lethal wrote:

theracist wrote:

lethal wrote:

theracist wrote:You realize that that is Obama's history. His father was married to another woman at the time he married Obama's mother. His dad's dad had at least four wives.

Attacking Romney for his ties to polygamy when Obama's father was a polygamist. Attacking Romney for cruelty to dogs while Obama ate dogs. Obama Biden 2012 - Anything Your Guy Did, Our Guy Did Worse!

Why is eating dogs in Indonesia wrong? You're just a racist.

I'm certainly racist against people who think their side's dumb story is important and telling but the other side's dumb story is irrelevant or mean spirited.

Or ethnocentric. Or disrespectful of the customs of other cultures. One of those.

I literally could not care less personally whether Obama ate a dog or not. My opinion on his fitness for office or his moral character or any of those things hasn't changed one way or another.

Three decades ago, when his sons were all much younger, Romney wanted to bring the pet along on family trips, but there wasn't room for the dog in the car. He slapped it on the roof, and built a windshield so he would be safe and more comfortable. By all accounts the dog seemed to enjoy these trips for the most part. One time the dog was sick and crapped all over the place. I'm sure it didn't enjoy that journey, although presumably it would have been pretty uncomfortable for the dog if it was crapping all over the place inside the station wagon too. Admittedly it probably would have been a little better for the guy, but probably worse for everyone else involved. I'm not sure why travelling on the roof of a car - unless the weather was bad - is any less humane than flying with a dog in cargo or leaving your dog in a kennel for a week or two while you're away on vacation.

I think the Romney dog story is one of the dumbest things to be raised repeatedly in politics as evidence of some sort of moral failing. The Obama campaign has raised the issue a few times in the past, but they can't do that any more. Because, it turns out, he ate a fucking dog.

And I think that's fantastic.

Stop being idiotic

JH's reaction to these two things tells me that he knows they are problems for Romney. Sadly, the false equivalencies will work on some/most people.

Who has trouble distinguishing the actions of a fully cognizant 30 year old man and a 6 year old boy?

People who repeat everything they hear on Fox News.

I can not believe you guys, Dems, are still raising this issue. It's done. No one is going to vote for Obama because Romney stuck his dog on a car 25 years or so ago. If you feel you are influencing someone with this, instead of attacking Romney's record/current words, then you deserve to have those people counter-influenced by the dog-eating story.

There ARE equivalencies to these two things, the chief ones being it was a long time ago and no one was intentionally trying to hurt anyone. But we shouldn't be talking about them as they are emblematic of nothing. Move on.

who is 'you guys'? monkeyboy raised it and jh got a boner about obama eating food as a kid.

one event shows romney is kind of heartless (i would never do that to my dog, just leave him in a kennel), the other shows obama was 6 years old.

i don't think it reflects on romney's ability to govern, but this rebuttal is fucking retarded.

Monkeyboy and Youseff for two. Just let it die. There are plenty of things to attack Romney for. This isn't one. Obama should be above this as he preached to me.

ps - there is no possible chance of me voting for Romney, none. I just don't want to read about dogs.

td11 wrote:one event shows romney is kind of heartless (i would never do that to my dog, just leave him in a kennel), the other shows obama was 6 years old.

i don't think it reflects on romney's ability to govern, but this rebuttal is #$!&@ retarded.

I typed out a rebuttal and then cancelled it. Let's all agree to stop talking about this dumbass thing. Even if you're possibly right, you're not possibly going to win. This isn't a winning issue. Stop. For the love of God stop.

foreclose, foreclose, foreclose! :

Legal processing specialists sign affidavits in the presence of a notary and swear "under the penalty of perjury to the best of my knowledge, information and belief that the contents of the foregoing paper are true."

To meet legal requirements of state foreclosure laws, the document processors at Wells Fargo’s Charlotte office sign their affidavits as “Vice President of Loan Documentation.”

DeVito said the company’s board of directors has granted all document processors the title, a practice that corporate governance experts say confers on them the legal authority to sign documents as corporate officers.

Entry-level legal process specialists earn between $30,700 and $53,300 a year, according to recent internal job postings. Though basic qualifications in those postings call for one or two years of administrative experience, Wells Fargo says these entry-level workers have the training and expertise to satisfy state requirements that corporate officers review all foreclosure files.

