Perhaps people realized he sounds a lot like a Bond villain?Newt was going to win FL! WTF happened
-
Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.
PoliGAF 2012 Community Thread
- Thread starter AlteredBeast
- Start date
- Status
I think you're referring to Santorum.
Bulbo Urethral Baggins
Banned
Newt was going to win FL! WTF happened
Last night happened. You could see his bloated ego deflate in real-time.
Yea, Newt's more a Bond henchman. Weird name, looks a little odd, really aggressive personality. And apparently gets himself knocked out of the picture before the third act.
Newt WISHES he was a Bond villain. He dreams 'big', and wants to rule the world, but sucks at it. He's the henchman of the villain Bond takes out in the first 10 minutes of the movie, before the titles theme song even starts. He had a surprisingly good run for what he was, but we should have known it wouldn't last.
*disclaimer* I haven't seen any of the more recent Bond films, so I do not know how they changed in structure.
Skiptastic
Member
Blame people who don't auto-subscribe to threads they post in and go to Subscriptions all the time.
He's stuck around too long, though. I think Perry or Cain would fit that role in our political Bond movie analogy a bit better. They have all the characteristics of a proper villain, but they're really just a footnote of the actual story. Then you find out the actor playing them used to be a big name and they're trying to revive their career to help sell their upcoming autobiography.
....I may have gone off on that analogy a little.
mckmas8808
Mckmaster uses MasterCard to buy Slave drives
I have a question. If conservatives believe that government can't create jobs, then why do they keep saying government actions kills jobs?
Jason's Ultimatum
Member
The jokes on you! I didn't have to do a THING!
They're not contradictory beliefs...
maximum360
Member
I expect the post count to drop substantially. It'll be a slow bleed until this place is a ghost town.
AlteredBeast
Fork 'em, Sparky!
I don't think so. As long as we influence people to keep general politics in here and out of the specific news story type discussions, these threads will be nearly as busy as the old ones.
Yeah, I don't even know how they can claim such a thing. There is an abundance of evidence against such a statement. Now if they want to say the government is *less* efficient than the private sector at creating jobs I might buy it. But the claim that government cannot make laws is a complete fabrication of reality.
*got half way out writing a story about a road being built and then someone from the construction crew buying milk with money he got from the job he was contracted to do that was paid via tax dollars, but it got too branchy trying to follow the dollars so gave up*
Government spending puts money into the economy, putting money into the economy makes jobs. This is incontestable, so it is very baffling to me that people actually buy the Republican's rhetoric.
Edit: In some ways the money injected into the economy by the government is very inefficient. Romney's pay as former governor - total waste, he probably just put it in a foreign bank account. Giving food stamps to the family that makes less than 15k a year - very efficient. They went straight out bought cheese which paid a farmer, a company that builds industrial tanks, a cheese factory worker, an employee at the grocer, etc. Money injected at the bottom appears to be objectively better than that injected at the top.
The debate/primary threads are going to siphon off a lot of discussion in this thread. No doubt about it. But it should return to normal once Willard locks it up in March.
But, the plus side is that it may draw some new users in from those threads (or other hot-button topics) that otherwise ignored the monolithic Poligaf thread.
--- /// ---
There an be no question that poor policy or too stringent regulations can 'kill' jobs. Then of course there is the worry of having to support all these jobs (into the future) that have generous pensions/perks attached to them.
But you would have to say that there is a net benefit to society overall if these jobs/work are actually demanded by the public.
But, the plus side is that it may draw some new users in from those threads (or other hot-button topics) that otherwise ignored the monolithic Poligaf thread.
--- /// ---
There an be no question that poor policy or too stringent regulations can 'kill' jobs. Then of course there is the worry of having to support all these jobs (into the future) that have generous pensions/perks attached to them.
But you would have to say that there is a net benefit to society overall if these jobs/work are actually demanded by the public.
Flying_Phoenix
Banned
Well guys guess what? My podcast is back on.
Also I may very well be able to have the show be on my University's radio station.
Does anybody want to be on a show in the next few days? I want to polish up my radio skills.
Post or PM me if you're interested!
Also I may very well be able to have the show be on my University's radio station.
Does anybody want to be on a show in the next few days? I want to polish up my radio skills.
Post or PM me if you're interested!
