Gentoo Forums
Gentoo Forums
Gentoo Forums
Quick Search: in
Debate: Biden vs Ryan
View unanswered posts
View posts from last 24 hours

Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5  
Reply to topic    Gentoo Forums Forum Index Off the Wall
View previous topic :: View next topic  
Author Message
McGruff
Tux's lil' helper
Tux's lil' helper


Joined: 28 Dec 2004
Posts: 147

PostPosted: Sat Oct 13, 2012 5:20 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Actually it matters a great deal because there are two markedly different economic policies one of which is dead wrong and one of which is dead right:

Quote:
...severe financial crises inflict sustained economic damage, and it takes a long time to recover.

This same observation, of course, offers a partial excuse for the economy’s lingering weakness. And the question we should ask given this unpleasant reality is what policies would offer the best prospects for healing the damage. Mr. Obama’s camp argues for an active government role; his last major economic proposal, the American Jobs Act, would have tried to accelerate recovery by sustaining public spending and putting money in the hands of people likely to use it. Republicans, on the other hand, insist that the path to prosperity involves sharp cuts in government spending.

And Republicans are dead wrong.

The latest devastating demonstration of that wrongness comes from the International Monetary Fund, which has just released its World Economic Outlook, a report combining short-term prediction with insightful economic analysis. This report is a grim and disturbing document, telling us that the world economy is doing significantly worse than expected, with rising risks of global recession. But the report isn’t just downbeat; it contains a careful analysis of the reasons things are going so badly. And what this analysis concludes is that a disproportionate share of the bad news is coming from countries pursuing the kind of austerity policies Republicans want to impose on America.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
richk449
Guru
Guru


Joined: 24 Oct 2003
Posts: 345

PostPosted: Sat Oct 13, 2012 5:35 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

BoneKracker wrote:
dmitchell wrote:
richk449 wrote:
I couldn't agree more.

So which pack of lies do you like for 2012, R? :P :lol:

He's Obama through and through, even if he won't admit it. If he wasn't, he'd have been poisoned by a gay waiter (or his wife) by now. :P

I think you would be surprised at the level of disillusionment that democrats have with Obama. Four years ago, if I told a democrat that I was thinking of voting third party, I would get an earful about throwing my vote away. This year, I hear "yea, I don't blame you".

Considering what I hear on a person level, I am shocked that Obama has even a chance of winning.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Bones McCracker
Veteran
Veteran


Joined: 14 Mar 2006
Posts: 1565
Location: U.S.A.

PostPosted: Sat Oct 13, 2012 5:44 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

richk449 wrote:
BoneKracker wrote:
dmitchell wrote:
richk449 wrote:
I couldn't agree more.

So which pack of lies do you like for 2012, R? :P :lol:

He's Obama through and through, even if he won't admit it. If he wasn't, he'd have been poisoned by a gay waiter (or his wife) by now. :P

I think you would be surprised at the level of disillusionment that democrats have with Obama. Four years ago, if I told a democrat that I was thinking of voting third party, I would get an earful about throwing my vote away. This year, I hear "yea, I don't blame you".

Considering what I hear on a person level, I am shocked that Obama has even a chance of winning.

Somebody I know recently came back Afghanistan and said they hadn't been paying attention to politics and wasn't sure for whom to vote, because based on what little they knew, they didn't like either Obama or Romney. I told him to vote for Gary Johnson and gave him a link to his website. So, I do respect what you're doing.

Last election I voted Libertarian. This election, I'm going to vote for Romney, because he's acceptable and Obama is not (in terms of his demonstrated inability to deal with the economy and his obvious authoritarian bent), and it's going to be a close race.

You're surprised Obama has a chance of winning? It's because of the Ministry of Truth and complicit press. Just look two posts up. Kool Aid drinkers like that are why he has a chance of winning.
_________________
pjp wrote:
I didn't misquote you, I just misunderstood you.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Bones McCracker
Veteran
Veteran


Joined: 14 Mar 2006
Posts: 1565
Location: U.S.A.

PostPosted: Sat Oct 13, 2012 8:20 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

WSJ says that in preparing Biden, the Obama campaign has confused strength with aggression, that the debate was a draw on substance, but that Biden loses on style.
Quote:
There were fireworks all the way, and plenty of drama. Each candidate could claim a win in one area or another, but by the end it looked to me like this: For the second time in two weeks, the Democrat came out and defeated himself. In both cases the Republican was strong and the Democrat somewhat disturbing.