Investigators at the Department of Housing and Urban Development, who are charged with finding "waste fraud and abuse" among lenders filing claims for payment when a federally-insured mortgage defaults, checked into problems at all five big banks after reports surfaced in 2010 of widespread document fraud.

Those investigators reported last month that Wells Fargo document processors had “signed the great majority of the judgment affidavits without personal knowledge or otherwise verifying the data and information.”

That investigation took place in the fall of 2010. But the Wells Fargo employees who spoke to msnbc.com on condition they would remain anonymous said those practices persist in the Charlotte office.

Their knowledge of a foreclosure filing is limited by a process that relies on data provided by a third party vendor and based on documents they don't always have time to review, according to the employees.

When in doubt, throw those people out of their homes!!!

jeff2sf wrote:

td11 wrote:one event shows romney is kind of heartless (i would never do that to my dog, just leave him in a kennel), the other shows obama was 6 years old.

i don't think it reflects on romney's ability to govern, but this rebuttal is #$!&@ retarded.

I typed out a rebuttal and then cancelled it. Let's all agree to stop talking about this dumbass thing. Even if you're possibly right, you're not possibly going to win. This isn't a winning issue. Stop. For the love of God stop.

i just want jh to acknowledge that he's being a complete dick about this eating food thing. IT'S FOOD. shut up about it.

Aside from the laffs of Romney dog reminding me of Natl. Lampoon's Vacation, I really don't give a poop about either.

But it's about perception. In Romney's case, he essentially treated the family pet as luggage. Granted, it's not like he strapped one of his kids to the roof, but treating his dog like an inanimate possession doesn't play well with people that view their pets as living, breathing family members. For these same people, eating dog is horrendous, but Obama being 6 yrs old and in a country where it was acceptable mitigates it. Those that harp on Obama dog have the ulterior motive of "reminding" everyone of Obama's heritage, that he's a secret muslim raised in a weird "un-american" tradition. Those that harp on Romney dog, that Mittens lacks emphathy.

'Tis the season of election politics.

jeff2sf wrote:

td11 wrote:one event shows romney is kind of heartless (i would never do that to my dog, just leave him in a kennel), the other shows obama was 6 years old.

i don't think it reflects on romney's ability to govern, but this rebuttal is #$!&@ retarded.

I typed out a rebuttal and then cancelled it. Let's all agree to stop talking about this dumbass thing. Even if you're possibly right, you're not possibly going to win. This isn't a winning issue. Stop. For the love of God stop.

no need for melodrama, bruh, i agree it's stupid, too.

the Pentagon needs to man up and stop harrassing journalists for reporting on the horrible story about the soldiers in Afghanistan.

Looks like Sarzoky will be the first one-term president of France since the 80s. Polls are looking ROUGH. a runoff with the Francois Hollande looks to be a trounce. since Angela Merkel is conservative, they'd butt heads since he wants to cut down on the austerity measures Sarzoky agreed to.

pacino wrote:

jeff2sf wrote:

td11 wrote:one event shows romney is kind of heartless (i would never do that to my dog, just leave him in a kennel), the other shows obama was 6 years old.

i don't think it reflects on romney's ability to govern, but this rebuttal is #$!&@ retarded.

I typed out a rebuttal and then cancelled it. Let's all agree to stop talking about this dumbass thing. Even if you're possibly right, you're not possibly going to win. This isn't a winning issue. Stop. For the love of God stop.

i just want jh to acknowledge that he's being a complete dick about this eating food thing. IT'S FOOD. shut up about it.

I'm not sure if I'm not communicating well or if you just can't read, but I. Don't. Give. A. Shit. What. Obama. Ate.

Outside of the posts tweaking/responding to Monkeyboy, since he has mentioned the Romney dog story repeatedly, my point has been about how happy I am that this dumb story came up because it means the other dumb dog story gets to go away for the duration of the campaign.

Someone should ask Michael Vick what he thinks about puppygate.

jeff2sf wrote:Monkeyboy and Youseff for two. Just let it die. There are plenty of things to attack Romney for. This isn't one. Obama should be above this as he preached to me.

ps - there is no possible chance of me voting for Romney, none. I just don't want to read about dogs.

Point to where I did that. I was simply responding to the fallacy of JH's logic.

td11 wrote:romney, as a grown ass man, put his sick dog who was constantly shitting himself on the roof of his car

Should of let him take the spare caddy