AlteredBeast
Fork 'em, Sparky!
Flying_Phoenix, with the podcast getting potential radio play, I think you might get more desire for participation. Who knows, maybe one day I will join in.
EDIT: LOL. With a name and tagline like that, I cannot support that. Good luck, though
EDIT: LOL. With a name and tagline like that, I cannot support that. Good luck, though
Well guys guess what? My podcast is back on.
Also I may very well be able to have the show be on my University's radio station.
Does anybody want to be on a show in the next few days? I want to polish up my radio skills.
Post or PM me if you're interested!
Sounds fun actually. Sign me up.
Flying_Phoenix
Banned
What day and time are you available in the course of today through Monday?
You can PM me if you don't want to post it in this thread for obvious reasons.
It laid the groundwork for what? For insurance companies to reap massive profits from the millions of new people that have to sign up? Do you think once those profits come in, we will ever see a 'one payer' system (true universal health care)? it's going to be even pushed even further away. With no real evidence that it will control skyrocketing costs nor improve health outcomes.
Instead we have a reform bill that will create an even more powerful lobbying monster. All funded by you and I (via subsidies that will be paid to poor people).
mckmas8808
Mckmaster uses MasterCard to buy Slave drives
Ron Paul signed off on racist newsletters in the 1990s, associates say
By Jerry Markon and Alice Crites, Friday, January 27, 7:29 AM
Ron Paul, well known as a physician, congressman and libertarian , has also been a businessman who pursued a marketing strategy that included publishing provocative, racially charged newsletters to make money and spread his ideas, according to three people with direct knowledge of Pauls businesses.
The Republican presidential candidate has denied writing inflammatory passages in the pamphlets from the 1990s and said recently that he did not read them at the time or for years afterward. Numerous colleagues said he does not hold racist views.
Presidential candidate Ron Paul challenged fellow debaters to a 25-mile bike ride after moderator Wolf Blitzer asked about his age and health. (Jan. 26)
But people close to Pauls operations said he was deeply involved in the company that produced the newsletters, Ron Paul & Associates, and closely monitored its operations, signing off on articles and speaking to staff members virtually every day.
It was his newsletter, and it was under his name, so he always got to see the final product. . . . He would proof it, said Renae Hathway, a former secretary in Pauls company and a supporter of the Texas congressman.
The newsletters point to a rarely seen and somewhat opaque side of Paul, who has surprised the political community by becoming an important factor in the Republican race. The candidate, who has presented himself as a kindly doctor and political truth-teller, declined in a recent debate to release his tax returns, joking that he would be embarrassed about his income compared with that of his richer GOP rivals.
Yet a review of his enterprises reveals a sharp-eyed businessman who for nearly two decades oversaw the company and a nonprofit foundation, intertwining them with his political career. The newsletters, which were launched in the mid-1980s and bore such names as the Ron Paul Survival Report, were produced by a company Paul dissolved in 2001.
The company shared offices with his campaigns and foundation at various points, according to those familiar with the operation. Public records show Pauls wife and daughter were officers of the newsletter company and foundation; his daughter also served as his campaign treasurer.
Jesse Benton, a presidential campaign spokesman, said that the accounts of Pauls involvement were untrue and that Paul was practicing medicine full time when the offensive material appeared under his name. Paul abhors it, rejects it and has taken responsibility for it as he should have better policed the work being done under his masthead, Benton said. He did not comment on Pauls business strategy.
Mark Elam, a longtime Paul associate whose company printed the newsletters, said Paul was a busy man at the time. He was in demand as a speaker; he was traveling around the country, Elam said in an interview coordinated by Pauls campaign. I just do not believe he was either writing or regularly editing this stuff.
In the past, Paul has taken responsibility for the passages because they were published under his name. But last month, he told CNN that he was unaware at the time of the controversial passages. Ive never read that stuff. Ive never read I came was probably aware of it 10 years after it was written. Paul said.
##################
There's more at the link. I wonder how many Ron Paul supporters will take another look at this situation after this story.
By Jerry Markon and Alice Crites, Friday, January 27, 7:29 AM
Ron Paul, well known as a physician, congressman and libertarian , has also been a businessman who pursued a marketing strategy that included publishing provocative, racially charged newsletters to make money and spread his ideas, according to three people with direct knowledge of Pauls businesses.