Last week Mr. Obama was weirdly passive. Last night Mr. Biden was weirdly aggressive, if that is the right word for someone who grimaces, laughs derisively, interrupts, hectors, rolls his eyes, browbeats and attempts to bully. He meant to dominate, to seem strong and no-nonsense. Sometimes he did—he had his moments. But he was also disrespectful and full of bluster. "Oh, now you're Jack Kennedy!" he snapped at one point. It was an echo of Lloyd Bentsen to Dan Quayle, in 1988. But Mr. Quayle, who had compared himself to Kennedy, had invited the insult. Mr. Ryan had not. It came from nowhere. Did Mr. Biden look good? No, he looked mean and second-rate. He meant to undercut Mr. Ryan, but he undercut himself. His grimaces and laughter were reminiscent of Al Gore's sighs in 2000—theatrical, off-putting and in the end self-indicting.

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10000872396390443749204578051542621349694.html
_________________
pjp wrote:
I didn't misquote you, I just misunderstood you.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
notageek
Tux's lil' helper
Tux's lil' helper


Joined: 05 Jun 2008
Posts: 120
Location: Bangalore, India

PostPosted: Sat Oct 13, 2012 8:27 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

I've been noticing both WSJ and Washington Post are critical of Obama, something they weren't in the last election.
_________________
The problem is not the problem. The problem is your attitude about the problem. Do you understand? --Capt Jack Sparrow.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
juniper
l33t
l33t


Joined: 22 Oct 2004
Posts: 757
Location: EU

PostPosted: Sat Oct 13, 2012 11:28 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

notageek wrote:
I've been noticing both WSJ and Washington Post are critical of Obama, something they weren't in the last election.


But what of the right wing media conspiracy!

last time, obama was the fresh face against a failed president. tables have turned.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Bones McCracker
Veteran
Veteran


Joined: 14 Mar 2006
Posts: 1565
Location: U.S.A.

PostPosted: Sat Oct 13, 2012 3:47 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

juniper wrote:
notageek wrote:
I've been noticing both WSJ and Washington Post are critical of Obama, something they weren't in the last election.


But what of the right wing media conspiracy!

last time, obama was the fresh face against a failed president. tables have turned.

Tell that to NBC, MSNBC, CNN, ABC, CBS, New York Times, New Yorker, Bloomberg, Time, Newsweek, etc., etc., etc., who all seem to have their lips super-glued to his knob.
_________________
pjp wrote:
I didn't misquote you, I just misunderstood you.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
McGruff
Tux's lil' helper
Tux's lil' helper


Joined: 28 Dec 2004
Posts: 147

PostPosted: Sat Oct 13, 2012 6:30 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

One of the highlights of the debate was watching Ryan get pulled up for trashing stimulus spending when, according to Biden, he had himself made two requests for stimulus funds (and people wonder why Biden couldn't stop laughing...). Turns out he asked many more times than we knew about:

Quote:
During Thursday night's vice presidential debate, Vice President Joe Biden attacked Rep. Paul Ryan (R-Wis.) for criticizing the president's stimulus act despite having sent two separate requests for stimulus funds for his district.

Biden was wrong. Ryan sent at least four requests.

A Freedom of Information Act request for correspondence between Ryan's office and the Environmental Protection Agency, filed by The Huffington Post, unearthed two additional instances in which the Wisconsin Republican petitioned for American Recovery Act funds. In addition, there were many other occasions in which the GOP vice presidential nominee asked the EPA for grant money for projects in Wisconsin's 1st District, which encompasses Ryan's hometown of Janesville and has a slight Democratic lean. Combined, the letters muddy Ryan's claim that the stimulus wasn't helpful and that government spending, more broadly, doesn't assist small businesses.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Bones McCracker
Veteran
Veteran


Joined: 14 Mar 2006
Posts: 1565
Location: U.S.A.

PostPosted: Sat Oct 13, 2012 9:19 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

That was a retarded point. Once the thing was passed, his constituents are going to get screwed by taxes to pay for that program, so why shouldn't they benefit? The problem with the stimulus was that the Obama Administration pissed most of it away protecting government workers, paying for their own pet projects, and playing cronyism. Bidden was personally tasked with making sure only highly job-creating projects were chosen and ensuring full accountability (that the unemployment goal would be achieved and that the Government would be able to demonstrate where every dollar went and how many jobs it created). He failed MISERABLY in all respects. They pissed it away, unemployment did not stay below the promised 8.5% used to justify the spending (instead continuing right on up to 10-12% depending on whom you ask), they have been roundly criticized over and over for their shifty choices of projects (from "Cash for Clunkers" to Solyndra), and their reports of "jobs created or saved" have become a total joke.

At least in this case, Ryan probably endorsed two grant applications which actually did create jobs, and probably didn't create an unfunded program that needed to be cut the next year, causing job losses, like most of Obama's stimulus, which was squandered on the public sector, just adding to the problem.

