American Politics

[Karl Fletcher]

Does anyone else take an interest in this?

 

I find it quite interesting.

 

This chap, Mitt Romney, running for President seems like a fucking mentalist.

 

If he gets into the Oval Office :popcorn:

 

We have a few USA based Dandies on here, what's your take on things?

 

[stand_free]

Does anyone else take an interest in this?

 

I find it quite interesting.

 

This chap, Mitt Romney, running for President seems like a fucking mentalist.

 

If he gets into the Oval Office :popcorn:

 

We have a few USA based Dandies on here, what's your their take on things?

 

 

I tried reading up on it and got confused by all the Primaries malarchy.

 

Romney seems like a bit of a cheb though. I know that much.

[Karl Fletcher]

He's Mormon

[Ando]

They're all fucking mental. Here's Clint Eastwood onstage at a Republican Convention criticising an invisible Obama

 

http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/video/2012/aug/31/clint-eastwood-obama-gop-convention-video

[Big Man]

They're all fucking mental. Here's Clint Eastwood onstage at a Republican Convention criticising an invisible Obama

 

http://www.guardian....onvention-video

 

Fuck sake.

 

''I am not doddery, doddery I am.....''

 

 

 

All american politicians are equally fucking mental. I've yet to come across a sane and rational one. Misguided devotion to religion seems to be the central flaw amongst them all.

 

Obama is the lesser of the two evils, but only slightly. I hope he wins.

[Jonty]

 

 

All american politicians are equally fucking mental. I've yet to come across a sane and rational one. Misguided devotion to religion seems to be the central flaw amongst them all.

 

 

Is Romney really any worse than the leader of the opposition in this Countrty, Ed F4ckin Milliband? For all his faults, which I'm sure are many (Mormonism being the obvious one), least Romney has had a career away from politics.

 

Cameron / Osbourne / Miliband etc etc canna really say that can they?

[robbiejmc]

It's hard to tell whether someone will make a good president. Probably the nicest guy to take office, Jimmy Carter was an absolutely awful president, whereas Nixon who was by all acounts a complete bellend, actually proved to be a very able president. Obama has not done too much of note but I think he'll still win out as he has a fantastic campaign team. It's a shame as I think Romney could cause some controversy if he won, he seems to piss people off quite well.

[Big Man]

Is Romney really any worse than the leader of the opposition in this Countrty, Ed F4ckin Milliband? For all his faults, which I'm sure are many (Mormonism being the obvious one), least Romney has had a career away from politics.

 

Cameron / Osbourne / Miliband etc etc canna really say that can they?

 

I hold champagne socialists and multi-millionaires who come into politics to consolidate their power in equal disdain. They are two cheeks of the same arse, none of them have clean hands. To try and elevate one above the other is to demonstrate alarming ignorance.

 

Modern America is a cesspool of humanity and I really don't know what the answer is.

 

In the long term I doubt it will matter who wins Obama V Romney.

[Jonty]

I hold champagne socialists and multi-millionaires who come into politics to consolidate their power in equal disdain. They are two cheeks of the same arse, none of them have clean hands. To try and elevate one above the other is to demonstrate alarming ignorance.

 

Modern America is a cesspool of humanity and I really don't know what the answer is.

 

In the long term I doubt it will matter who wins Obama V Romney.

 

Why do you say that? Is "modern" America any worse than we are over here? Or "modern" China? Or "modern" Japan? Cesspool of humanity - jesus, nice general statement to write off 400 miilion odd people.

 

You get c4nts everywhere, distinguishing between nationalities is meaningless unless you think that it is a persons nationality that drives the problem, which I dont.

 

And of course it matters who wins - there are huge differences between Obama's and Romney's programs. Infact at least in America they have a clear choice in their election - over here our choice is "two cheeks of the same arse" as you say.

[The Boofon]

Ann Romney is 63 years old and she's a fucking honey GILF. :spunk:

 

 

[Jonty]

Tell me you're not being serious? Nobody can be this thick?

