Reply With Quote
The crowd liked it.......and I bet you the majority of Americans shook their head sure.
I'm still laughing at "kept us safe". Jeb is pathetic. He's so defensive but knows there's nothing he can do. His family sucks. They're garbage. No one is going to vote for Jeb. I don't see how any human can support him and that life sucking family.
The crowd liked it.......and I bet you the majority of Americans shook their head sure.
Thats because they mostly are real dumb mother ers.
Trump could have placed his index on Jethros nose and said "oh yeahh ? Your bro aint PUSSY "
And hoe ass jeth would have cowered like a pussy- .
Actually it's true. The Middle East is busier killing each other now. Have we had 3000 Americans die in a single day via a terrorist attack?
http://fivethirtyeight.com/live-blog...ential-debate/Nate Silver
11:38 PM Who Spoke The Most?
Donald Trump dominated the debate, and he had the help of the moderators to do it. They asked him more questions than any other candidate (and only one fewer than they asked Huckabee, Kasich, Rubio and Walker combined). Bush was the second-most-frequent speaker, relying on the favor of the moderators and the other candidates’ propensity to attack him (and thus give him the chance to reply). Fiorina pushed her way into the top three with her frequent interruptions.
This analysis excludes the opening statements and the final, lighthearted questions posed to everyone.
Leah Libresco
11:28 PM
Kasich tries to praise Latinos - and ends up talking about tipping the hotel maid
http://www.latimes.com/nation/politics/trailguide/la-na-trailguide-09172015-htmlstory.html?update=84458176
Republican debate on CNN: Is Reagan mystique myth or reality?
In any Republican presidential debate, Ronald Reagan’s name is likely to punctuate several applause lines.
Everyone from Sen. Rand Paul to Donald Trump has quoted – and misquoted – the nation’s 40th president in an effort to share some of his aura. The temptation is understandable. Mr. Reagan is in many ways the ( ball starting) father of the modern Republican Party.
Reagan has become more mythic than real. Candidates carefully choose which bits of the Reagan legacy to cite.
“He is someone that conservatives can easily project their views onto, but, for instance, most conservatives don’t want to go into Reagan’s early life….”
Republicans need a hero and in Reagan they have found one,” Professor Schmidt says. “They just don’t drill down into Reagan raising taxes or giving amnesty to millions of undo ented immigrants.”
“Reagan also decisively moved the party to the right. Prior to Reagan, Republican presidential candidates rarely asked for tax cuts. Now, it’s impossible for someone to get nominated who doesn’t offer a tax cut plan,”
Reagan cut the highest marginal tax rate almost in half, and it has never gone back to pre-Reagan levels. This move “has had profound effects on the increasingly unequal distribution of wealth in America,”
He also is responsible for drastic reductions in social services for the poor and mentally ill that have never returned to pre-Reagan levels,
But “the myth about Ronald Reagan is that he did all of this by himself,” says Hale. The compromises he made with House Speaker Thomas “Tip” O'Neill are often ignored, and today Reagan is held up as an uncompromising conservative who never “cut a deal” to get things done.
“That is absolutely not true,” Hale says.
Reagan’s willingness to talk and deal with Democrats could bring him under severe criticism today, perhaps making him unelectable in a Republican primary,
“Reagan’s team developed a legend of pictures and visions in voters’ heads that exceed actual fights and battles in Sacramento and on Capitol Hill,” (aka Repug fantasies for the base)
Whether it was a GOP insurrection in 1976, or raising taxes in California and battling for health care reform in the late 1960s, “or getting along with that other Irish pol, Tip O'Neill, the Reagan reality and the Reagan political legend were completely different things.”
http://www.csmonitor.com/USA/Politic...yth-or-reality
St Ronnie the Diseased was a useful idiot for the VRWC that was a reaction to the progressive victories of the 1960s and with the famous memo from lawyer Lewis Powell. When the VRWC got their tool into the WH, the 99% got ed and been ed ever since.
Don’t Believe the Carly Fiorina Hype: Here’s Every Major Problem With Her Performance In the GOP Debate
“On day one in the Oval office I will make two phone calls the first to my good friend Bibi Netanyahu to assure him we will stand with the state of Israel. The second to the Supreme leader to tell him that unless and until he opens every nuclear facility to real anytime inspections by our people not his,we the United States of America will make it as difficult as possible to move money around the global financial system. We can do that we don’t need anyone’s cooperation to do it. And every ally and every adversary in this world will know that the United States of America is back in the leadership business which is how we must stand with out allies. As regards Planned Parenthood, anyone who has watched this videotape, I dare Hillary Clinton, Barack Obama to watch these tapes, watch a fully formed fetus on the table, it’s heart beating, its legs kicking while someone says we have to keep it alive to harvest its brain. This is about the character of our nation and if we will not stand up and force President Obama to veto this bill shame on us.”
what she said about the tape is untrue. According to Sarah Kliff at Vox, who has watched the entire set of videos, there is no scene like this. (CNN Fact Check claimed the comment was “true but misleading” because the tape has an unrelated and out of context flash of a scene like this which was edited in after the fact by the videographers. That’s what would normally be called “false” or more precisely “a hoax”.) But it doesn’t matter. The folks in the audience loved it and judging by the Twitter commentary so did conservatives. After all, it may have been the most extreme rhetoric of the entire debate.
