2012 Presidential Election (free for all edition)

[12thMan]

Originally Posted by mlmpetert

You know at first i was going to call Dan Pffeifer a complete idiot but im thinking its not really his fault. No one knows whats going on in this administration. Its got to be painful working working there, regardless of how strongly you feel about Admin's ideology. For God's sake the second cabinet meeting of the year was just held. Wtf does Obama do all day?

Obama Holds First Cabinet Meeting Since January | The Weekly Standard

And come on 12th. I appreciate your summary of what happened but thats not at all what im saying. Do you not find it odd at all the way the the British Embassy phrased the return of the statue? I mean this is such a non-issue in retrospect. So why did the Obama admin or the Brits never clarify. I mean regardless if you think it was an issue or not we all thought it happened. Even Pffeifer, bless his sole, had no idea what was going on.

I can't believe I'm still discussing this retarded issue, which says a lot about me actually.

In terms of Cabinet meetings. Really? The president is in meetings everyday. But if you're really concerned, just like I told HG28, go to whitehouse.gov and POTUS' sked is posted daily. Daily. Yes, it's public information.

The mix-up was in the initial reporting by the British newspaper, not the White House. Had they clarified from the jump that there were two busts instead of one, this conversation wouldn't exist. It's really that simple to me. Why should the executive branch of our government, with all the pressing issues, keep tabs and report to the general public and media the location of Winston Churchill's bust. Do realize how absurd that sounds?

[saden1]

Originally Posted by 12thMan

I can't believe I'm still discussing this retarded issue, which says a lot about me actually.

In terms of Cabinet meetings. Really? The president is in meetings everyday. But if you're really concerned, just like I told HG28, go to whitehouse.gov and POTUS' sked is posted daily. Daily. Yes, it's public information.

The mix-up was in the initial reporting by the British newspaper, not the White House. Had they clarified from the jump that there were two busts instead of one, this conversation wouldn't exist. It's really that simple to me. Why should the executive branch of our government, with all the pressing issues, keep tabs and report to the general public and media the location of Winston Churchill's bust. Do realize how absurd that sounds?

Dude, take it easy maaaaan. It's like this bro, if the information is not available on the websites I frequent it does not exist. Information must be observed to exist...honestly, it is your responsibility to disapprove anything we say not the other way around.


As for the Churchill bust, you can never have too many of his busts in the White House. It's disappointing that we only have one of his busts when we could have had two.

[drew54]

Originally Posted by saden1

it is your responsibility to disapprove anything we say not the other way around.

Romney didn't pay any taxes for 10 years.

Harry Reid: Bain Investor Told Me That Mitt Romney 'Didn't Pay Any Taxes For 10 Years'

[Slingin Sammy 33]

Originally Posted by drew54

Romney didn't pay any taxes for 10 years.

Harry Reid: Bain Investor Told Me That Mitt Romney 'Didn't Pay Any Taxes For 10 Years'

Certainly a credible source Reid has.....

"Tellingly, neither Reid nor his office would reveal who the investor was, making it impossible to verify if the accusation is true. And as his quote makes clear, he's uncertain if the information is accurate. The Romney campaign's press secretary, Andrea Saul, has previously denied rumors that Romney didn't pay "any taxes at all."

[saden1]

Originally Posted by drew54

Romney didn't pay any taxes for 10 years.

Harry Reid: Bain Investor Told Me That Mitt Romney 'Didn't Pay Any Taxes For 10 Years'

LOL...vicious politics at it's best.

The fact that Romney has had a Swiss and Cayman Island bank accounts and 130 plus shell companies is sufficient for me to know his unscrupulousness. If he wants to hide his taxes it's going to be tough.

[Giantone]

Who is fighting for the middle class? President Obama versus Mitt Romney. — Barack Obama


Needs to be seen.....

[mlmpetert]

Originally Posted by 12thMan

I can't believe I'm still discussing this retarded issue, which says a lot about me actually.

In terms of Cabinet meetings. Really? The president is in meetings everyday. But if you're really concerned, just like I told HG28, go to whitehouse.gov and POTUS' sked is posted daily. Daily. Yes, it's public information.

The mix-up was in the initial reporting by the British newspaper, not the White House. Had they clarified from the jump that there were two busts instead of one, this conversation wouldn't exist. It's really that simple to me. Why should the executive branch of our government, with all the pressing issues, keep tabs and report to the general public and media the location of Winston Churchill's bust. Do realize how absurd that sounds?

I completely realize how absurd it is for the White House to spend time with correspondence of tabloid type issues, but isnt that part of the purpose of The White House blog? Or the Attack Watch team or Obama's Truth Team or the White House Twitter account, or maybe even Obama's Twitter account?

So like you said HAD they clarified this at the begaining it would be a non-issue. And HAD Pfeiffer not simply just made something up (that wasnt true) to dispute a claim thats several YEARS old, then neither of us would be wasting out time on this. Unfotunitly no one knows whats going on there.

[Slingin Sammy 33]

Who's going to see this?

