BF2S Forums 2012 U.S. election presidential, Mitt Romney vs Barack Obama

Social conservatives are bringing down the credibility of the fiscal conservatives and have been for decades, but this is just getting ridiculous now.

Dilbert_X wrote:

So if I rape someone and there's a kid its not my fault?

But you can't get pregnant from a legitimate rape, so she was asking for it!

Pretty simple. If things fuck up, it was just god's will.

http://www.belfasttelegraph.co.uk/news/ … 29346.html

Romney style!

KEN-JENNINGS wrote:

FEOS wrote:

13urnzz wrote:

i don't recall Clinton using a presidential debate to roll out policy. which, if you watched the last debate, rmoney closely mirrors obama on foreign policy, except for bayonets and knives. he'll have more of those and ships too!

Who said anything about policy in that debate? Neither candidate talked about policy, they talked about positions--which are two different things.

Both candidates have changed their positions throughout their campaigns and administrations--apparently, it's totally OK to do that if you're the incumbent (you have flexibility to respond to a dynamic world), but it's the epitome of hypocrisy if you're the opposition (you're a flip-flopper).

Love the objectivity here. It's sooo refreshing and not at all like the morons who post >insert candidate's name here< pictures/memes/etc on Facebook.

/sarcasm

you really think Romney's being dynamic?  If he's changing his position on something wouldn't it make sense to say, "hey guys I was wrong when i said I think we should do 'x'.  Let's do 'y' instead?  Changing positions is fine - it's something I want politicians to do.  But it seems like Romney says something and a week later says something else. 

According to you, both candidates are changing their positions, but only one is moving more center.  So then Obama was more center than changed his positions to be more lefty?  But we're the ones not being objective.

Yes, Obama is staying left. He's running his campaign backwards, and it's showing in poll numbers.

Romney did exactly what you describe. He said he had one view, then changed his view after certain things happened.

Obama said the same thing WRT gay marriage. He didn't bother to explain why he changed his position on a number of other things (Gitmo, for one; increased deficits, for another). Clinton did as well--remember, he's the one who signed DADT and DOMA into law.

13rin wrote:

Hahaha... Ok guise. 

When I wake in the morning, I wait on the Lord, and I ask Him to give me the strength to do right by our country and its people.  And when I go to bed at night I wait on the Lord, and I ask Him to forgive me my sins, and look after my family and the American people, and make me an instrument of His will. -Barack Obama 2011
@20:13
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KWxnR03F-bQ



Derp!

Totally comparable to saying rape is all part of Gods plan. Totally.

Jay wrote:

Are you familiar with pre-determinism? It's the premise behind the Final Destination franchise, I'm sure you've seen those. He believes that everything that happens is pre-ordained by his deity, the good as well as the bad. So what? Why is that something to mock? Then again, you would mock anyone that even expressed a simple belief in a god so why stop here? All-knowing, world-wise, AussieReaper to the rescue. Worry about fixing your own stupidity before you mock others.

Must make you proud to include such stalwarts of intellectualism within the GOP. Champions of science and the arts.

Oh, wait. The Texas board of education is releasing an amended set of text books featuring intelligent design.

Oh wait, Sarah Palin thinks the Earth is 6000 years old.

Oh wait, Todd Akin believes there's only conception when its a "legitimate rape"

I'll happily mock these idiots, because that's exactly what they deserve. Derision.

How do you let Akin be a member on the House Committee on Science, Space and Technology?

How do you let Michelle Bachmann on House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence?

What a joke.

Last edited by AussieReaper (2012-10-25 12:46:16)

Jay wrote:

There are just as many morons on the left as on the right.

There seem to be a lot of morons in American politics in general.
I mean fair enough there are a fair few idiots and/or dislikeable people in British politics but not so many outright morons.

Mutantbear wrote:

coke wrote:

Jay wrote:

There are just as many morons on the left as on the right.

There seem to be a lot of morons in American politics in general.
I mean fair enough there are a fair few idiots and/or dislikeable people in British politics but not so many outright morons.

he does have a point, just not that well articulated. american politicians in comparison to european politicians are far more brash, vulgar, loud... and over-groomed, over-presented, over-exposed in the media, etc. they become cartoon-like, in short. whereas european politicians are quite dour, too-sensible, straight-laced bureaucrats with snakes tongues. it's overstated buffoonery (look at all the romney gaffes so far during this election) versus understated meretriciousness. one isn't better than the other. but the american political circus really does seem like a circus in comparison to the more subdued european politics. don't forget, we british are famed for our understatedness... american politics, with all its loud stage antics and boastful declarations, seems like the compete opposite.

Last edited by aynrandroolz (2012-10-25 14:09:50)

Sorry this turned into quite a long post that would be better suited to be hidden on some blog that no-one reads but now that I've written it I'm not going to delete it.

