Melody's Melodramatic Meltdown on Mitt Romney (Tounge Twister?)

[Melody]

I really need to address this, has America gone stupid? I for one don't dabble in politics but I can't just turn a blind eye to Mitt Romney. This distasteful spiteful republican has gone too far for me. I know we have brilliant minds on these forums and I'd like to see where some of you stand on this. But what got me was he built his campaign off gay bashing and is probably going to stop the marriages which will leave gays to once again fight for the right to be equal. When we already got the church down our throat for "sinning" against god.

[cidbahamut]

Re: Melody's Melodramatic Meltdown on Mitt Romney (Tounge Twister?)

It's not so much a specific candidate or politician, but the whole political system is just foul right now.

Voting Republican is voting for a theocracy.
Voting Third Party is throwing away your vote.
Voting Democrat is voting for the guys who will still fuck things up, just without the religious overtones.

[Murphie]

Re: Melody's Melodramatic Meltdown on Mitt Romney (Tounge Twister?)

I'm not saying the Democrats are blameless, because they certainly do shit that make me facepalm, but I would like to see what they could actually accomplish if they weren't constantly cockblocked by the GOP.

[Omgwtfbbqkitten]

Re: Melody's Melodramatic Meltdown on Mitt Romney (Tounge Twister?)

Food for thought:

Back when people were supporting Chik-fil-a "Appreciation" Day, they may have driven a GM or Ford car there, when they got there, they took a picture with their iPhone or Android Phone, posted about it on Twitter or Facebook and when they finally got to the front of the line they probably got a Coke product to wash down that chicken sandwich and waffle-fries.

GM, Ford, Apple, Google, Twitter, Facebook and Coke are all pro-LGBT. So all those people that were so against gay marriage ended up giving pro-LGBT companies more money. Those against gay marriage would have done a lot more for their misguided cause by staying home and doing nothing. This isn't to say there aren't problems with these companies, EA is also pro-LGBT but still anti-consumer at heart - but you should support allies where you find them and push for change to create others.

Example: 40 years ago homosexuality was removed from the DSM as a mental illness by the American Psychiatric Association, despite that being transgender was still considered such until this year. None of this change was ever made from the ballot box, but by continuing to push for human rights. The work still isn't done, though, as the social damage of 40 years is still done and there are still stigmas surrounding homosexuality all these years later. This is what our generation is saddled with changing - I doubt the baby boomers on either side of the aisle will work as hard toward it. We'll still have a lot of other issues at the end of the day.

This isn't to say voting isn't important, more that voting for one guy or the other changes very little on its own - if you want change, you have to push for it. I haven't seen Romney's stance on gay marriage (and I wouldn't assume Melody's position to be an informed one regardless), but pardon me if I find Obama's recent 180 on the issue of gay marriage to be awfully convenient. He was against it for years and just happens to have a change of heart when his term is almost up? Okay.

The people that think being pro-LGBT begins and ends at a voting booth are more fairweather friends than allies. I guess it could be argued Obama's change on the issue "raises awareness" but if you needed a figurehead like a president to change your heart on the issue, I have assume you're detached from reality, technology and are shrouded in privilege.

[DakAttack]

Re: Melody's Melodramatic Meltdown on Mitt Romney (Tounge Twister?)

Republicans have one goal, to protect their money and their ability to make it. They care for nothing else and will make any and every back room deal no matter how small the pay-off.

[Malacite]

Re: Melody's Melodramatic Meltdown on Mitt Romney (Tounge Twister?)

I'm not saying the Democrats are blameless, because they certainly do shit that make me facepalm, but I would like to see what they could actually accomplish if they weren't constantly cockblocked by the GOP.

A-fucking-men. Thankfully, Obama seems to have finally gotten the message - another FDR is needed here, not Mr. Nice guy. We applaud him for trying to play nicely, but it's clear the only thing they're going to respond to is a kick in ass.


Seriously, even an editor at FOX NEWS said that Paul Ryan's speech had more lies in it than any he's ever heard before. Don't even get me started on Clint (though, Jon Stewart put it perfectly last night.)


It's going to be an interesting election to watch, but I think the debates will be the determining factor.

[Aeni]

Re: Melody's Melodramatic Meltdown on Mitt Romney (Tounge Twister?)

