Thread: GOP and Democratic National Conventions 2012

Originally Posted by larvidchr

Not commenting on the speech but

why not?

did you listen to it or read the transcript?

Originally Posted by larvidchr

Strange how in some countries a Presidents/ministers spouse suddenly becomes someone who is given a privileged right and platform to voice their opinions

i assure you it's not strange to people who know anything about american political history.

it was eleanor roosevelt's comments at the 1940 convention which can be cited as the first instance of a spouse speaking at a political convention. various other political wives have had small speaking roles at other nominating conventions but it was barbara bush who had the first full fledged speaking role at a convention in '92. the objective of that speech (and those which followed in later years) was to give a personal and intimate portrayal of the man behind the office---and who better to do that than the spouse?

Originally Posted by larvidchr

like in this case, is washing Obamas underwear and dirty socks and minding his children a political qualification endorsed by voters

ok, let's discuss, "this case".

washing underwear and dirty socks, eh?

do you know anything at all about michelle obama's background?
are you aware that she is a graduate of both princeton university and harvard law?
did you know she was an associate at the prestigious law firm, sidley austin and later was a VP at university of chicago hospitals?
are you aware of the work she has done with wounded military vets since she became first lady?

Originally Posted by larvidchr

neither is it Democratically correct.

i haven't the slightest idea of what you're on about here.

please take a moment to enlighten the board as to why having the president's wife speak on the first night of a political convention is not "democratically correct".

Originally Posted by raycarey

Originally Posted by larvidchr

Not commenting on the speech but

why not?

did you listen to it or read the transcript?

Originally Posted by larvidchr

Strange how in some countries a Presidents/ministers spouse suddenly becomes someone who is given a privileged right and platform to voice their opinions

i assure you it's not strange to people who know anything about american political history.

it was eleanor roosevelt's comments at the 1940 convention which can be cited as the first instance of a spouse speaking at a political convention. various other political wives have had small speaking roles at other nominating conventions but it was barbara bush who had the first full fledged speaking role at a convention in '92. the objective of that speech (and those which followed in later years) was to give a personal and intimate portrayal of the man behind the office---and who better to do that than the spouse?

Originally Posted by larvidchr

like in this case, is washing Obamas underwear and dirty socks and minding his children a political qualification endorsed by voters

ok, let's discuss, "this case".

washing underwear and dirty socks, eh?

do you know anything at all about michelle obama's background?
are you aware that she is a graduate of both princeton university and harvard law?
did you know she was an associate at the prestigious law firm, sidley austin and later was a VP at university of chicago hospitals?
are you aware of the work she has done with wounded military vets since she became first lady?

Originally Posted by larvidchr

neither is it Democratically correct.

i haven't the slightest idea of what you're on about here.

please take a moment to enlighten the board as to why having the president's wife speak on the first night of a political convention is not "democratically correct".

None of which would have earned her that place behind the microphones had she not also been washing Obamas underwear.

No one has voted for her, they have voted for her husband, Americans have created the concept "First Lady" out of thin air based only on a marriage certificate, (Possibly they where envious of old cultures and Constitutional Monarchy and tried to create something, from something even more meaningless, in the good old bigger is better American way) she really is fvuck all, and that is a fact you can squirm about all you like, they could have had any random bum up there with equal right or possibly more.

IMO - the Democrat voters and the rest of the nation had the right to hear an accomplished active top politician with actual influence talking about their plans and the future, instead of a glorified housewife waisting precious TV time doing what she do best, cleaning up her husband.

Devoted spouses are the last people you can trust if you want the truth about somebody, same when they are in divorce proceedings, then they will lie too, but it will be much more entertaining.

And this is the problem with the puritan's on both sides over there, the trappings of having a wife is a real world US election requirement, and so is the children and the goddamn Dog, any divorces, abortions, sexual preference, no private time poking willing interns with cigars, and certainly no "blowing steam" off in the office toilet, you can't possibly run a country and have a private life at the same time the list is a mile long and has very little to do with Political ability, and all to do with hypocrisy and bigotry.

Thus you probably miss out on some really brilliant Woman and Guys who cant squeeze through that narrow minded eye of the needle.