 

Hmmm given they have totally different policies / ideas RE Taxation / Management of the Deficit / Gay Marriage / Healthcare / Imigration / Foreign Policy / I'm not sure what you mean?

 

Or are you just venting again, trying to prove to everybody how clever you are?

[Jonty]

I take it back. It is possible to be this stupid.

 

You do understand how the election races are funded and by whom? It is MORE staged than the UK. Obama enforces Bush's agenda.

 

Yup of course. Lets all waste billions of dollars campaigning when infact we've decided who's going to win all along. Bush and Obama - two cheeks of the same arse, haha.

 

How do you explain the fact that the election in 2000 was decided by a few hundred voters in Florida, that part of the Bush masterplan as well?

 

Grow up.

[Jonty]

Bush didn't win in 2000. The votes you refer to in Florida were against Bush and were not counted.

 

40. Ronald Reagan

41. George H. W. Bush

42. William J. Clinton

43. George W. Bush

44. Barack Obama

 

Deluded.

[Jonty]

He didn't win. You believe everything that you read or are told, displaying zero critical thinking of your own, ever.

 

He did win.

 

 

Is you conservative UK-supporting, establishment-licking outlook your own or did mummy and daddy give it to you?

 

Missed this bit from earlier in this very thread did we; -

 

 

Cameron / Osbourne / Miliband etc etc canna really say that can they?

 

I think my opinion of the political class in this country is more than clear dont you?

[Jonty]

The fact he got sworn in is indisputable, surely. You think I'm arguing a fact?

 

If you read a wider selection of commentary beyond what is offered by Murdoch, you might be aware of the vote corruption that got Bush to the White House.

 

So did Obama commit electoral fraud too? And if it's possible then why didn't the same forces that delivered Bush to the White House do the same thing with John McCain?

 

 

I have no idea what you're saying. I just find your anti-independence, non-questioning, establishment-acceptance all the time ridiculous.

 

And I find your belief in conpiracy theories and hidden agenda's pretty juvenile and boring.

[Jonty]

 

 

 

The label "conspiracy theory" is a lazy label that people like you put upon anyone who dares to comment on the facts as are known in the public domain and who dares to challenge the Rupert Murdoch-fed world view.

 

Most lazy of all however, is not reading for yourself the contrary view and the fact you either haven't read about the gross injustice that occurred in Jeb's ward and county - or have read it but dismissed it as crank theory - and how it affected the total Florida votes and therefore the whole election, indicates to me that you don't want to explore beyond the establishment view.

 

This happens all the time with you. It's like Iran is next, Hesbollah are bad, Iraq did have WMD's and Afghanastan were hiding the cookie monster who was executed by the Marines, invisibly, and who's body was dumped at sea. Vietnam was all about the fight against communism I suppose too? Open your eyes by opening your brain. Stop jumping to establishment-supporting views without reading a wider selection of commentators. Your entrenched views, consistent as you are, are consistent with that of a Murdoch-reading thick cunt.

 

 

Shades of grey.

 

Stick to listening to George Galloway chum, you'll not have any challenges to your entrenched views from him.

[Jonty]

Good example. What did you think of his appearance before the Senate?

 

I thought the Americans were f4ckin stupid to give him a stage.

[Jonty]

Did your prejudice towards the man prevent you from evaluating what he said, let alone forming an opinion of the proceedings?

 

Nope. I'm sure Galloway says alot of things I agree with, it just happens most the stuff he says that get publicised (praising Saddam, If she's sleeping its not rape, Would you like me to be the cat?) that I dont agree with. Shades of grey as I said.

 

Though dont you understand that having Galloway before the Senate in the first place is a first rate example of the strength of American democracy. If politics in America really is beholden to Murdoch and Big Business then why give somebody like Galloway the opportunity to defend himself in such a public setting?

 

Where are the Chinese George Galloways? Or the Russian? Banged up in jail probably. Just look at Mikhail Khodorkovsky.

[Big Man]

Why do you say that? Is "modern" America any worse than we are over here? Or "modern" China? Or "modern" Japan? Cesspool of humanity - jesus, nice general statement to write off 400 miilion odd people.

