Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie

Half-baked Republican Presidential Fruitcakes (and fellow confections)

Options
12627293132137

Comments

  • Registered Users Posts: 33,330 ✭✭✭✭Penn


    jank wrote: »
    And nobody mentioned a defeat of that size, in fact many posters mention that a Romney defeat alone should be cause enough to dramaticly change their position, so i guess there is no clear train of thought here other than hypothetical scenarios.
    Galvasean wrote: »
    If Romney got hammered at the polls there would be calls to shake things up and remove the tea Party which is reducing American Republicanism to a laughing stock.

    I agree. A defeat of that size won't happen, and the Republican Party won't change if they lose this election. But sometimes it's better for a party to lose by a majority and take a look at their own party and how they can improve things, instead of being the party of "'nearly-won's"


  • Registered Users Posts: 30,746 ✭✭✭✭Galvasean


    Jank, this is why I don't enjoy talking to you on this forum. You constantly argue against claims nobody made. It's very very tiresome.


  • Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 13,018 ✭✭✭✭jank


    Penn wrote: »
    I agree. A defeat of that size won't happen, and the Republican Party won't change if they lose this election. But sometimes it's better for a party to lose by a majority and take a look at their own party and how they can improve things, instead of being the party of "'nearly-won's"

    Would you hold the democrats the the same account if for example the GOP lost the white house but retook both the house and the senate?


  • Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 13,018 ✭✭✭✭jank


    Galvasean wrote: »
    Jank, this is why I don't enjoy talking to you on this forum. You constantly argue against claims nobody made. It's very very tiresome.

    I am sorry for that, I will try harder in future to communicate in an easier tone.


  • Registered Users Posts: 33,330 ✭✭✭✭Penn


    jank wrote: »
    Would you hold the democrats the the same account if for example the GOP lost the white house but retook both the house and the senate?

    Yes, which I've already stated:
    Penn wrote: »
    If, hypothetically speaking, any party lost an election by a large majority and maybe only got 30% of the vote, they would probably have to take a look at their own party and try to find out what is putting off voters and how they could fix that, without completely abandoning their own principles and beliefs.

    Any party losing any election by a large majority would mean they should re-evaluate the direction they're going in


  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 4,718 ✭✭✭The Mad Hatter


    This is a bizarre video. Romney, in the middle of a speech, is heckled by a climate change campaigner asking what's to be done about climate change in the wake of Sandy. Romney's face takes on the weirdest "wtf do I do" grin while the crowd first boos the heckler, then chants "U!S!A!" at him. And once it's past, Romney, acting as though nothing had happened, carries on with his speech.



  • Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 24,401 Mod ✭✭✭✭robindch


    Michael Bloomberg, formerly of the democratic and republican parties, now independent, endorses Obama's climate change policies (does he have any?)

    http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2012/nov/01/bloomberg-endorses-obama-climate-change


  • Registered Users Posts: 33,330 ✭✭✭✭Penn


    robindch wrote: »
    Michael Bloomberg, formerly of the democratic and republican parties, now independent, endorses Obama's climate change policies (does he have any?)

    I think he acknowledges that it might exist, so that's a start.


  • Registered Users Posts: 1,018 ✭✭✭legspin


    Not exactly presidential stuff but indicative of the head-in-the-sand attitude of the G.O.P.

    http://www.nytimes.com/2012/11/02/business/questions-raised-on-withdrawal-of-congressional-research-services-report-on-tax-rates.html


  • Registered Users Posts: 26,578 ✭✭✭✭Turtwig


    The Simpsons are on Fox right?



  • Advertisement
  • Closed Accounts Posts: 2,442 ✭✭✭Sulla Felix


    Jernal wrote: »
    The Simpsons are on Fox right?

    Yeah, but money talks. Fox tried once or twice to clamp down on them and the voice actors threatened a walkout, Fox caved. Not just over principles of course, I think the pay struggles saw more airtime.


  • Registered Users Posts: 4,718 ✭✭✭The Mad Hatter


    Remember when The Simpsons was funny? :(


  • Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 24,401 Mod ✭✭✭✭robindch


    The beeb dredges up some reporting on previous US elections -- the last one (Charles Wheeler on Dan Quayle) is great:

    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/magazine-20185413


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 1,753 ✭✭✭fitz0


    http://www.gbdioc.org/images/stories/Front_Page/An-Important-Moment-Article-from-Bishop-Ricken-10-24-2012.pdf
    DIOCESE OF GREEN BAY
    P.O. Box 23825 • Green Bay, WI 54305-3825 • 920-272-8194 • FAX 920-435-1330
    OFFICE OF THE BISHOP

    October 24, 2012

    Dear Brothers and Sisters in Christ,

    AN IMPORTANT MOMENT

    It is almost time to vote and to make our choices for president and other political offices both local and national. You have often heard it said that this is a turning point in our country’s history and I could not agree more.