The reason Biden was flapping his lips about this is because everybody knows it was a huge failure, and he was supposed to be the guy personally making sure that did not happen. Red herring if I've ever seen one.
_________________
pjp wrote:
I didn't misquote you, I just misunderstood you.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
bogamol
Tux's lil' helper
Tux's lil' helper


Joined: 01 Nov 2009
Posts: 84
Location: Detroit, Michigan - The Home of Rock and Roll

PostPosted: Sun Oct 14, 2012 12:21 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

juniper wrote:
notageek wrote:
I've been noticing both WSJ and Washington Post are critical of Obama, something they weren't in the last election.


But what of the right wing media conspiracy!

last time, obama was the fresh face against a failed president. tables have turned.


Who was the incumbent?

I dont know how many times I heard that 'failed presidency' thing on MSNBC as if Obama were actually running against Bush. Let me remind you that Bush term limited out. He was running against a completely different, much more moderate candidate than Bush ever pretended to be. In fact I think the only thing conservative about him was his defense-hawkishness.

So before you rant about conservatives and the right wing media conspiracy know that just like conservatives have Fox and WSJ libs have NYTimes LATimes WashingtonPost MSNBC. In fact surprisingly NPR seems to have the least biased reporting...that ia until you let their anchors interact in [strikethrough]polite[/strikethrough] society.

...funnily enough the NPR reporters who are deemed not ridiculously liberal enough end up working for Fox and do a pretty good job of articulating the liberal perspective.


Last edited by bogamol on Sun Oct 14, 2012 12:34 am; edited 2 times in total
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Old School
Apprentice
Apprentice


Joined: 20 Nov 2004
Posts: 236
Location: The Covered Bridge Capital of Oregon

PostPosted: Sun Oct 14, 2012 12:23 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

McCain by default.
_________________
I am not young enough to know everything.
- Oscar Wilde
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
bogamol
Tux's lil' helper
Tux's lil' helper


Joined: 01 Nov 2009
Posts: 84
Location: Detroit, Michigan - The Home of Rock and Roll

PostPosted: Sun Oct 14, 2012 12:46 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Wow apparently I am more annoyed by that issue than I thought...what a rant!
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
juniper
l33t
l33t


Joined: 22 Oct 2004
Posts: 757
Location: EU

PostPosted: Mon Oct 15, 2012 10:00 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

bogamol wrote:
juniper wrote:
notageek wrote:
I've been noticing both WSJ and Washington Post are critical of Obama, something they weren't in the last election.


But what of the right wing media conspiracy!

last time, obama was the fresh face against a failed president. tables have turned.


Who was the incumbent?

I dont know how many times I heard that 'failed presidency' thing on MSNBC as if Obama were actually running against Bush. Let me remind you that Bush term limited out. He was running against a completely different, much more moderate candidate than Bush ever pretended to be. In fact I think the only thing conservative about him was his defense-hawkishness.

So before you rant about conservatives and the right wing media conspiracy know that just like conservatives have Fox and WSJ libs have NYTimes LATimes WashingtonPost MSNBC. In fact surprisingly NPR seems to have the least biased reporting...that ia until you let their anchors interact in [strikethrough]polite[/strikethrough] society.

...funnily enough the NPR reporters who are deemed not ridiculously liberal enough end up working for Fox and do a pretty good job of articulating the liberal perspective.


as usual, I find it odd what passes for a liberal in the US.

The liberal papers you mention are liberal on in the context of a crazy media field. MSNBC is trash. Where was the NYT when the iraq war started? were they not towing the party line enough for you? Several prominent OP Eds from the NYT were pro the war.

Just because they think gays shouldn't shipped to guantanamo doesn't make them liberal. or perhaps it does in the heartland.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Bones McCracker
Veteran
Veteran


Joined: 14 Mar 2006
Posts: 1565
Location: U.S.A.

PostPosted: Mon Oct 15, 2012 1:14 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

It's 'toe the line', not 'tow the line'. It means 'adhere to guidance'.
_________________
pjp wrote:
I didn't misquote you, I just misunderstood you.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
juniper
l33t
l33t


Joined: 22 Oct 2004
Posts: 757
Location: EU

PostPosted: Mon Oct 15, 2012 2:11 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

BoneKracker wrote:
It's 'toe the line', not 'tow the line'. It means 'adhere to guidance'.


i know, idiom nazi :lol:
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Bones McCracker
Veteran
Veteran


Joined: 14 Mar 2006
Posts: 1565
Location: U.S.A.

PostPosted: Tue Oct 16, 2012 8:18 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Sorry. Just trying to be helpful. :P
_________________
pjp wrote:
I didn't misquote you, I just misunderstood you.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Display posts from previous:   
Reply to topic    Gentoo Forums Forum Index Off the Wall All times are GMT
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5
Page 5 of 5

 
Jump to:  
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum