be hoped for, and that ideas are the currency of values that can make that happen more often. It's just sad that we need real laws to make human rights real for anyone. I'm resigned to putting the laws in place, but it's still the ideas that will make the most difference.

But back to Obama. The sad thing there is that while Obama has toyed with marxism, and done the community organizer bit with dedicated socialists who would resent being called "borderline" on it, he's really a compromised President obligated to others, dependent on others, who essentially guide him into being a Bush of another color.

And although I was raised LDS with some palpable connections to the Romney clan, I am convinced Romney is just another Bush. He might patch up some things for the big business folks, and encourage more investment and get job growth back on an uphill road, though.

But he's not going to make people who are seriously looking at their own opportunities and human rights, like you or me, feel any better about our prospects.

So I'll vote for Paul until the cows come home, or go third party Libertarian.

 

[TroutBum]

... he's really a compromised President obligated to others, dependent on others, who essentially guide him into being a Bush of another color.

This. I had such high hopes for him, but alas, he has become the very thing I loathe. Of course, it is inevitable in politics, but for some reason, I thought he might be different. I won't be making the same mistake twice.

 

[Saint Cy of JFC]

I've had a few black friends, workmates. . . . and even some actual marxist friends. . . . along my weary little road in life. Some of them could have sung in the choir at Rev. Wright's little church where Obama attended. I disagree with your reverse sort of racist analysis of the white and conservative voting blocks because I know some of them too, who do vote for conservative blacks, and who have formed business partnerships with blacks and who hire blacks and who treat blacks with respect.

I think it's pretty ordinary that a lot of black folk will feel the way you do, and I realize that I'm just as human and short-sighted a lot of the time. We will all stick up for one of our own, in any sense of the idea, when we feel others are downing him/her with prejudice or ignorance.

A lot of whites nowadays will parade with their PC poses pretty good. And a lot of whites are getting sore at it, too. Fundamentally, I don't think it's useful to force people of any kind to conform to any ideal within their little personal sphere of what's inside the mind or heart, and I consider that intelligence and understanding are the thing to be hoped for, and that ideas are the currency of values that can make that happen more often. It's just sad that we need real laws to make human rights real for anyone. I'm resigned to putting the laws in place, but it's still the ideas that will make the most difference.

But back to Obama. The sad thing there is that while Obama has toyed with marxism, and done the community organizer bit with dedicated socialists who would resent being called "borderline" on it, he's really a compromised President obligated to others, dependent on others, who essentially guide him into being a Bush of another color.

And although I was raised LDS with some palpable connections to the Romney clan, I am convinced Romney is just another Bush. He might patch up some things for the big business folks, and encourage more investment and get job growth back on an uphill road, though.

But he's not going to make people who are seriously looking at their own opportunities and human rights, like you or me, feel any better about our prospects.

So I'll vote for Paul until the cows come home, or go third party Libertarian.

Yup. Seems like you have to lie to get in office, then be about as vanilla as possible while you are in office as to not totally upset anyone, then hope to get re-elected when your opposition is just as bad as you are.

 

[Scat]

So I'll vote for Paul until the cows come home, or go third party Libertarian.

All this will do is get Obama reelected.

 

[KillaCam]

An Obama slogan I saw today on 106 & Park, "I got 99 problems, but a "Mitt" ain't one."

I seriously think Obama's done a pretty good job since coming in in 2008, when the economy was in the ****ter. The DOW has surpasses 12,000 this year, General Motors is once again the leading car manufacture in the world. Unemployment is down near 8% from 10% in 2009. Utah's unemployment is near 5%. I wanna see what he can accomplish in 4 more years. I wouldnt mind seeing universal healthcare, although many hate the idea. The way I see it is this term has been an adjustment, and he can take full hold of the reins from 2012 until 2016.

As far as Mitt Romney, I hope people see past him and dont elect him. The last thing we need is someone trying to run the USA as a business. Trying to make a profit. He's made his millions screwing people just like us and we dont need that for 4 years.

I know Utah will vote for Romney...OBVIOUSLY. Just make an educated decision beforehand. Even if in the end you vote for Mitt.

 

[trigg3r]

I've been back a few times, it's a great place. I would love to live and work there. Summer all year long, beautiful country, cool culture, awesome people, etc.

I guess the drawbacks would be #1 salary (although.... In Sao Paulo they might not be that far behind... And if you get a job at an American firm, you can make bank) and #2 not being able to personally watch Jazz games. Which... Meh. You can get most sports, that you care about, NFL/NBA on dish. I remember seeing a lil bit of the Giants vs... I think it was Cowboys game. When Romo screwed up the hold... lol

And beautiful ladies!

Would love to live there as well. Just a little fearful of foreigners being kidnapped in South America. Seems like it is pretty common.

 

[babe]

All this will do is get Obama reelected.

could be.

But the Senate is where it's at right now, and what we need is at least ten to stand tall like Paul. Call it Obama Insurance.

Make it real hard for Obama, or even Romney to do another war, like on Iran.

Get the Fed audited and exposed for what it is, and replaced with the Treasury doing its constitutional duty.

Send up some balanced budgets Romney will look real duplicitous complaining are too "sketchy".

