jerseyhoya wrote:

The Seamus story was discussed again Monday when Ann Romney told Diane Sawyer that “the dog loved” traveling that way. “He would see that crate and, you know, he would, like, go crazy because he was going with us on vacation. It was to me a kinder thing to bring him along than to leave him in the kennel for two weeks.”

Certainly kinder than eating him.

ABC, ftw

Hilary Rosen's foot in mouth comment neutralizing the annoying War on Women thing. Now Obama, confirmed dog eater, probably going a long way toward having Gail Collins shut up about the stupid dog on a car roof 29 years ago story. Annoying general election stories dying fast!

that annoying war on women thing where legislatures across the country pass anti-women bills and guys like scott walker and bob mcdonnell sign 'em. silly!


anyway, eating something is certainly more humane than torturing them.

thephan wrote:Does Obama just hold up a graph showing job growth since he has been in office, climbing from a depth of the previous administration, to turn the argument into 'well, I would have done better.' that is a stupid counter if there ever was one, especially if you were not even in a position to do anything, much less the previous candidate. Are the American people so stupid to ignore the depth of the financial chrisis and belive something so thinly covering a work of fiction? Well, probably most are now that I think about it.

I'd find a white blue collar guy from a swing state (say, Bill the Electrician from Florida) and present his 401k balance in 2008 and compare it to his 2012 balance.

The story of Romney driving heedlessly along while his poor dog shits himself in pain and terror resonates because it aligns to the perception that he's either blind to suffering or, like so many Republicans when it comes to the lower orders (of whatever species), kind of gets off on it. Seamus is a stand-in for every working class guy whose life was wrecked so Mitt could boost return for Bain's investors.

The story of six year old Obama eating what was put on his plate in Indonesia doesn't really align to anything except, I guess, spooky icky ferriner.

Similarly, to pac's point, the Republicans aren't primarily losing by 15 points with women because of some stupid fucking remarks made on camera. It's because they want to stick things in their hoo-hahs to punish sluttery and make sure they continue to be paid less.

dajafi wrote:The story of Romney driving heedlessly along while his poor dog shits himself in pain and terror resonates because it aligns to the perception that he's either blind to suffering or, like so many Republicans when it comes to the lower orders (of whatever species), kind of gets off on it. Seamus is a stand-in for every working class guy whose life was wrecked so Mitt could boost return for Bain's investors.

The story of six year old Obama eating what was put on his plate in Indonesia doesn't really align to anything except, I guess, spooky icky ferriner.

Yes for committed hacks on the left the Seamus story will never die because it confirms all sorts of deeply held notions no matter how ridiculous. This is of course true from the other side. Obama doesn't understand American values. Hell, he was raised eating dogs!

But the story is over banished from the campaign narrative now. Because in response any GOP surrogate or anchor can say 'at least he didn't eat it' if the Obama camp brings it up. And that's a fine response. Because the story is really effing stupid.

jerseyhoya wrote: And that's a fine response. Because the story is really effing stupid.

You're right. Romney will continue to provide plenty of examples of his inability to genuinely understand normal americans, and his indifference to addressing their concerns, and Obama will continue to be black. let's move on.

dajafi wrote:make sure they continue to be paid less.

Men in their 20s make less than women their 20s. But that doesn't really fit the "oppress womanz!" narrative.

thephan wrote:Does Obama just hold up a graph showing job growth since he has been in office, climbing from a depth of the previous administration, to turn the argument into 'well, I would have done better.' that is a stupid counter if there ever was one, especially if you were not even in a position to do anything, much less the previous candidate. Are the American people so stupid to ignore the depth of the financial chrisis and belive something so thinly covering a work of fiction? Well, probably most are now that I think about it.

The American people are probably dumb enough, on average, to fall for the simplistic pre-post analysis that you propose. Bush/Obama/Fed did a good job preventing catastrophe, but the recovery has been slower than other recoveries. Elections like this are usually a referendum on the current admin, and we'll see what narratives stick. Obama should hammer home the fact that income taxes and payroll taxes have not gone up; most people think Obama had raised taxes, which is a testament to the imperviousness of the electorate to facts.

Werthless wrote:

dajafi wrote:make sure they continue to be paid less.

Men in their 20s make less than women their 20s. But that doesn't really fit the "oppress womanz!" narrative.

Nor is it relevant, the point is that if you have a woman and a man in the same job the man is likely to make more.

Christie's approval has dropped five points since it has become more apparent that he lied to the public about why he canceled the tunnel.

Cory Booker 2013?

Werthless wrote: Obama should hammer home the fact that income taxes and payroll taxes have not gone up; most people think Obama had raised taxes, which is a testament to the imperviousness of the electorate to facts.

This won't adequately convey my gratitude, but I have not and would not have found this kind of perceptive and unequivocally accurate observation made via any of the conventional media outlets I endure propaganda from.




I know, I know; I know.

I mean this.

jerseyhoya wrote:Hey Monkeyboy at least Romney didn't eat his dog, amiright?

In India, it's horrible to eat a cow, yet we do it all the time. I've eaten horse, but I don't think that disqualifies me from saying something bad about people who abuse horses. The problem with Mitt is that he has no empathy. It shows up time and time again -- from putting his dog on the roof to saying he enjoys firing people to joking about his dad firing people, etc, etc, etc. I think that's quite different from eating the food your given as a child.

But whatever. Mitt is still a heartless ass who will enjoy putting more Americans out of work. He's going to gut every domestic program he can that doesn't help his rich friends and he'll derive pleasure from it.

I understand Romney has made sure he's on the record saying he would fire some or all of the miscreant secret service agents

like him or hate him he sticks with his themes

Joe Biden's turn...

funkymunch

The Nightman Cometh wrote:

Werthless wrote:

dajafi wrote:make sure they continue to be paid less.

Men in their 20s make less than women their 20s. But that doesn't really fit the "oppress womanz!" narrative.

Nor is it relevant, the point is that if you have a woman and a man in the same job the man is likely to make more.

Dingdingding

The gender premium in earnings isn't as large as the education premium. More women pursue and complete higher education.

dajafi wrote:

The Nightman Cometh wrote:

Werthless wrote:

dajafi wrote:make sure they continue to be paid less.

Men in their 20s make less than women their 20s. But that doesn't really fit the "oppress womanz!" narrative.

Nor is it relevant, the point is that if you have a woman and a man in the same job the man is likely to make more.

Dingdingding

The gender premium in earnings isn't as large as the education premium. More women pursue and complete higher education.

But it's not necessarily discrimination requiring legislation, if there are other variables that explain differences. I am tired of reading the oft quoted "women make 65 cents on the dollar" when it is not controlled for anything. Unless we are attributing differences to discrimination, the law has no effect. And its not anti-women if women are earning more money at the entry level type jobs for which this law applies. That's what makes my stat about earnings in 20s relevant.

Embarrassing that both the Daily Show and Colbert didn't do a segment on OBAMA EATING DOGS

LIBERAL MEDIA!!!!

These puppies are gonna sell...

You know you were thinking this...



... who sez the politics thread needs to be all piss and vinegar?

How long before PETA jumps on the dog eating thing, arguing there's no difference between eating dog and eating pig? (Except that pigs are more delicious.)