The Republican presidential candidate has denied writing inflammatory passages in the pamphlets from the 1990s and said recently that he did not read them at the time or for years afterward. Numerous colleagues said he does not hold racist views.
Presidential candidate Ron Paul challenged fellow debaters to a 25-mile bike ride after moderator Wolf Blitzer asked about his age and health. (Jan. 26)
But people close to Pauls operations said he was deeply involved in the company that produced the newsletters, Ron Paul & Associates, and closely monitored its operations, signing off on articles and speaking to staff members virtually every day.
It was his newsletter, and it was under his name, so he always got to see the final product. . . . He would proof it, said Renae Hathway, a former secretary in Pauls company and a supporter of the Texas congressman.
The newsletters point to a rarely seen and somewhat opaque side of Paul, who has surprised the political community by becoming an important factor in the Republican race. The candidate, who has presented himself as a kindly doctor and political truth-teller, declined in a recent debate to release his tax returns, joking that he would be embarrassed about his income compared with that of his richer GOP rivals.
Yet a review of his enterprises reveals a sharp-eyed businessman who for nearly two decades oversaw the company and a nonprofit foundation, intertwining them with his political career. The newsletters, which were launched in the mid-1980s and bore such names as the Ron Paul Survival Report, were produced by a company Paul dissolved in 2001.
The company shared offices with his campaigns and foundation at various points, according to those familiar with the operation. Public records show Pauls wife and daughter were officers of the newsletter company and foundation; his daughter also served as his campaign treasurer.
Jesse Benton, a presidential campaign spokesman, said that the accounts of Pauls involvement were untrue and that Paul was practicing medicine full time when the offensive material appeared under his name. Paul abhors it, rejects it and has taken responsibility for it as he should have better policed the work being done under his masthead, Benton said. He did not comment on Pauls business strategy.
Mark Elam, a longtime Paul associate whose company printed the newsletters, said Paul was a busy man at the time. He was in demand as a speaker; he was traveling around the country, Elam said in an interview coordinated by Pauls campaign. I just do not believe he was either writing or regularly editing this stuff.
In the past, Paul has taken responsibility for the passages because they were published under his name. But last month, he told CNN that he was unaware at the time of the controversial passages. Ive never read that stuff. Ive never read I came was probably aware of it 10 years after it was written. Paul said.
##################
There's more at the link. I wonder how many Ron Paul supporters will take another look at this situation after this story.
Flying_Phoenix
Banned
EDIT: LOL. With a name and tagline like that, I cannot support that. Good luck, though
The tagline is suppose to be a running joke in which it changes every week or so. Think of it like Bart Simpson on the chalkboard.
The name is the name though.
I just read this a few minutes ago. I think it's clear Paul has lied over and over about his knowledge of this at the time.
Is he racist? who knows who cares
But if he isn't above publishing some bigoted bull shit under his name just to make a few dollars then that is pretty sick in and of itself.
AlteredBeast
Fork 'em, Sparky!
It is what it is. Good luck to you.
The Librarian
Banned
The people whom he's racist against...?
Suikoguy
I whinny my fervor lowly, for his length is not as great as those of the Hylian war stallions
AlteredBeast
Fork 'em, Sparky!
Really sad scenario. Racism and bigotry is some absolutely disgraceful garbage.
mckmas8808
Mckmaster uses MasterCard to buy Slave drives
How not? If government can create regulation that kills jobs (I do believe that this is possible), then why can't government pass a law that create jobs that wouldn't have been created?
Yeah I know that a private company literally hires the person, but if the reason the job was created in the first place was because the federal government wanted something done and funded it, then wouldn't that mean it is a government created job?
Newt's predictably erratic behavior coupled with the ire of party actors. And I suppose Mitt Romney was instrumental. He actually capitalized on Newt's vulnerabilities with effective attacks. The ammunition had been gifted to him. He only needed to assail him. Indeed, he did.Newt was going to win FL! WTF happened
Trojita
Rapid Response Threadmaker
Things we've known for awhile, but a nice and concise list.
http://robertreich.org/post/11329289033
THE SEVEN BIGGEST ECONOMIC LIES
The Presidents Jobs Bill doesnt have a chance in Congress and the Occupiers on Wall Street and elsewhere cant become a national movement for a more equitable society unless more Americans know the truth about the economy.