Ditch Obamacare, Codex Alimentaris, and a lot of other nonsense we've been hobbling ourselves with, especially the HSA and other national police state apparatchik orgs.

It's true we have more veto fights with Obama in office than we would with Romney, but it's also true that the RNC needs to be replaced by some grass roots folks, and that's a bigger issue than Obama. We actually need a political party that is responsible and responsive to the people, at least one. Two would be better, sure.

 

[trigg3r]

could be.

But the Senate is where it's at right now, and what we need is at least ten to stand tall like Paul. Call it Obama Insurance.

Make it real hard for Obama, or even Romney to do another war, like on Iran.

Get the Fed audited and exposed for what it is, and replaced with the Treasury doing its constitutional duty.

Send up some balanced budgets Romney will look real duplicitous complaining are too "sketchy".

Ditch Obamacare, Codex Alimentaris, and a lot of other nonsense we've been hobbling ourselves with, especially the HSA and other national police state apparatchik orgs.

It's true we have more veto fights with Obama in office than we would with Romney, but it's also true that the RNC needs to be replaced by some grass roots folks, and that's a bigger issue than Obama. We actually need a political party that is responsible and responsive to the people, at least one. Two would be better, sure.

I agree with your sentiment, it just won't happen. Way too many corrupt politicians and Americans who are asleep or at this point don't care about anything involving government unless it is collecting a check from government. Not saying that's wrong to collect a check from government. Just saying that's where a lot of people's interest in government ends.

 

[NAOS]

Politically, no. One is a moderate Republican and the other borders upon Socialism.

idiocy

 

[NAOS]

There is a sliding scale between absolute free market capitalism and absolute state run collectivism. These systems are based on various political philosophies. Obama has repeatedly supported ideas that stem from socialist ideology. Now, there is a big, very big, difference between recommending various socialist inspired programs and transforming the current U.S. economic system into a legitimately socialist economy, but to describe Obama’s stated views as socialist leaning is not some right wing delusion.

you're trying to sound moderate, but... you are also wrong. Sorry.

 

[NAOS]

But socialist ideals are socialist ideals. The idea that industry unfairly takes advantage of workers and that it is the right of the people to seize control of these industries in order to opperate them in a way more beneficial to workers is the root of socialist thinking. Please correct me if I'm wrong.

implied here (as the counterpoint to your over-simplified reading of socialism) is a very monstrous definition of capitalism, namely, that is must ignore the true costs of production and pursue the lowest overhead and most rapid and complete use of resources in order to be defined as such.

In the end, these are caricatures.

 

[NAOS]

Americans over-exaggerate the differences between the so-called 'left' and the 'right.'

Since Reagan especially, the guiding force of governance has been economic rationale (what is now termed "neo-liberalism"). Go down the list since Reagan.... all of them, including Obama, have had more in common economistically than they have had differences. All the other stuff is taken up by the media, made into the largest shenanigan possible, attracting everyones attention, while the serious decisions and consequences of de-regulation pass through.

If you want to use Obamacare as an example of his "socialism", then you're just proving how brainwashed you are.

 

[trigg3r]

idiocy

Tool.

 

[Saint Cy of JFC]

Americans over-exaggerate the differences between the so-called 'left' and the 'right.'

Since Reagan especially, the guiding force of governance has been economic rationale (what is now termed "neo-liberalism"). Go down the list since Reagan.... all of them, including Obama, have had more in common economistically than they have had differences. All the other stuff is taken up by the media, made into the largest shenanigan possible, attracting everyones attention, while the serious decisions and consequences of de-regulation pass through.

If you want to use Obamacare as an example of his "socialism", then you're just proving how brainwashed you are.

How can one be such a terrible Utah Jazz forum poster, but utterly dominate the general discussion?

 

[The Thriller]

Would love to live there as well. Just a little fearful of foreigners being kidnapped in South America. Seems like it is pretty common.

I haven't heard of that happening ever in Brazil.

Why? For one, Brazil is a pretty wealthy country right now. There just isn't a demand to ransom some American family when these folks are already making (good) money.

Secondly, in the industrialized portions of Brazil, Sao Paulo, Porto Alegre, Rio de Janeiro, Florianopolis, Recife, etc there are SO many tourists and foreign businessmen from all over the world, it's really hard to just focus in on one person. Unless you're sporting an American flag, wearing a cowboy hat, and driving around in a big Ford F-350, you'll probably be considered as Gaucho (A southern Brazilian with German ancestry) or a European pansie.

Thirdly, I think your chances of being robbed are greater. Which is true whether you're visiting LA, New York, or Brazil. Just stay out of the bad areas (which are hard to miss. Usually you'll see them coming a long ways off. They're noticeably different than most other areas. You'll see orange bricked ghettos called "favelas.")

You'll be fine here:

You should be worried when city ends and favela begins. Be worried if you're inside here:

You're looking at part of one of the most exclusive sights in all of Brazil, Morumbi. Rich rich filthy rich area that ends in poor poor poor favela. Most foreigners working in Sao Paulo will probably reside in one of those high rises.

 

[Saint Cy of JFC]

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-latin-america-17495375

https://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/programmes/this_world/4898554.stm