Jay wrote:

...There are just as many morons on the left as on the right.

Ahhhhh, no.

Sorry I don't buy this. There certainly are morons on both sides, some of whom are exceptional morons and if you're talking about the wider spectrum of everyone who considers themselves left or right maybe you have a point, (though there would be no way to determine this.) But in terms of representatives the right has an over-abundance of idiocy.

In fairness most of the idiocy comes from religion but I don't think this should be a get out of jail free card. You can be religious without believing in the more idiotic parts of it.

Like this most recent guy, Richard Mourdock. I get how it all works in his head but it is an idiotic thought, and a more idiotic one to voice. It is being twisted a bit and I have seen frequently the line "rape is a gift from God" which is not what he said. But he believes in this whole pre-determinism thing and he is using it for his line of thinking. Technically if you believed in pre-determinism you would argue that a woman deciding to abort their rape-baby is just as pre-determined as some person deciding to rape them. You could argue that pre-determinism would mean anything is permitted. But Mourdock chose to use this argument to back something as horrible as rape over a victim's rights to not be forced to bear the child of a rapist. That is idiocy.

And Todd Akin, I still can't get over that moron's logic. Akin, who has no scientific or medical background that I'm aware of, decides to say to all that women have a rape-conception kill-switch in cases of 'legitimate' rape. When he has a chance to correct himself he takes back the word 'legitimate' but maintains his bizarro stance on human biology. And whether or not he uses the word legitimate everyone knows what he really means. It's not rape if you enjoy it. it's not rape if you were leading them on. It's not rape if there was the slightest chance that you may have consented at one point. It's sick.

Rape seems to be Republican tourettes and their constant dancing around the issue of 'abortion in cases of rape' has led to some absolutely ridiculous and insulting thoughts being shared. I don't think the culture of rape apologists exist on the other side but I would be interested to be proven wrong.

But then there's others like Sarah Palin who before she found her true role in reality television was lined up to take the second highest office in the US. She believed dinosaurs and man coexisted. Joe Barton who decided that global warming would be solved by wind, (because wind is cold and global warming is hot, right?) Allen West who said deformed children were God's punishment for women who had abortions. The constant stream of Republicans insisting that evolution is false including Paul Broun who called evolution and the big bang theory 'lies from the pits of Hell'. Then there's the birther movement. Nothing like that on the other side that I'm aware of.

And you know the Republican Party is aware of this "duh" image too. George W Bush is not a dumb man despite being inarticulate and seemingly bereft of fucks but he certainly comes across as dumb and his complete absence in this campaign has been as noticeable as the Joker in the latest Batman film. Never mind a speech or an endorsement of his party's candidate, I don't think he's even been invited to sit in the audience for anything.

That's not even to go into the anti-intellectual rhetoric that comes pretty much exclusively from the right.

There have been some good facepalm events for the Democrats of course like Democrat Hank Johnson who had an interesting theory about what overpopulation would do to Guam, (he thought the island might capsize and sink,) which is dumb and deserves to be mocked. But they seem to be far less frequent than the moronic ideas from the right.

I'd definitely be keen to read from anyone who has collected some of the more idiotic crap from either party, especially from Democrats just to even the playing field. But most of the examples to the question of "what idiocy is shown by the Democrat side?" comes down to "well you have to be an idiot to believe in socialism or Keynesian Economics." I'm sorry but that's not the same thing. Believing in evidence-based political or economic theory, whether you agree with them or not, does not equal voicing completely false assertions about basic human biology.

It's a mistake to think that there is an even spread of nuts across the political spectrum. It's the argument that Fox loves to spin out, that they're just the counter balance to the bias on the Left. While this may be true to a certain extent, there is no left media equivalent of Glenn Beck. And there's no left political equivalent of Paul Broun or Todd Akin either, there just isn't. I don't see it.

Feel free to point them out though, I am always keen to learn and laugh at the political funnies.

Ty, I was referring to the base, not the politicians. I honestly don't pay enough attention to national politics to provide you with a list, sorry.

Jaekus wrote:

tbf, I very rarely if ever see a racist/sexist/homophobic/creationist/bigoted leftie. They seem to have the monopoly of those on the right.

They exist on both sides, but yeah, that's more of a right wing thing. Instead, the left has a monopoly on social engineering like pushing for excise taxes, bans on soda, cigarettes, salt, emphasis on pipe dream energy sources etc and whose beliefs are rarely if ever based on sound science. Then there's the people that believe their loans should be forgive, that if we spread the wealth people will be better off. Ideas pushed by the left 'sound' better, kind of, but most of the ideas are stupid and would be ruinous to implement. The left is full of dreamers with stupid ideas that eventually get pushed out into the mainstream and either get laughed at or they fuck us.