Heres a short (2 minute 30 second) effort to rebut the seven biggest whoppers now being told by those who want to take America backwards. The major points:
1. Tax cuts for the rich trickle down to everyone else. Baloney. Ronald Reagan and George W. Bush both sliced taxes on the rich and what happened? Most Americans wages (measured by the real median wage) began flattening under Reagan and have dropped since George W. Bush. Trickle-down economics is a cruel joke.
2. Higher taxes on the rich would hurt the economy and slow job growth. False. From the end of World War II until 1981, the richest Americans faced a top marginal tax rate of 70 percent or above. Under Dwight Eisenhower it was 91 percent. Even after all deductions and credits, the top taxes on the very rich were far higher than theyve been since. Yet the economy grew faster during those years than it has since. (Dont believe small businesses would be hurt by a higher marginal tax; fewer than 2 percent of small business owners are in the highest tax bracket.)
3. Shrinking government generates more jobs. Wrong again. It means fewer government workers everyone from teachers, fire fighters, police officers, and social workers at the state and local levels to safety inspectors and military personnel at the federal. And fewer government contractors, who would employ fewer private-sector workers. According to Moodys economist Mark Zandi (a campaign advisor to John McCain), the $61 billion in spending cuts proposed by the House GOP will cost the economy 700,000 jobs this year and next.
4. Cutting the budget deficit now is more important than boosting the economy. Untrue. With so many Americans out of work, budget cuts now will shrink the economy. Theyll increase unemployment and reduce tax revenues. That will worsen the ratio of the debt to the total economy. The first priority must be getting jobs and growth back by boosting the economy. Only then, when jobs and growth are returning vigorously, should we turn to cutting the deficit.
5. Medicare and Medicaid are the major drivers of budget deficits. Wrong. Medicare and Medicaid spending is rising quickly, to be sure. But thats because the nations health-care costs are rising so fast. One of the best ways of slowing these costs is to use Medicare and Medicaids bargaining power over drug companies and hospitals to reduce costs, and to move from a fee-for-service system to a fee-for-healthy outcomes system. And since Medicare has far lower administrative costs than private health insurers, we should make Medicare available to everyone.
6. Social Security is a Ponzi scheme. Dont believe it. Social Security is solvent for the next 26 years. It could be solvent for the next century if we raised the ceiling on income subject to the Social Security payroll tax. That ceiling is now $106,800.
7. Its unfair that lower-income Americans dont pay income tax. Wrong. Theres nothing unfair about it. Lower-income Americans pay out a larger share of their paychecks in payroll taxes, sales taxes, user fees, and tolls than everyone else.
Demagogues through history have known that big lies, repeated often enough, start being believed unless theyre rebutted. These seven economic whoppers are just plain wrong. Make sure you know the truth and spread it on.
http://robertreich.org/post/11329289033
THE SEVEN BIGGEST ECONOMIC LIES
The Presidents Jobs Bill doesnt have a chance in Congress and the Occupiers on Wall Street and elsewhere cant become a national movement for a more equitable society unless more Americans know the truth about the economy.
Heres a short (2 minute 30 second) effort to rebut the seven biggest whoppers now being told by those who want to take America backwards. The major points:
1. Tax cuts for the rich trickle down to everyone else. Baloney. Ronald Reagan and George W. Bush both sliced taxes on the rich and what happened? Most Americans wages (measured by the real median wage) began flattening under Reagan and have dropped since George W. Bush. Trickle-down economics is a cruel joke.
2. Higher taxes on the rich would hurt the economy and slow job growth. False. From the end of World War II until 1981, the richest Americans faced a top marginal tax rate of 70 percent or above. Under Dwight Eisenhower it was 91 percent. Even after all deductions and credits, the top taxes on the very rich were far higher than theyve been since. Yet the economy grew faster during those years than it has since. (Dont believe small businesses would be hurt by a higher marginal tax; fewer than 2 percent of small business owners are in the highest tax bracket.)
