Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

2016 Postmortem

Showing Original Post only (View all)

mnhtnbb

(31,389 posts)
Sun Oct 7, 2012, 05:10 PM Oct 2012

Funniest comment I've seen regarding the debate performance... [View all]

On another site where right wingers abound (it's a weight loss program) one of the
people I know fairly well put up a thread about the Presidential Debate because
she's truly ambivalent about her choice for POTUS. She recognizes, as a resident
of Utah, that her vote for POTUS doesn't really count, but it's important to her.
She's an out lesbian with a Mormon family. She says she's a Democrat...but
she worked for a defense contractor for many years and got a very close up
look at 'government waste'. Hmm...

Sensing her ambivalence, I put up a post regarding issues, looking at it from
the perspective of Republicans for Obama. I used the info from this thread
http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1251&pid=123141
and later referred to http://www.republicansforobama.org/

Major snark ensued from other people on the website!!! Not a surprise!


So, then I decided this a.m. to challenge her assertion
that "Romney is a good man". I disputed it based on:

he's an animal abuser;
he's a bully;
he's a liar;
he's all about the money without regard to how he gets it or who gets hurt in the process.

I provided links for everything. In fact, here's my
post from this a.m.:

Wow. Initially, I decided to stay away from this, but after trying to focus my comments on issues rather than personality while addressing M's clear ambivalence, and seeing the snark that erupted from doing so, I'm going to question the assumption that Romney is a good man.

What is good? What unbalances the scale from all the good things that a person does to the not-so-good things that the same person does?

M states that she believes Romney is a good man. I don't come to the same conclusion. Why? Here's my list:

--He is an animal abuser. And for those who like to play snarky, check out
http://www.dogsagainstromney.com/

--He is a bully. I do not write off his 'pranks'-- that included holding down a gay man and cutting his hair--as meaningless. It says something about his character. http://www.newyorker.com/online/blog...ney-bully.html

--He is a liar. There are so many documented instances of this that I won't list any links. Just google his name and liar. Many will say all politicians lie. They definitely all make promises--some of which turn out to be very difficult to keep. Did they intend to keep them? Did they change their mind along the way? Sure, there's nuance to whether a promise not kept is a lie. Again, take the whole history of the person and look to see whether the lies form a pattern across all areas of life.

--Money is everything to the man. It's all about money, no matter how he gets it or who is hurt by his actions. This is the story of Bain Capital. http://www.rollingstone.com/politics...pital-20120829

I was a reluctant supporter of Obama in 2008. I'm such a flaming lefty that Obama was much too far to the right of center for my liking. I grew up with Republican parents--Reagan Republicans--and my brother is a staunch Republican. I understand Eisenhower Republicans: remember he was the one who warned of the military-industrial complex. For all the discussion on this thread about cutting the budget, you have to ask, where are you going to make those cuts? There hasn't been ONE word in this thread about touching the defense budget--which is among the categories where significant cuts can be made to discretionary spending. It has to be on the table--because if the US wants to go to war it has to pay for it. Whining about insufficient tax breaks for the richest among us--who DON'T send their kids off to be maimed and die for us--while the rich get richer and the poor get poorer is going to push this country to the brink of civil unrest. Countries that have huge gaps in inequality tend to not do well.
http://www.theatlantic.com/internati...ality/245315/#
And that is where the US is headed unless/until the people of this country wake up and insist that their elected representatives start working together. The Republicans made it their primary goal to obstruct during President Obama's first term--they even said it out loud!--and that behavior has to stop. https://bangordailynews.com/2012/05/...ling-congress/
President Obama has shown a willingness to negotiate with anyone--on anything--who would come to the table. It's time to get over our differences and work towards common goals.



OMG. After that, the right wingers went bonkers!

But, here comes the punch line. I just checked the thread and one of other lefties posted this:

What stuck out most for me was the Big Bird statement. For me it summarized what I don't like about the Republican challenger. He doesn't get what's important to the average US person. Funding for Big Bird by the gov't is miniscule and the stats are there to show the positive effect of Sesame Street on early and later education. But he would keep tax breaks (aka corporation welfare) to oil companies.

But what made me laugh is the goal comparison of first time candidate Obama vs first time Romney. It shows how far we have come.

Obama 2008: I will get Bin Laden
Romney 2012: I will get Big Bird


That is just too funny!!!

20 replies = new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight: NoneDon't highlight anything 5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
Latest Discussions»Retired Forums»2016 Postmortem»Funniest comment I've see...»Reply #0