You want to whore yourself out for Grinner, be my guest. My talents are far too valuable to be wasted like that.
US Presidential Election: Tuesday November 6th, 2012
- Thread starter Team Brian GB
- Start date
- Status
You want to whore yourself out for Grinner, be my guest. My talents are far too valuable to be wasted like that.
I can't see it happen, the nutty evangelicals would probably label Obama the antichrist, and AIPAC have their hands on legislators in both parties and houses. Plus he'd lose financial support from the wealthy Jewish Americans.
I'd love it though, I loathe the smug look on Netayahu's face at times, prick.
I can't really blame Netanyahu since he's seen what forces oppose Israel first hand. It's our fault for not putting our interests first and allowing our policy to be influenced.
Well most Israelis have seen those forces first hand too and still think Netanyahu's crazy to push for an attack on Iran.
It's possible though that he's doing it all just to make the Iranians think an attack's imminent. He needs cabinet support and army support for an attack and at the moment I don't think he has either. Problem is the Iranians know this too, so I can't see his strategy working.
It's possible though that he's doing it all just to make the Iranians think an attack's imminent. He needs cabinet support and army support for an attack and at the moment I don't think he has either. Problem is the Iranians know this too, so I can't see his strategy working.
We fecked up turning our attention to Iraq.
Would the US really care much about Israel if not for a) Jewish money and influence and b) supposed birthplace of the christian messiah?
The mistake about Afghanistan was we decided on Nation Building...just look at the regime we have there.
Seeing our guys just getting taken out a couple or so at a time is not acceptable.
yeah...I will agree Iraq made us take our eyes off...this is really a no win situation.
Jewish money and Jewish votes.
but other than that, Israel is our strongest friend in the region...if not the only one.
We both need each other.
Fortunately the majority of Israelis want peace with the Palestinians. The current PM's party is in the minority as Plech points out.
Does the Romney campaign actually know what the term "context" means? They are one of the most intellectually dishonest lot I've ever seen.
A stable democracy in that region should always be a friend.
It's becoming less of a mutual friendship, and more of a parasitic connection
I think we all knew that the first black president was going to be senselessly slandered by the party of old white men. Though I thought they'd try to be a bit more subtle.
Read: http://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2012/03/obama-explained/308874/
Personally, from a management strategy perspective, you can see a very logically approach -- he was trying to fix the mid to long term issues early on because he could (with control of the congress ie do the difficult stuff first and while he can.)
Et Tu Homer!
This is the key. Being allies doesn't mean doing whatever the hell Bibi or Likud want. The US wears the pants in the relationship, not Israel. Romney would bend over, lube up, and beg for Israel to have its way with him because Adelson gives him millions. It's unthinkable to consider pressuring Israel. Carter and HW Bush both did and they got booted out. Constantly giving them free reign because their lobby is stupidly influential damages the potential influence the US has in the relationship, peace process, and the region.
If the US told Israel to stop expanding settlements or they would lose funding, they might give a second thought to their landgrabs. In the current situation, there is no possible resolution. The status quo suits Israel since it ensures US interest. If the two-state solution happened and the two nations could act in a civilized manner, i.e. not besieging or lobbing rockets at one another, why would the US be overly bothered?
Also, Netanyahu needs to piss off and keep his nose out of the US elections. Everyone knows who he wants to win without him talking about it.
Their getting booted out had nothing to do with them playing hardball with Israel. Carter had a terrible economy and a botched foreign adventure at the end of his term, H.W. had an economy in recession, had pissed off the base by raising taxes, and ran into the most talented politician of his generation.There were always pro-Israel Jewish donors. What's changed since those days is Israel becoming a top 5 issue for 70 million evangelicals, and also Arafat's rejection of the peace treaty, which rightly or wrongly convinced a lot of Americans that the Palestinians weren't interested in peace.
There were always pro-Israel Jewish donors. What's changed since those days is Israel becoming a top 5 issue for 70 million evangelicals, and also Arafat's rejection of the peace treaty, which rightly or wrongly convinced a lot of Americans that the Palestinians weren't interested in peace.
They both had the economy to deal with but their support from Jewish voters and donors dropped significantly from their election to re-election. It's by no means a primary cause, but it doesn't help. There was an article in the Atlantic(I think) talking about the drop in Jewish support both had plus, for HW, the drop in support from Evangelicals.
Clinton was on JS last night. Man I could hear the guy speak for days.
No wonder his son pandered to Evangelicals and Israel so intensely, lesson learned.
"Not a primary cause" is a fecking understatement. Even if Carter had lost the entire Jewish vote (as opposed to getting a clear majority of it), it wouldn't have mattered much. Saying that 'both pressured Israel and both got booted out' certainly makes it sound like a primary cause, as well as like very conspiratorial thinking. Surveys consistently show that US Jews don't generally vote on issues relating to Israel.
The Obama campaign seems to have made that purely for its own base, but still...
Most people vote out of (perceived) economic self-interest.
The Obama campaign seems to have made that purely for its own base, but still...
That's a good 'un
After a speech at the University of Florida, Herman Cain told members of the media that he would have been doing better if he was the nominee, saying that he'd probably have a “substantial lead” on President Barack Obama at this point.
Ouch. When the pizza dude whose tax plan seemed to have come off of one of his company's coupons says your ideas lack depth...
Ouch. When the pizza dude whose tax plan seemed to have come off of one of his company's coupons says your ideas lack depth...
Mitt's about to release "a summary" of his tax rates from 1990-2009. Seems legit.
Herman is awesome.Brilliant. When his lack of transparency has done all the damage it can do, NOW release an edited, redacted summary, sans the full returns to prove what you're saying is true.
On another note, being male, I managed not to take much notice of Romney's comment in the Boca video that the campaign was using Romney's wife Ann "sparingly...so that people don't get tired of her." Or perhaps it's just being a single male that I failed to take notice of the general inadvisability of publicly worrying that people will "get tired of" your wife.
Then again, maybe Mitt knew what he was talking about.
Ann Romney's comment was in response to the interviewer asking her about Peggy Noonan critizicing Romney's campaign.
typical arrogance.
The more you get to know the Romneys the more you can believe Romney's 47% comment was not a 'misspeak'.
Zero real life experience.
typical arrogance.
The more you get to know the Romneys the more you can believe Romney's 47% comment was not a 'misspeak'.
Zero real life experience.
CNN Breaking News @cnnbrk
Mitt Romney paid 14.1 % tax rate on $13.7 million income in 2011, campaign says.
Mitt Romney paid 14.1 % tax rate on $13.7 million income in 2011, campaign says.
Saw this elsewhere
"I'm taking bets that Romney will start using the name Willard in the relaunch of his Presidential Campaign. "
"I'm taking bets that Romney will start using the name Willard in the relaunch of his Presidential Campaign. "
Anyone see Colbert's episode on the 18th of Sept?
That bit about delivering Romney's recorded speech in an 'elegant' manner was tremendous.
That bit about delivering Romney's recorded speech in an 'elegant' manner was tremendous.
What an odd time to release them considering the rut his campaign is already in.
Probably thought he'd get it out the way, reach the nadir now and try build back up over the next 6/7 weeks. He's basically relying on the economy failing or Obama ballsing up big time already. He's just a bad candidate, really.
Ryan got booed today during a speech as well
How the Mitt Romney video killed the American Dream:
http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2012/sep/21/mitt-romney-video-killed-american-dream
- Status