Republicans have one goal, to protect their money and their ability to make it. They care for nothing else and will make any and every back room deal no matter how small the pay-off.

There are 4 major components in the "Republican Tent".

1. The Evangelical + Methodist Christians
2. Business
3. Libertarian
4. Military

Right now, the way they operate is just a sequence of compromises built upon overlapping common interests. I would say that their common interests are more secure than those of the democrats, as seen by the incoherency and in-house bickering on the left.

The issue of the LGBT is not just a matter of "Right vs Left", because there are those that condemn the LGBT community on the left, primarily those of minorities (African American and Latino communities among the strongest opposition - because of their strong spiritual/religious inclinations, e.g., Catholic, Methodist, Islam, etc) The only reason that the left seems to "wholly" embrace the LGBT community is the "let's not talk about it out here" kind of policy. In other words, the friction exists, just not out in plain view (or in other words, the enemy of my enemy is my friend - for now)

Politics is all about special interest and compromises. There's nothing grand or honorable about what goes on in the back-room where deals are cut for votes. If you're new to the political process, then there's probably a lot of popular media that will explain in candor (much of it is probably true and not as embellished as one would like to believe) In short, your friend today will be your enemy tomorrow, and vice versa. That's the oil that greases politics and governance, especially in an open one like a democracy. Maybe not so much in some dictatorship, as there's less leeway, but corruption exists no matter what the circumstances are, as long as money and power is involved.

But I think with that Citizens United ruling by the Supreme Court, the political process has been increasing the rate of its downward spiral. There's going to be some breaking point, but I have no idea what that will be. Short of a world war, unless the people in this country can come to terms with how they are voting, there's not going to be any good for the next decade to come.

[Malacite]

Re: Melody's Melodramatic Meltdown on Mitt Romney (Tounge Twister?)

Republicans have one goal, to keep everyone stupid, scared poor and sick for their own perpetual self gains

FTFY. It wasn't always that way, and not all republicans are bad - just the good ones (Andrew Sullivan, David Brooks etc) are rarely heard.

[Omgwtfbbqkitten]

Re: Melody's Melodramatic Meltdown on Mitt Romney (Tounge Twister?)

1. The Evangelical + Methodist Christians
2. Business
3. Libertarian
4. Military.

Dunno if I agree on the Libertarian part, if being Libertarian were a true tenant, they'd maintain marriage wasn't a state institution to start with and its no one's damn business who you marry. Libertarians also tend to believe in a strong national defense, not that we're the world's police.

[Yellow Mage]

Re: Melody's Melodramatic Meltdown on Mitt Romney (Tounge Twister?)

I'm not saying the Democrats are blameless, because they certainly do shit that make me facepalm, but I would like to see what they could actually accomplish if they weren't constantly cockblocked by the GOP.

Didn't they have a congressional supermajority at one point relatively recently?

Lewis Black said it best when he said that Republicans are the party of bad ideas, and the Democrats are the party of no ideas.



Concerning the OP specifically, Romney was, is, and will always be little more than a footnote. The important thing to take note here is that the Republican party as a whole is on a violent path of self-destruction on a grander scale than the likes of Sony could even dream. When blatant lies, fascist appeals to bigotry, and false religious appeals (arguably little more than trolling) are the only things that get you attention; when large sums of corporate money are the only engine keeping you rolling (though, not that Democrats are any more innocent of this, or at least the ones who wish to stay competitive in what's quickly becoming a plutocracy); it's only a matter of time before everyone realizes that you're desperate. When everyone realizes this, there will be a power vacuum, once people take notice of the implication that the Democratic party will become the only "reliable" party to vote for, and how blatantly un-Democratic it is to have only one "real" choice offered up by some wanton organization.

In that sense, Democrats and Republicans really rely on each other to stay in power. In other senses, they may as well be the same super-party: the party of money in politics.

Of course, now the Republican part of this false dichotomy is falling apart at the seams. One could see from several miles away that Romney would inevitably be the guy that they fell for, but he really is "more of the same" stuff that's destroying his very party . . . and all that, while even being more moderate than his peers! The party's obvious "shifting the window" ploy is going to backfire, and hard. If the Republican party still wanted to exist for the foreseeable future; if they wanted to keep up this two-party charade . . . they honestly really should have nominated Ron Paul--not for Paul himself, but to give the party a new image, even if it is Libertarianism. It would be a huge improvement for them, even, to have a guy who is only certifiable half of the time; the "sticking to your guns" aspect of Paul would have been a nice bonus, too. (Especially when contrasted with Romney . . .)