In fact, much of what Fiorina says is either untrue or incoherent, which her polished style of rapid-fire answers containing long lists of memorized specifics obscures. She is a master at what we used to call “dazzling them with BS.” She claims to have a well thought out plan for everything from dealing with the Ayatollah (only after conferring with her “good friend” Bibi Netanyahu) — by calling him up and demanding that he allows Americans to inspect his nuclear facilities anytime we choose or we’ll start “moving his money around the financial system” — to enlarging the sixth fleet and putting missile defense into Poland. The first bit of magical thinking is so common among the Republican candidates that it’s not worth commenting upon except to say that the presidency would be a part time job if it was that easy. As for her military “prescriptions,” let’s just say they are vacuous nonsense. Here’s what she said she would do about Russia
“What I would do, immediately, is begin rebuilding the Sixth Fleet, I would begin rebuilding the missile defense program in Poland, I would conduct regular, aggressive military exercises in the Baltic states. I’d probably send a few thousand more troops into Germany. Vladimir Putin would get the message. By the way, the reason it is so critically important that every one of us know General Suleimani’s name is because Russia is in Syria right now, because the head of the Quds force traveled to Russia and talked Vladimir Putin into aligning themselves with Iran and Syria to prop up Bashar al- Assad.”
That sounds very impressive, except, as Ezra Klein pointed out, the nuclear armed Sixth Fleet is gigantic already, the U.S. is already conducting military exercises in the Baltics and we already have 40,000 troops in Germany. Oh, and Vladimir Putin, General Suleimani and Bashar al-Assad will have been dead for decades, if not centuries, by the time a missile shield is installed in Poland.
Her comments on immigration were likewise factually challenged as was her tedious, mind-numbing list of alleged accomplishments as CEO of Hewlett Packard. (She’s been repeatedly fact checked on this and just keeps on saying it anyway.) She didn’t go into it last night, but in previous interviews her comments on climate change were wrong in every way.
And as an illustration of just how fundamentally dishonest she is, even her own personal story is exaggerated. She often says she started out as a secretary and rose to become the first woman CEO of a Fortune 500 company. It’s true that she once did clerical work, but it was in summers during college and for a brief time between dropping out of law school and starting business school. After she got her MBA she joined a management training program at AT& T where she climbed the ladder. It takes nothing away from her accomplishment, which is very impressive, to point out that the image she paints of a plucky gal from the typing pool raising herself up by her bootstraps isn’t exactly how it happened.
Fiorina is worth over $50 million and didn’t bother to pay the debts from her losing 2010 Senate campaign until she decided to run for president. (One of her former aides said “I’d rather go to Iraq than work for Carly Fiorina again.”)
So considering her very loose relationship with the truth, her failed record as a businesswoman which left thousands of people’s lives in ruins and her cavalier at ude about paying her debts, it’s awfully ironic that the lines she delivers with the most righteous passion are harsh criticisms of Hillary Clinton’s honesty and trustworthiness.
That’s something else she has in common with Trump — chutzpah.
http://www.alternet.org/election-201...ter1042591&t=8
Sure sounds like Fiorina wowed, lied to, conned the dupes who put her in charge of H-P, the way she's doing the same with the Repugs, conservatives.
Fantasies and Fictions at G.O.P. Debate
I would argue that all of the G.O.P. candidates are calling for policies that would be deeply destructive at home, abroad, or both. But even if you like the broad thrust of modern Republican policies, it should worry you that the men and woman on that stage are clearly living in a world of fantasies and fictions. And some seem willing to advance their ambitions with outright lies.
Let’s start at the shallow end, with the fantasy economics of the establishment candidates.
You’re probably tired of hearing this, but modern G.O.P. economic discourse is completely dominated by an economic doctrine — the sovereign importance of low taxes on the rich — that has failed completely and utterly in practice over the past generation.
Yet the hold of this failed dogma on Republican politics is stronger than ever, with no skeptics allowed. On Wednesday Jeb Bush claimed, once again, that his voodoo economics would double America’s growth rate, while Marco Rubio insisted that a tax on carbon emissions would “destroy the economy.”
the discussion of foreign policy was practically demented. Almost all the candidates seem to believe that American military strength can shock-and-awe other countries into doing what we want without any need for negotiations, and that we shouldn’t even talk with foreign leaders we don’t like.
the only candidate who seemed remotely sensible on national security issues was Rand Paul, which is almost as disturbing as the spectacle of Mr. Trump being the only voice of economic reason.
some of the candidates went beyond expounding bad analysis and peddling bad history to making outright false assertions, and probably doing so knowingly, which turns those false assertions into what are technically known as “lies.”