 

You get c4nts everywhere, distinguishing between nationalities is meaningless unless you think that it is a persons nationality that drives the problem, which I dont.

 

And of course it matters who wins - there are huge differences between Obama's and Romney's programs. Infact at least in America they have a clear choice in their election - over here our choice is "two cheeks of the same arse" as you say.

 

 

Modern America is a cesspit of humanity because the political, legal and financial institutions which underpin the country have been corrupted to a perverse extent and are now largely subject to the control of private entities. These private entities include News Corporation, Goldman Sachs, ExxonMobil and Halliburton to name but a few.

 

Republican/Democrat, 1/0, X/Y, Red/Black, Left/Right it doesn't really matter what you call them. It is an example of a false ideological divide. Any element of choice in the future direction of the country is entirely illusory. It's nothing new of course, it is a tactic which is age old (even Cicero kent about it). The extreme left and the extreme right will dance around in circles together, ''arguing'' and ''debating'' - some of it genuine, some of it engineered. In the meantime the middle ground will become the status quo. No progress is made. Except where the interests of private individuals dictate it so.

 

The top tier politicians on either side have far-reaching connections to private industry and are free to do their bidding, in-turn, one after the other. The rich will get richer the poor will get poorer. The human rights of the masses (patriot act, military commission act) and enemies (Guantanimo, illegal rendition) will be progressively subjugated. It's like a grotesque human version of a Newton-Raphson iteration but in reverse.

[Foster14]

Infact at least in America they have a clear choice in their election - over here our choice is "two cheeks of the same arse" as you say.

 

One are where the US has superiority over the UK is that it has two elected houses and a separately elected leader.

 

It certainly doesn't have a clear choice in their election. Both candidates are slightly right of centre, moving away from that means you are instantly fucked nowadays.

[Big Man]

Fuck knows what this last bit means but excellent post...

 

I think.

 

 

I just meant things get progressively worse over time.

[Ke1t]

Does anyone else take an interest in this?

 

I find it quite interesting.

 

This chap, Mitt Romney, running for President seems like a fucking mentalist.

 

If he gets into the Oval Office :popcorn:

 

We have a few USA based Dandies on here, what's your take on things?

 

 

While my own politics run the gamut from far left to the odd right-wingish opinion, I've come to the realisation that the 'right wing', I'm specifically talking about the Republican Party, in the United States is largely the domain of idiots, psychotics, religious fundamentalists, sociopaths, racists, and arseholes.

 

There's really no 'left wing' in the United States, certainly not as Europeans would recognise a Left Wing.

 

I'm not saying the Democrats don't have idiots, psychotics, religious fundamentalists, sociopaths, racists, and arsehole in their ranks, but from what I have observed in my time here, the Republican idiots, psychotics, religious fundamentalists, sociopaths, racists, and arseholes outnumber the Democratic idiots, psychotics, religious fundamentalists, sociopaths, racists, and arseholes. by a factor of 10.

 

Now, given this is the base to which Republican candidates must appeal for votes, it's understandable that (to a European), the Republican candidate is going to come across as borderline lunatic... and not necessarily on the sane side of that border.

 

They really HAVE to say ridiculous things in order to make themselves electable to their idiot, psychotic, religious fundamentalist, sociopaths, racist, arsehole voting bloc. Things, which to a rational person, just seem like the ramblings of a madman, or woman... let's not forget the women.

 

Let's not forget shrill, maniacal cunts like Ann Coulter, one of America's most successful authors... successful because she writes hateful, poisonous shit about Democrats, which is meant purely to confirm the far right's prejudices. Pandering to prejudice is the easy way to get sales and publicity, and she does have a talent for rabble rousing... just look at the titles of her books.

 

 

If you were to write a book called "Democrats murder puppies, orphans, and your Dear Old Granny: The Truth Behind Those Fucking Communist Demoncrat Pigs" you'd make a million bucks in sales overnight. Coulter figured that out, as have a few fat, entitled old white guys...

 

Anyway, Mittens Romney, he's probably mental, I'm sure he is, but he's pandering to a voting base which makes him seem like Mr Sane of 1 Sanity Crescent, Saneville, The United States of Sanity.