2016: Obama's America | Official Movie Site

Looks like Oscar material to me :cool-smil

[saden1]

Originally Posted by Slingin Sammy 33

Who's going to see this?

2016: Obama's America | Official Movie Site

Looks like Oscar material to me :cool-smil

Interesting...CPAC speech.

"I think that if you take...and apply it to the action of the son...these are the guys I call Obama's founding fathers...this isn't just a, kinda hit job on Obama...I'm a college professor and the film is a journey...if the american people really knew who Obama was they would see he is not an ordinary democrat."


Any idea if the movie a comedy or a tragedy?

[mlmpetert]

Originally Posted by saden1

Interesting...CPAC speech.

"I think that if you take...and apply it to the action of the son...these are the guys I call Obama's founding fathers...this isn't just a, kinda hit job on Obama...I'm a college professor and the film is a journey...if the american people really knew who Obama was they would see he is not an ordinary democrat."


Any idea if the movie a comedy or a tragedy?

Perhaps it falls in Shakespear's third category, a history?


I heard an interview about a month or so ago about this movie and it sounded pretty interesting. The director basically stated that conservitive documentries dont exist and that this is one form of media that liberals have used and done so well. He said a lot of his scripters/filmers/editors were all people that had experience with Moore or other liberal movie makers, and that in the process some of them turned conservative on many issues.......

But honestly, I watched the trailer to this thing this morning and it looks like it sucks pretty bad.

[saden1]

Originally Posted by mlmpetert

Perhaps it falls in Shakespear's third category, a history?


I heard an interview about a month or so ago about this movie and it sounded pretty interesting. The director basically stated that conservitive documentries dont exist and that this is one form of media that liberals have used and done so well. He said a lot of his scripters/filmers/editors were all people that had experience with Moore or other liberal movie makers, and that in the process some of them turned conservative on many issues.......

But honestly, I watched the trailer to this thing this morning and it looks like it sucks pretty bad.

A movie based on suppositions doesn't make for a quality movie. It looks like dog shit but if they can get people to go watch it and make some change then it was worth is. In any case, is there any particular liberal movie you would like to compare this to?


As for people turning, well, people don't turn conservative...plus these conservative and liberal labels don't mean much these days because there are so many facets to individuals. African American's by and large consider themselves conservative but they are no conservative in voting sense.

[mlmpetert]

Originally Posted by saden1

A movie based on suppositions doesn't make for a quality movie. It looks like dog shit but if they can get people to go watch it and make some change then it was worth is. In any case, is there any particular liberal movie you would like to compare this to?


As for people turning, well, people don't turn conservative...plus these conservative and liberal labels don't mean much these days because there are so many facets to individuals. African American's by and large consider themselves conservative but they are no conservative in voting sense.

I couldnt agree with you any more on your first 2 sentences.

Honestly i havent really seen any explicitly liberal movie/documentaries. Ive never seen a Moore flick, i never saw Al Gore's polar bear film. Ive saw Lose Change, but i dont know if id classify that as explicitly liberal or a documentary, rather just a conspiracy theory movie. It scared me though how easy it is to put something together thats captivating, persuasive and logical, yet sooooo factually flawed and misleading. Do you have any suggestions for me?

Im not sure what youre trying to say. Like people dont change? Can people not turn liberal either?

I actually put together a long winded response to your post yesterday, but decided not to post it.... too many digressions too many thoughts. In general i was thinking about how polarized it seems our country has become. I completely agree that conservative and liberal, left and right, totally lame and completely whack, no longer fit the population in general. All are regularly being used misleadingly and in different ways to change the traditional connotations.

[12thMan]

Originally Posted by mlmpetert

I completely realize how absurd it is for the White House to spend time with correspondence of tabloid type issues, but isnt that part of the purpose of The White House blog? Or the Attack Watch team or Obama's Truth Team or the White House Twitter account, or maybe even Obama's Twitter account?

So like you said HAD they clarified this at the begaining it would be a non-issue. And HAD Pfeiffer not simply just made something up (that wasnt true) to dispute a claim thats several YEARS old, then neither of us would be wasting out time on this. Unfotunitly no one knows whats going on there.

Pretty remarkable that we've had these many exchanges and still don't eye to eye. The purpose of the White House blog is not to debunk baseless right wing theories as to the location of artwork. The White House has an entire office dedicated to that. So that, you know, the president and his staff can focus on governing.

White House Art | The White House

Curator's Office - White House Museum

[firstdown]

Originally Posted by 12thMan

Pretty remarkable that we've had these many exchanges and still don't eye to eye. The purpose of the White House blog is not to debunk baseless right wing theories as to the location of artwork. The White House has an entire office dedicated to that. So that, you know, the president and his staff can focus on governing.

White House Art | The White House

Curator's Office - White House Museum

I thought the WH blog was to point to jobs Obama created in districts that don't exist.

[Giantone]

Originally Posted by firstdown

I thought the WH blog was to point to jobs Obama created in districts that don't exist.

....that would be Bush.