    The Church is not a political organism, but as you hopefully have learned in the US Bishops Faithful Citizenship material (which we have made widely available to you in the parishes, in the Compass and on-line), the Church has the responsibility to speak out regarding moral issues, especially on those issues that impact the “common good” and the “dignity of the human person.”

    I would like to review some of the principles to keep in mind as you approach the voting booth to complete your ballot. The first is the set of non-negotiables. These are areas that are “intrinsically evil” and cannot be
    supported by anyone who is a believer in God or the common good or the dignity of the human person.

    They are:
    1. abortion
    2. euthanasia
    3. embryonic stem cell research
    4. human cloning
    5. homosexual “marriage”

    These are intrinsically evil. “A well-formed Christian conscience does not permit one to vote for a political program that contradicts fundamental contents of faith and morals.” Intrinsically evil actions are those which
    have an evil object. In other words, an act is evil by its very nature and to choose an action of this type puts one in grave moral danger.

    But what does this have to do with the election? Some candidates and one party have even chosen some of these as their party’s or their personal political platform. To vote for someone in favor of these positions means
    that you could be morally “complicit” with these choices which are intrinsically evil. This could put your own soul in jeopardy.

    The other position to keep in mind is the protection of religious liberty. The recent aggressive moves by the government to impose the HHS mandate, especially the move to redefine religion so that religion is confined more and more to the four walls of the Church, is a dangerous precedent. This will certainly hurt the many health care services to the poor given by our Catholic hospitals. Our Catholic hospitals in the Diocese give millions of dollars per year in donated services to the poor. In the new plan, only Catholic people can be treated by Catholic institutions.

    It has never been our mission to be exclusive of those who are not of our faith. This mandate also places Catholic business owners in a very precarious position in that they, too, will have to pay for those medical “services” which violate Catholic teaching. This has never been the American way and now these moves and others by the present government, will significantly alter and marginalize the role of religious institutions in our society.

    These positions are indicators of a broader societal disposition to remove God from the public square and from any relation to society whatever. It is precisely religion and the free exercise thereof which has made this country great in the past.

    Many people in our Diocese are presently without work. Our Catholic Charities is serving more and more people who are unemployed or under employed and can barely keep up with the demands. Work is so critical to the family and to the sense of human dignity. An economy which does the most for the common good is an economy that works and provides people gainful employment for the country’s citizens. A government that works pays its bills and models for citizens what it means to be responsible and contributive.

    Let us pray for the electorate and let’s take action, that we may vote for good and moral leaders for this great country which will only remain great, if she continues to be and to do the good.

    Sincerely yours in Christ,

    The Most Reverend David L. Ricken, DD, JCL

    Bishop of Green Bay

    tl;dr? Vote for Obama and go to hell.

    He ticks all the boxes - abortion, Catholic charity, intrinsic evil, grave moral danger, gay marriage, etc. I quite like how he starts this political letter with 'The Church is not a political organism' before going on to politicize.

    Classic RCC.


  • Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 24,401 Mod ✭✭✭✭robindch


    Mitt deals with a household problem without support:



  • Registered Users Posts: 4,718 ✭✭✭The Mad Hatter


    robindch wrote: »
    Mitt deals with a household problem without support:


    This just in: Romney has Drinking Problem


  • Moderators, Category Moderators, Entertainment Moderators, Science, Health & Environment Moderators, Regional East Moderators Posts: 18,313 CMod ✭✭✭✭The Black Oil


    Was listening to a vox pop on Radio 4 this morning. One woman from New Zealand said part of why she became a US citizen was to vote against Obama and that some of his rhetoric was bordering on dictatorship.

    I suppose, whatever you're into and all that, but you have to wonder about how some people consume information.


  • Registered Users Posts: 4,537 ✭✭✭joseph brand


    robindch wrote: »
    Mitt deals with a household problem without support:

    Another Mitt video from that YouTube channel.



    ". . ha ha you haven't got your make up on yet . . ha ha. . OH you do, good to see you ha ha" :eek:

    This man has a way with the ladies.


  • Moderators Posts: 51,724 ✭✭✭✭Delirium


    Romney staff refusing to let frostbitten children leave PA rally
    This is happening right now at Mitt Romney’s rally in Pennsylvania. Apparently it’s freezing, and Romney’s staff is refusing to let rally-goers leave. People are begging reporters for help.