[Jonty]

While my own politics run the gamut from far left to the odd right-wingish opinion, I've come to the realisation that the 'right wing', I'm specifically talking about the Republican Party, in the United States is largely the domain of idiots, psychotics, religious fundamentalists, sociopaths, racists, and arseholes.

 

There's really no 'left wing' in the United States, certainly not as Europeans would recognise a Left Wing.

 

I'm not saying the Democrats don't have idiots, psychotics, religious fundamentalists, sociopaths, racists, and arsehole in their ranks, but from what I have observed in my time here, the Republican idiots, psychotics, religious fundamentalists, sociopaths, racists, and arseholes outnumber the Democratic idiots, psychotics, religious fundamentalists, sociopaths, racists, and arseholes. by a factor of 10.

 

Now, given this is the base to which Republican candidates must appeal for votes, it's understandable that (to a European), the Republican candidate is going to come across as borderline lunatic... and not necessarily on the sane side of that border.

 

They really HAVE to say ridiculous things in order to make themselves electable to their idiot, psychotic, religious fundamentalist, sociopaths, racist, arsehole voting bloc. Things, which to a rational person, just seem like the ramblings of a madman, or woman... let's not forget the women.

 

Let's not forget shrill, maniacal cunts like Ann Coulter, one of America's most successful authors... successful because she writes hateful, poisonous shit about Democrats, which is meant purely to confirm the far right's prejudices. Pandering to prejudice is the easy way to get sales and publicity, and she does have a talent for rabble rousing... just look at the titles of her books.

 

 

 

If you were to write a book called "Democrats murder puppies, orphans, and your Dear Old Granny: The Truth Behind Those Fucking Communist Demoncrat Pigs" you'd make a million bucks in sales overnight. Coulter figured that out, as have a few fat, entitled old white guys...

 

Anyway, Mittens Romney, he's probably mental, I'm sure he is, but he's pandering to a voting base which makes him seem like Mr Sane of 1 Sanity Crescent, Saneville, The United States of Sanity.

 

 

So is there a difference between the Democrats and the Republicans, even after understanding that they are both what people in the UK would term, right wing.

[Ke1t]

So is there a difference between the Democrats and the Republicans, even after understanding that they are both what people in the UK would term, right wing.

 

To simplify, because I've got to go out...

 

On an economic level, I think there's very little difference between the parties.

 

On a social and intellectual level, I think there's a significant difference.

 

I'll give you a link to a board that I've never used, but have checked out two or three times because I'm familiar with the posters who use it. Most of them are right wing, bordering on the extremism that haunts the right wing, a few token centrists post there.

 

Just as a bit of a social experiment, try posting something praising Obama, or any kind of positive 'Leftist' message.

 

Just to see the kind of response you get.

 

As I say, I've never used this board, but it is related to a board on which I posted for some time...

 

But if you try to get involved in a debate there you'll get a pretty good feel for the mentality of the American Right Wing.

 

Message Board

[muttondressedaslamb]

Anyone declaring themselves as a US Republican might as well say that they are insane.

 

Bush, McCain, Palin and now Romney are so out there that the fact that anyone voted for them ever, is proof enough of national madness.

 

The common denominators include zealous theological devotion to the state of Israel although it is hard to believe that this is just a party line rather than personal belief.

 

Democrats have at least attracted the more humane of Americans over the years, relatively speaking of course.

 

That the CIA killed JFK (allegedly) was suggestion enough that the deepest of corridors of US power has always been Republican.

 

It's also the party of the Corporatocracy, Enron being their most sterling example of what can go wrong when they are unaccountable to anyone.

 

And lets not forget good old Paul Ryan acting on insider info selling shares in Citigroup and Wachovia and buying up shares in the more stable Goldman Sachs. Not that I am saying such an act is of the preserve of the Republicans.

[Jonty]

Anyone declaring themselves as a US Republican might as well say that they are insane.

 

Bush, McCain, Palin and now Romney are so out there that the fact that anyone voted for them ever, is proof enough of national madness.