The American political history and all the fake tinsel and bravado IS strange seen from the outside!, you are the ones shouting the loudest about Democracy and Freedom, but providing the least of both parts comparable to other western Democratic nations, we are way ahead of you on that score, and that is part of the reason why most people hardly know the names of the European leaders spouses in good correct democratic tradition, since they are nobody and not elected by anybody.

This whole election is a sorry scam of competing to buy a Pres., and sell his message with the shortest conman created garbage ads. appealing to simple gullible minds with the attention-span of no more than 10-30 seconds.

Clint Eastwood's performance was appalling, probably due to old age?, I felt a little embarrassed on his behalf and thought that someone had done him a bad turn this time by asking him to do this, but he is in his own right a world famous actor, instructor, movie maker, business man, and with many years as active in local politics on management level.

Only very few had ever heard about M.Obama before her husbands rise to Political notoriety, and same B.Obama's notoriety is the only reason they have today, but the whole world knew Clint Eastwood "he build that- alone" .

It's no strange coincidence things have been going backwards in the US in the last couple of decades, the old American tenacity, innovation and quality have changed to spin doctor guided play acting and fast food consumer Politics -it's showboating, dirt cheap, lightning fast - but ultimately very unhealthy as it has turned out.

Frightening thing is that the same reality TV like garbage is being exported to our shores and jammed down our throat's with alarming speed, much like baggy pants and hip hop.

Obama was very popular in Europe and still is, just not nearly as much, the last while he has been picked apart in many media story's for having made very little difference, and for having been to distant and vague towards the people/guests and politicians he has to deal with, his team-building is suffering for it, and he has not been able to hold on to the initial optimism and expectations, and nor to inspire confidence in the minds of his foreign counterparts.

All that said I personally do not see any bright shining light on offer from the opposition either IMO.

Obama was very popular in Europe and still is, just not nearly as much, the last while he has been picked apart in many media story's for having made very little difference, and for having been to distant and vague towards the people/guests and politicians he has to deal with, his team-building is suffering for it, and he has not been able to hold on to the initial optimism and expectations, and nor to inspire confidence in the minds of his foreign counterparts.

Obama is a disaster.
He's created five trillion dollars in debt in less than four years. Bush couldn't do that in eight.
He's barely scratched the 9 percent unemployment.
He's played the race card often with very bad consequences.
He's ordered people killed with no questions asked, no defense, no jail.
He's ordered Americans abroad killed.
He's expanded extrajudicial rendition.
He's slighted every head of state who's had the misfortune of meeting him and the First Wookie.
He's fought every attempt by states to protect their borders from illegal aliens.
He's been caught smuggling arms into Mexico to fabricate a crisis, in order to forge legislation.
There are 49 million Americans on food stamps under his watch. Disgraceful.

He's an embarrassment to Americans everywhere. And he's done. Americans, at least, have seen through his bullshit.

Having said all that, I imagine a lot of Europeans might like him because they're not the sort of people who hold self-determination as a proud virtue. They need their Nannies, they need to be cared for. They require suffocating rules and layers of bureaucracy and sixteen different color-coded trash bins.

[QUOTE=Panty Hamster;2207095]

He's created five trillion dollars in debt in less than four years. Bush couldn't do that in eight.

I agree, and shame on him. I'm very disappointed in this.

He's barely scratched the 9 percent unemployment.

Employment and unemployment is not the President's responsibility.

He's played the race card often with very bad consequences.

More than his opposers?

He's ordered people killed with no questions asked, no defense, no jail.
He's ordered Americans abroad killed.

I do not like it, but if they were Muslim then I think it's a good thing.

He's expanded extrajudicial rendition.

I'm not challenging nor disagreeing, but how so? I did not hear about this.

He's slighted every head of state who's had the misfortune of meeting him and the First Wookie.

Wrong. See bold

Also, define the term "slight."

He's fought every attempt by states to protect their borders from illegal aliens.

I agree. F*ck illegals.

There are 49 million Americans on food stamps under his watch. Disgraceful.

Remember, GWB's nickname was the "food stamp President." Obama has a hand in this but so does GWB, and it stinks. (That's why I vote Libertarian.)

Originally Posted by Panty Hamster

Obama was very popular in Europe and still is, just not nearly as much, the last while he has been picked apart in many media story's for having made very little difference, and for having been to distant and vague towards the people/guests and politicians he has to deal with, his team-building is suffering for it, and he has not been able to hold on to the initial optimism and expectations, and nor to inspire confidence in the minds of his foreign counterparts.