For example, Chris Christie asserted, as he did in the first G.O.P. debate, that he was named U.S. attorney the day before 9/11. It’s still not true: His selection for the position wasn’t even announced until December.
Mr. Christie’s mendacity pales, however, in comparison to that of Carly Fiorina, who was widely hailed as the “winner” of the debate.
Some of Mrs. Fiorina’s fibs involved repeating thoroughly debunked claims about her business record. No, she didn’t preside over huge revenue growth. She made Hewlett-Packard bigger by acquiring other companies, mainly Compaq, and that acquisition was a financial disaster. Oh, and if her life is a story of going from “secretary to C.E.O.,” mine is one of going from mailman to columnist and economist. Sorry, working menial jobs while you’re in school doesn’t make your life a Horatio Alger story.
But the truly awesome moment came when she asserted that the videos being used to attack Planned Parenthood show “a fully formed fetus on the table, its heart beating, its legs kicking while someone says we have to keep it alive to harvest its brain.” No, they don’t. Anti-abortion activists have claimed that such things happen, but have produced no evidence, just assertions mingled with stock footage of fetuses.
So is Mrs. Fiorina so deep inside the bubble that she can’t tell the difference between facts and agitprop? Or is she deliberately spreading a lie? And most important, does it matter?
http://mobile.nytimes.com/2015/09/18...bate.html?_r=1
#boutons-copypaste-athon
Reagan was the greatest president since FDR. Dude ended the Cold War.
Oh hey there's a plane here. Oh well
Darrin, just another content-free poster
You Lie! Russia collapsed internally, not from anything St Ronnie The Diseased did. you rightwingnuts live in a fantasy world of bull myths, propaganda, lies.
Walker Bummed He Was Unable to Show He Memorized Three Branches of Government
DES MOINES —Assessing his performance in the aftermath of the second Republican Presidential debate, Wisconsin Governor Scott Walker said he was “saddened” that he never got a chance to show that he had memorized the three branches of the federal government.
“If you do all of that homework and nobody even knows that you did it, what’s the whole point of doing it in the first place?” Walker, who was campaigning in Iowa, said. “I’d be lying if I said it didn’t suck.”
Walker said he had memorized the three branches in the hopes of dazzling the audience with his knowledge of the inner workings of the federal government, but “there just didn’t seem to be a good time to get it all in.”
“If Jake Tapper had asked something about the size of the federal government, for example,” Walker said, “then I would have been like, ‘It’s three branches big, Jake. Those branches are: executive, being the President; legislative, being Congress; and judicial, being courts.’”
“I would’ve nailed it,” he added.
Walker acknowledged that he might get another chance to talk about the three branches of government at the next Republican debate, in October, but said that he would probably have to learn them all over again by then.
http://www.newyorker.com/humor/borow...NzYxOTg0MTg1S0
That's not funny enough to be satire and it's too ridiculous to be true. What is it?Walker Bummed He Was Unable to Show He Memorized Three Branches of Government
DES MOINES —Assessing his performance in the aftermath of the second Republican Presidential debate, Wisconsin Governor Scott Walker said he was “saddened” that he never got a chance to show that he had memorized the three branches of the federal government.
“If you do all of that homework and nobody even knows that you did it, what’s the whole point of doing it in the first place?” Walker, who was campaigning in Iowa, said. “I’d be lying if I said it didn’t suck.”
Walker said he had memorized the three branches in the hopes of dazzling the audience with his knowledge of the inner workings of the federal government, but “there just didn’t seem to be a good time to get it all in.”
“If Jake Tapper had asked something about the size of the federal government, for example,” Walker said, “then I would have been like, ‘It’s three branches big, Jake. Those branches are: executive, being the President; legislative, being Congress; and judicial, being courts.’”
“I would’ve nailed it,” he added.
Walker acknowledged that he might get another chance to talk about the three branches of government at the next Republican debate, in October, but said that he would probably have to learn them all over again by then.
http://www.newyorker.com/humor/borow...NzYxOTg0MTg1S0
Which all went on the government credit card. "Conservatives"
You Lie. Russia went totally bankrupt invading Afghanistan which was then followed by the collapse of oil prices in the 80s. Exporting oil and gas was the only source of hard currency (dollars) since the ruble was not tradeable. Russia simply didn't have the oil/gas dollars to support itself, its losing war in Afghanistan, and its empire.
The Repug myth is that St Ronnie's huge buildup caused the collapse, but that's a lie, like everything else the Repugs spew about St Ronnie, their bogus hero.
St Ronnie also corrupted the CIA/NSA to LIE about, vastly overstate Russia's military/industrial strength to scare people into accepting St Ronnie's buildup (aka, wealth transfer from taxpayers to the MIC). CIA/NSA up to that point didn't "fix up" the intelligence to fit policy, only provided raw data for the politicians to make policy. dubya and hed continued the Repug corruption of NSA/CIA to fixup intel about Iraq.
It's a permanent fixture in the library.
Got it. Still weird to have it behind them
http://www.theatlantic.com/politics/...tm_source=SFFB
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