    Absolutely incredible.

    If you can read this, you're too close!



  • Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 32,865 ✭✭✭✭MagicMarker


    According to Google it's 2°C there, hardly frostbite weather.

    None the less, stupid not to let people leave.


  • Advertisement
  • Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 24,401 Mod ✭✭✭✭robindch


    Meanwhile, here's the latest viral video:



  • Moderators, Music Moderators Posts: 25,868 Mod ✭✭✭✭Doctor DooM


    According to Google it's 2°C there, hardly frostbite weather.

    None the less, stupid not to let people leave.

    Google's weather is not exactly 100% accurate, I've had it tell me it's 12 degrees outside when it's been snowing.

    Regardless, not allowing people to leave is never a good look out, especially considering the "47%" thing hanging over Romney. Stupid poor people, stay til we're done with you!


  • Registered Users Posts: 17,371 ✭✭✭✭Zillah


    Apparently in the case of a tie the house chooses the President and the senate chooses the Vice-President. Which means we could see Romney and Biden in the White House together. Which would be awesome. It's like a sitcom.
    Google's weather is not exactly 100% accurate, I've had it tell me it's 12 degrees outside when it's been snowing.

    Regardless, not allowing people to leave is never a good look out, especially considering the "47%" thing hanging over Romney. Stupid poor people, stay til we're done with you!

    Regardless of whether it is technically freezing or not, 2 degrees centigrade is bloody cold, and with wind chill it could be dangerous, especially for people not engaged in strenuous exercise.


  • Registered Users Posts: 9,788 ✭✭✭MrPudding


    According to Google it's 2°C there, hardly frostbite weather.

    None the less, stupid not to let people leave.
    Chuck in a bit of wind and it could be properly cold, particularly for kids. And bear in mind, this was last night, not sure what the temp was then.

    MrP


  • Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 24,401 Mod ✭✭✭✭robindch


    Zillah wrote: »
    Which means we could see Romney and Biden in the White House together. Which would be awesome. It's like a sitcom.
    Reminds me of Mencken's line on the veepship:
    HL Mencken wrote:
    He is a man who sits in the outer office of the White House hoping to hear the President sneeze.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 31,967 ✭✭✭✭Sarky


    I'm rather enjoying following #romneydeathrally on Twitter at the moment.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 4,940 ✭✭✭Corkfeen


    Sarky wrote: »
    I'm rather enjoying following #romneydeathrally on Twitter at the moment.

    My favourite tweet: Each Romney from each Multiverse is now a battle royale to see who becomes President. So much blood. :D


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 31,967 ✭✭✭✭Sarky


    "I turn to my partner, who has become a sunken-eyed wraith. She pulls the scab that was once my face off and we laugh"

    This may be the greatest hashtag in the history of mankind.


  • Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 24,401 Mod ✭✭✭✭robindch


    Things looking good for Obama:

    http://fivethirtyeight.blogs.nytimes.com/
    http://cs.oberlin.edu/~bbetchar/electors.php

    And, if you're not a US-citizen, vote yourself!

    http://www.votevotevote.net/index.php

    Obama currently out in front by 90% to 10%.


  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 962 ✭✭✭darjeeling




    Campaigning for the nomination last year, Mitt talks off-air to an Iowan radio host about his Mormon faith and gives a brief run-through of the itinerary for the Second Coming.
    The church says that Christ appears on the Mount of Olives and splits the Mount of Olives and appears in Jerusalem. That’s what the church says. And then over a thousand years, the Millennium, that the world is reigned in two places, Jerusalem and Missouri. That’s what the church says.

    The Second Coming, the arrival of Jesus Christ, our church says is in Jerusalem. That's the church doctrine. Cleon Skousen has a book called 'A Thousand Years' - you can talk about ...

    Christ appears — it’s throughout the Bible — Christ appears in Jerusalem, splits the Mount of Olives to stop the war that’s coming in to kill all the Jews, it's... it's ... our church believes that. That’s when the coming in glory in Christ occurs.
    We also believe that over the thousand years that follows, the Millennium, he will reign from two places. That the law will come forward from one place, from Missouri, and the other will be in Jerusalem. All right? That’s ... uh ... but, now, back to abortion ...

    Personally, I find the prophetic end-times bits of the Bible to be pure bonkers. I do hope that in the event of Romney or one of his ilk being elected that the Book of Revelation doesn't become a forward planning document for Middle East policy making.


Advertisement