Of course, the GOP absolutely couldn't stand the prospect of keeping Government out of your bedroom. That would've been too much.

So instead, that actually adopted one of the insane-half of Ron Paul's ideas to their party platform at a blatant and failed attempt at concession/assimilation: a considered return to a gold standard.

So Obama, in spite of a markedly mediocre first term (though far from the worst President EVAR), is all but certain to win in 2012. The media (which is, of course, bought out by the same kind of people who bought the two-party system, and as a result tends to ignore the likes of Paul who could possibly change anything about it, even for the better) will undoubtedly imply Romney's position in second place, though he will get maybe 30-ish% and Obama maybe 60-ish%, but there is going to be that subplot of a third candidate getting a relatively large double-digit% of the popular vote (the electoral college is, of course, rigged against third parties). It won't be long before the Republican party as we know it collapses completely. We just need someone who isn't a Democrat (and thus relies on Republicans to be non-competitive) to deal them a decisive finishing blow. I've little doubt that we'll see no less change in the US political system than that in our lifetimes.

[Omgwtfbbqkitten]

Re: Melody's Melodramatic Meltdown on Mitt Romney (Tounge Twister?)

In that sense, Democrats and Republicans really rely on each other to stay in power. In other senses, they may as well be the same super-party: the party of money in politics.

When people say "Voting third party is throwing your vote away" they practically concede this point. Its not like there's a greater good within a binary, its always the lesser of two evils but still evil.

Yet part of the problem is Democrats and Republicans do EVERYTHING they can to get third party candidates denied. To me, they've been the same party for a long, long time. Now most of them seem content to flush us down the toilet while they can still have a comfortable retirement.

[Raydeus]

Re: Melody's Melodramatic Meltdown on Mitt Romney (Tounge Twister?)

Politics are like the free market. No competition, no progress and only corruption awaits. The moment the corporations put their 2 puppet parties in place voting became irrelevant. All they need to do is convince you that you only have 2 choices and they win.

Or: Welcome to 3rd world politics, amigos!

[Yellow Mage]

Re: Melody's Melodramatic Meltdown on Mitt Romney (Tounge Twister?)

Now that I think about it, isn't the entire Democratic party platform just "We're not Republicans!" at this point?

[Malacite]

Re: Melody's Melodramatic Meltdown on Mitt Romney (Tounge Twister?)

Dunno if I agree on the Libertarian part, if being Libertarian were a true tenant, they'd maintain marriage wasn't a state institution to start with and its no one's damn business who you marry. Libertarians also tend to believe in a strong national defense, not that we're the world's police.

For once I think we actually agree. I think it's more that Libertarians just have more in common with the Right, and so they gravitate towards them - it's out of necessity and not so much really identifying with the group as whole. Otherwise you wouldn't see people like Ron Paul standing up to some of the most revered doctrine of the party.

I don't agree with all the assessments of the wheeling & dealing either; If that were true then so many of America's greatest accomplishments would never have happened, including the nation's founding. It's only really in more recent years (the later half of the 20th century) and I would imagine around the time of the civil war obviously, that things have broken down so badly. There's been pockets of it here & there but generally there's been a sense of country first & fighting for what you genuinely believe in, not so much selfish gain.

For a long time there weren't many people who wanted to even run for office because there wasn't the material gain to be had like there is now. So I for one, fucking Applaud Obama for going on Reddit the other day, fielding questions, and coming out and saying he wants to finally ban lobbying. It's about goddamn time someone in a position of real authority said it. He also wants to overturn citizens united via constitutional amendment, or failing that change the laws to require the listing of every single donor. The money will still be unlimited, but the people giving it won't be able to hide anymore.

[Raydeus]

Re: Melody's Melodramatic Meltdown on Mitt Romney (Tounge Twister?)

Lobbying will probably never die until they start putting politicians and lobbysit in prison for fraud, corruption and all the nice things that come from it.

Also, Corporations are NOT people. Because if they were someone would've murdered them already.