Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Every presidential candidate claims many things. That's a fact. The problem lies with the senate and congress. If they don't agree then it doesn't happen. There is no bamboozle.
The administration runs the Justice Dept. Congress has nothing to do with that outside of voting to approve. Once approved Mozillo, Blankfein, etc could have all been prosecuted without a single vote out of Congress.
Obama didn't have to appoint a Treasury Secretary that was going to give a free pass to those who broke the laws either.
How is it a progressive ideal for government to not be controlled by special interest and corporate elites ?
Show me one Democrat, republican, Green Party, Libertarian, Freedom Party, Independence, Liberal Party, Conservative Party .......... and so on who has campaigned on anything other than that ??????????????????
John McCain and Russ Feingold. Unfortunately, the Supreme Court struck down some of the legislation they fought for, which attempted to prevent the proliferation of money in campaigns, in 2009 when Citizens United brought a lawsuit. Corporations are people, my friend. How is anything supposed to change when private special interest groups sue for the right to dump money into candidates and the Supreme Court approves it? It is a repugnant system. Millions and millions of dollars wasted on dirty deceptive ads that nobody wants to watch and mute. There is something radically wrong with the entire election process in this country.
John McCain and Russ Feingold. Unfortunately, the Supreme Court struck down some of the legislation they fought for, which attempted to prevent the proliferation of money in campaigns, in 2009 when Citizens United brought a lawsuit. Corporations are people, my friend. How is anything supposed to change when private special interest groups sue for the right to dump money into candidates and the Supreme Court approves it? It is a repugnant system. Millions and millions of dollars wasted on dirty deceptive ads that nobody wants to watch and mute. There is something radically wrong with the entire election process in this country.
Not a single corporation was a part of the lawsuit. Groups as diverse as the ACLU, NRA, NARAL and others were. The legislation attempted to shut everyone out except the two parties and the news media.
John McCain and Russ Feingold. Unfortunately, the Supreme Court struck down some of the legislation they fought for, which attempted to prevent the proliferation of money in campaigns, in 2009 when Citizens United brought a lawsuit. Corporations are people, my friend. How is anything supposed to change when private special interest groups sue for the right to dump money into candidates and the Supreme Court approves it? It is a repugnant system. Millions and millions of dollars wasted on dirty deceptive ads that nobody wants to watch and mute. There is something radically wrong with the entire election process in this country.
What's particularly annoying about this is that Congress could very easily bypass the Citizens United ruling but refuses to do so. At the time the ruling was handed down, the Democrats controlled both houses of Congress and didn't do anything about it.
Not a single corporation was a part of the lawsuit. Groups as diverse as the ACLU, NRA, NARAL and others were. The legislation attempted to shut everyone out except the two parties and the news media.
The court made the right decision.
It turns out that all the money in the world will not help you if the media is against you. The media can turn a nice, successful family man who has never cheated on his wife, does not drink or smoke, and gives away tens of millions of dollars to charities, who has built or saved hundreds of businesses and created thousands of jobs in this country, with experience in both the private and public sectors, into a corporate-raiding murderer who is cruel to animals, bullies gay people, and doesn't care about half the country. Oh, and don't forget a rumored tax evader.
It turns out that all the money in the world will not help you if the media is against you. The media can turn a nice, successful family man who has never cheated on his wife, does not drink or smoke, and gives away tens of millions of dollars to charities, who has built or saved hundreds of businesses and created thousands of jobs in this country, with experience in both the private and public sectors, into a corporate-raiding murderer who is cruel to animals, bullies gay people, and doesn't care about half the country. Oh, and don't forget a rumored tax evader.
Worshiper, no, but I do like the man, and I do think he was totally misrepresented by the media. I was merely pointing out how the media can shape the perception of a person far more than focus groups and political ads. It was obvious when the Washington Post had a serious investigative journalist piece about how teenage Mitt Romney supposedly bullied a "gay" kid by leading a group of his fellow prep school kids to cut the guy's hair. The article was several pages long, very in depth. This from the same paper that brought us the Watergate story.
Status:
"everybody getting reported now.."
(set 24 days ago)
Location: Pine Grove,AL
29,557 posts, read 16,542,682 times
Reputation: 6041
Quote:
Originally Posted by katygirl68
Worshiper, no, but I do like the man, and I do think he was totally misrepresented by the media. I was merely pointing out how the media can shape the perception of a person far more than focus groups and political ads. It was obvious when the Washington Post had a serious investigative journalist piece about how teenage Mitt Romney supposedly bullied a "gay" kid by leading a group of his fellow prep school kids to cut the guy's hair. The article was several pages long, very in depth. This from the same paper that brought us the Watergate story.
Umm, but none of those things were untrue.
Romney admitted they all happened.
He said the gay kid was bullied simply because he was different, but because he was gay.
He said he raided(my word, not his) those companies because it was better to save what he could then try an impossible task of saving the entire thing.
Maybe the media did shape the perception of Romney, but you seem to be arguing that what the media reported didnt happen by using the word "supposedly", when he in fact, admitted they did.
He said the gay kid was bullied simply because he was different, but because he was gay.
He said he raided(my word, not his) those companies because it was better to save what he could then try an impossible task of saving the entire thing.
Maybe the media did shape the perception of Romney, but you seem to be arguing that what the media reported didnt happen by using the word "supposedly", when he in fact, admitted they did.
My understanding is that Bain went in to help companies already on the slide, at the behest of the owners. It's not like they did hostile takeovers, though they could have and I was unaware of it. Still, there were quite a few companies that would have gone under no matter what.
I do remember the stories about his car elevator on one of his many mansions, to which I say so what. At least he wasn't jetting off around the world preaching about climate change while having a carbon footprint the size of a small island country like Al Gore was.
Yes, he admitted to putting his dog in a dog carrier on the roof of his car on a family vacation, which seems weird but not idiotic when you consider he had a family of seven inside the car and it doesn't seem to have been a minivan or SUV. They said the dog liked it, and it doesn't seem any more mean than having your dog in a cage in the bed of a pickup truck or livestock in cattle cars or horse trailers.
I think you worded your sentence wrong because Romney said they may have cut the kid's hair because he was different, not because he was gay as he had no idea he was at the time. He also barely remembered the incident. And let's get real here, what 65-year old man should be held accountable for something he did as a 17-year old? I certainly hope no one thinks I'm the same person I was as a teenager. That was the sorriest excuse for an "investigative" piece I've ever seen, and that's saying something!
Oh, and remember those ads of garbage collectors saying Romney never gave them gifts or water like other residents did? Or the guy whose wife died because he lost his job and health insurance when Bain came in and helped dismantle the steel company? I seem to recall him basically blaming her death on Romney when his wife had insurance through her own employer for a few years after the plant closure. So, that was a flat-out lie.
Of course there was sometimes a kernel of truth in the stuff. That's what makes the story easier to sell to the public. There were a few outright lies though, such as the steel worker's story blaming Romney for his wife's cancer or at the very least saying Romney didn't care what happened to her, or Harry Reid implying on the Senate floor that he heard it from a friend who heard it from a friend that Romney was cheating on his taxes.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