 

The common denominators include zealous theological devotion although it is hard to believe that this is just a party line rather than personal belief.

 

Democrats have at least attracted the more humane of Americans over the years, relatively speaking of course.

 

That the CIA killed JFK (allegedly) was suggestion enough that the deepest of corridors of US powe

r has always been Republican.

 

It's also the party of the Corporatocracy, Enron being their most sterling example of what can go wrong when they are unaccountable to anyone.

 

If this was true then Enron would never have been allowed to fail. Surely Enrons failure is a prime example of a runaway corporations eventually being brought to heel by rules of Corporate governance (Which did indeed fail in this instance, hence the Sarbox rules) and proving big

corporations are indeed accountable.

 

Jeff Skilling, bush's former buddy, will be rotting in prison the rest of his days.

[Jonty]

I salute your indefatigability. That anyone can see Enron as a positive affirmation of the system is really quite remarkable.

 

Everyone close to it knew what was going on. It sank Arthur Andersen, worldwide. They thought they were invincible but the drain on the federal bank was getting too much, so out of control it was.

 

Skilling had to be made the scapegoat but what about the bigger criminals, the war criminals like Rumsfeld?

 

So is Enrons failure an example that Corporations in the US get away with anything? If so Why did they fail then?

 

Don't muddy the water with spurious references to Rumsfeld or war.

[Jocky Balboa]

The 2012 US election is effectively Goldman Sachs vs. Goldman Sachs.

 

With the exception of Ron Paul, I don't trust any of the candidates on either party. It is telling that Ron Paul, a life-long Libertarian, ran on a Republican ticket, such is the seemingly unbreakable duopoly of the 2 main parties. While I don't agree with all he stands for (not by a LONG shot) he was by far the best candidate.

 

As a side note, while I'm no fan of elaborate conspiracy theories, isn't it strange how the mainstream media can dig up endless dirt and seemingly personal info on just about anyone, but have been unable to locate a single solid fact on General Obama's childhood, teenage years, college years, old friends etc.? I think those who dispute the birthplace (and thus eligibility) of this AIPAC stooge are actually onto something.

[Monkey]

Good addition mdal, but I don't see Israel as anything to do with religion. I see Obama as being equally unjust towards the Palestinian issue but then again, considering who funded his campaign and given the predictions from those qualified to forecast, this is no surprise.

As an aside in this discussion and related to the "Jewish" vote I read an interesting opinion piece in the LA Times a couple of weeks back.

 

Here

 

And an equally interesting reply Here. ( The funding observation that you touch on is raised in the 2nd article and is telling in relation to Democratic policy)

[Jonty]

Was Enron even the biggest drain on the public purse? AIG and the banks on Wall Street etc. are examples of instutionalised theft.

 

Enron, aided and abetted by one of the establishment accountancy practices, one of the founding big four and a component of the big six, STOLE money.

 

You think it was a "runaway" private company. Who was paying the staff wages and the accountancy fees and every other pig who had their noses in the trough and their back pockets wide open? Paid for by former trading profits? You said yourself it was Dubya's buddy. Only the feeble-minded, the insane, the gullible and the brain-washed could possibly consider that Wall Street and Washington did not know what was going on, and given the scale, for many months and years before it all caved in.

 

The CLO's that led to the "global ecomonic crisis" were known about for years before it crashed, at central government level and right the way to the top. You think madman Brown, a former chancellor did NOT know? Northern Rock was the first indication, fully four, possibly five (I think) years before the pass the parcel stopped. Everyone knew it had to end sometime but not before many billions were raped. Fred the Shred was at it at RBS. EVERY cunt was at it.

 

Go away jonnybag. I already said that we can't find defer

 

debate for specific reasons given. Your dice are loaded. Your eyes are shut.

 

 

Blah blah, we'll agree to disagree then, I don't have time for your pisch just now.

Must pick u up on "founding member of the big four" tho u spazy.

The big four are PwC, KPMG, Deloitte and E&Y. Anderson were part of what was known as 'the big 5'.

 

Hav a nice evening.