3. Shrinking government generates more jobs. Wrong again. It means fewer government workers everyone from teachers, fire fighters, police officers, and social workers at the state and local levels to safety inspectors and military personnel at the federal. And fewer government contractors, who would employ fewer private-sector workers. According to Moodys economist Mark Zandi (a campaign advisor to John McCain), the $61 billion in spending cuts proposed by the House GOP will cost the economy 700,000 jobs this year and next.
4. Cutting the budget deficit now is more important than boosting the economy. Untrue. With so many Americans out of work, budget cuts now will shrink the economy. Theyll increase unemployment and reduce tax revenues. That will worsen the ratio of the debt to the total economy. The first priority must be getting jobs and growth back by boosting the economy. Only then, when jobs and growth are returning vigorously, should we turn to cutting the deficit.
5. Medicare and Medicaid are the major drivers of budget deficits. Wrong. Medicare and Medicaid spending is rising quickly, to be sure. But thats because the nations health-care costs are rising so fast. One of the best ways of slowing these costs is to use Medicare and Medicaids bargaining power over drug companies and hospitals to reduce costs, and to move from a fee-for-service system to a fee-for-healthy outcomes system. And since Medicare has far lower administrative costs than private health insurers, we should make Medicare available to everyone.
6. Social Security is a Ponzi scheme. Dont believe it. Social Security is solvent for the next 26 years. It could be solvent for the next century if we raised the ceiling on income subject to the Social Security payroll tax. That ceiling is now $106,800.
7. Its unfair that lower-income Americans dont pay income tax. Wrong. Theres nothing unfair about it. Lower-income Americans pay out a larger share of their paychecks in payroll taxes, sales taxes, user fees, and tolls than everyone else.
Demagogues through history have known that big lies, repeated often enough, start being believed unless theyre rebutted. These seven economic whoppers are just plain wrong. Make sure you know the truth and spread it on.
If one believes that all government actions create regulations, and all regulations kill jobs, how on earth does that contradict the belief that the government can't create jobs?
I don't disagree with you, but these make are not contradictory beliefs, just wrong ones.
It always amazes me that people are brainwashed into thinking that people like Romney somehow paying another 2 million a year in taxes would somehow hurt the economy. We could use that money to do some actual good like hire additional teachers or a variety of other things.
Bulbo posted this article in the other thread:
http://www.crescentpost.com/2011/12/newspaper-mitt-romney-says-muslims-are-peace-loving-people/
Haha, seriously? You're friends with these people, and one would reasonably think are otherwise decent people (or else why be friends in the first place?), but they all support terrorism? Even 9/11? And you're still friends with them?
http://www.crescentpost.com/2011/12/newspaper-mitt-romney-says-muslims-are-peace-loving-people/
Haha, seriously? You're friends with these people, and one would reasonably think are otherwise decent people (or else why be friends in the first place?), but they all support terrorism? Even 9/11? And you're still friends with them?
elrechazado
Banned
Good on Romney for not pandering to the guy.
Possibly. I would advise them not to, a lot of heart burn over someone that isn't worth it, but it is not for me to decide.
I never understood the in bold concept to begin with. What a naive thought that all Muslims have to do is simply come together as one uniform voice (despite the different sects, countries, cultures, politics, and languages of over a billion people) and simply say "WE DENOUNCE TERRORISM".
That's all. That is all they have to do and then people like this guy will simply be at ease. What an idea.
Black Republican
Member
btw if mitt romney does win nomination, i wonder how gop will spin South Carolina being the king maker in republican primaries or would they ignore romneys loss and call it a fluke? lol
come on now
Newt was going to win FL! WTF happened
come on now
Narpas Sword0
Member
Pointless abstraction
Officerrob
Banned
Bill Maher's show was a trainwreck tonight. Martin Bashir and Bill could never get a word in because former MTV V.J. Kennedy (crazy bitch) and Rep. Dana Rohrabacher wouldn't shut their damn mouths for a second. Kennedy was the absolute worst
Flying_Phoenix
Banned
Officerrob
Banned
Former MTV V.J., current libertarian and "political satirist"
StopMakingSense
Member
She's kinda hot though. Definitely would.
empty vessel
Member
Debt crisis is a misnomer. It's a political crisis.
I'm actually surprised considering he pretty much panders to whatever he can. It'd be nice if he actually did that more often.
- Status
Similar threads
- Locked
- Locked
- Locked
- Locked