Obama is a disaster.
He's created five trillion dollars in debt in less than four years. Bush couldn't do that in eight.
He's barely scratched the 9 percent unemployment.
He's played the race card often with very bad consequences.
He's ordered people killed with no questions asked, no defense, no jail.
He's ordered Americans abroad killed.
He's expanded extrajudicial rendition.
He's slighted every head of state who's had the misfortune of meeting him and the First Wookie.
He's fought every attempt by states to protect their borders from illegal aliens.
He's been caught smuggling arms into Mexico to fabricate a crisis, in order to forge legislation.
There are 49 million Americans on food stamps under his watch. Disgraceful.

He's an embarrassment to Americans everywhere. And he's done. Americans, at least, have seen through his bullshit.

Having said all that, I imagine a lot of Europeans might like him because they're not the sort of people who hold self-determination as a proud virtue. They need their Nannies, they need to be cared for. They require suffocating rules and layers of bureaucracy and sixteen different color-coded trash bins.

Tsk tsk, we have determined we don't want to see anyone not taken care off as best we can, we are living the US marine motto for all of our society and our countrymen, "leave no one behind", unlike you lot where all that patriotism in reality is just empty hollow bravado and really means "every man for himself", with millions without proper health care, on food-stamps and no funds for their retirement, and parents to poor to buy!! their kids a proper education.

Back to Obama -

They liked him first and foremost because he was black, Europeans love the underdog and surprise endings.

Adult Europeans have lived with the education about our own part in the slave trade, then the history told in our schools about the US civil war, KKK, segregation, Martin Luther King, Angela Davis and the Black Panthers, and with the Europeans singing "we shall overcome" around the 1960 campfires, and the constant decade's long racism drone from Blacks in the US that was getting and still is quite boring.

Obamas election was seen from Europe much like the US finally had shed the last bit of that story, he looked young and energetic, and as all politicians said all the right things, - an all happy lovey dovey ending.

There was also pronounced European - US, Bush and war weariness, mounting casualties also in many European coalition countries, supplemented with the mother of economic crisis born over there, making the US quite unpopular with many at the time.

Now the reality check is setting in, they see Obama is also killing people, he also breaks his promises like most Politician scum do, and the pressure from terrorism is as big as ever, the middle east in bigger turmoil than for many many years etc.

His popularity is slowly but markedly falling, but I guess it could only go that way, there was only down from way up there in Nobel peace-price on credit land.

Mrs. Obama gets a lot of people talking.

First Lady Michelle Obama garnered nearly double the tweets-per-minute during her speech than GOP presidential nominee Mitt Romney.

Obama’s speech Tuesday night at the Democratic National Convention in Charlotte peaked at 28,003 tweets per minute while Romney’s peaked at 14,289 TPM, according to Twitter.

Snip

The first lady didn’t just beat Romney; she beat her husband’s 2012 State of the Union address, which peaked at 14,131 TPM.

Good for her: Twitter: Michelle Obama's speech tops Mitt Romney's

EXCERPTS of President Bill Clinton’s Remarks to the Democratic National Convention

“In Tampa the Republican argument against the President's re-election was pretty simple: We left him a total mess, he hasn't finished cleaning it up yet, so fire him and put us back in.

audio President Bill Clinton's full speech

Heh...DNC rams God & Jerusalem back into the Platform and get boos!

DRUDGE REPORT 2012®

This is indeed a repeat of the Bar Scene in Star Wars!

Democrats held a voice vote today to put God and Jerusalem back into their platform. The party’s delegates stripped God and Jerusalem from their platform this year. However, after an uproar from several Jewish and Israeli leaders and out of fear of looking like heathens, Democrats decided to vote to put them back in.

Originally Posted by Panty Hamster

History will hold you, Europeans, responsible, in part

I was talking to bubba from M'suppi just the other day, and he asked me who should I vote for Mr Euro. What happened to pax Americana, American exceptionalism, and manifest destiny. .
You're not so different than the rest of us really (checked Bermuda shorts excepted)- when it all goes right, blame yerselves.. when it all goes wrong, blame someone else.