• Quick note - the problem with Youtube videos not embedding on the forum appears to have been fixed, thanks to ZiprHead. If you do still see problems let me know.

2012 Debates

Toontown said:
You remind me of Romney, who also took several things Obama said out of context and spun false conclusions from them



Bush would have been on bin Laden like a duck on a june bug.
Click to expand...

Does a duck get "on a june bug" by claiming the june bug is marginalized, not that important, and by not thinking about the june bug all that much?

If thats not the case then I have no idea what a duck on june bug means.

Oh I am sure you will provide evidence for both your claims like a duck on a june bug!
 
Biscuit said:
Does a duck get "on a june bug" by claiming the june bug is marginalized, not that important, and by not thinking about the june bug all that much?

If thats not the case then I have no idea what a duck on june bug means.

Oh I am sure you will provide evidence for both your claims like a duck on a june bug!
Click to expand...

Apparently, Osama Bin Laden's head just appeared on the President's desk along with the health care law.
 
TellyKNeasuss said:
Of course, if you do just want to count ships, the US Navy has 192 major combat vessels (aircraft carriers, cruisers, destroyers, frigates, submarines), which is 40 percent more than the second largest navy (China). In fact, the US Navy has almost as many major combat vessels as its 2 major rivals (Russia and China) combined.
Click to expand...

I think Obama kicked some butt last night.... but this was one of the things I think he should have brought up.

The numbers show just how dominate the U.S. Navy is over the rest of the world. He might not have wanted to go down that road but, not only is the Navy's power much greater than the Navy from 1916 (or whenever) it is also still the largest Navy in the world at this time.

Meaning, we have the most powerful and effective naval force in the history of humanity as well as the largest current standing navy... yet Mitt wants to increase the size of the Navy while at the same time he is complaining about the debt? That is crazy talk.
 
elbe said:
Does Romney (et al.) know all that? He sure sounds like he's going to singlehandedly enact some legislation as soon as he gets in.
Click to expand...

I don't have Romney-watch, and cannot say what he does or does not know. It could be that he has referred to some discretionary powers that have been conceded to the executive branch, which do not require the enactment of legislation.
 
Biscuit said:
Does a duck get "on a june bug" by claiming the june bug is marginalized, not that important, and by not thinking about the june bug all that much?

If thats not the case then I have no idea what a duck on june bug means.

Oh I am sure you will provide evidence for both your claims like a duck on a june bug!
Click to expand...

Obviously, the duck has to locate the june bug's exact location before getting on it. Before learning of the june bug's exact location, the duck may feign indifference.
 
Toontown said:
Obviously, the duck has to locate the june bug's exact location before getting on it. Before learning of the june bug's exact location, the duck may feign indifference.
Click to expand...

So until you locate the evidence that I

a) took W out of context

and that

b) Bush would have gone after Bin laden

You are also going to feign indifference? I guess we should all settle in for a whole lot of indifference.

Actually I don't doubt Bush would go after Bin Laden but he did not make it a priority and that the difference.
 
I think some of the gap in analysis about debates is that some people look at winning in terms of convincing certain groups of voters. Others look to the debates in vain, searching for the slightest hint of fact and judging the arguments in terms of their veracity. And then of course people look for whoever agrees with them the most.

I tend towards the second one. A lot of people seem to watch the debates for the sake of seeing how they will influence other people who also watch the debates to see how they will influence...
 
Unabogie said:
No, according to Toontown, that's how all legislation and foreign policy is handled. It just falls into your lap and jump on it like a junebug. Or something.
Click to expand...

More and more you're like a Romney. You're even using his likenes as an icon.

What I actually said was to the effect that the president does not have the power to enact legislation. Which remains a hard constitutional fact, despite your word-twisting, which now appears to be increasing in frequency and obsessiveness.

Look, if you're just out to prove that Obama will do some things Bush won't do, I'll stipulate that. After all, as Tricky says, to characterize them as identical in every respect would be to pidgeonhole them.
 
Unabogie said:
No, according to Toontown, that's how all legislation and foreign policy is handled. It just falls into your lap and jump on it like a junebug. Or something.
Click to expand...

Until he sees the legislation the president sits in the oval office feigning indifference to his stated agenda. Then when the legislation wanders his way he bounces.

Just like an indifferent duck on a lazy june bug.
 
Last edited:
Toontown said:
As Obama was at pains to point out just last night, the primary directive of the president is "to protect the American people". He would also have been correct to say foreign policy and diplomacy in general.

The president doesn't even have the constitutional power to enact healthcare reform. That is for the legislative branch to decide or not. The president can only sign or veto the legislation when it comes to his desk.
Click to expand...

Was this supposed to be a response to me? You quoted me, but don't seem to have addressed the substance of what I said. Just to recap, you claimed "Obama has done pretty much what Bush would have done if Bush had a 3rd term." I pointed out 2 examples of actions that Obama took that it would have been very unlikely that Bush would have taken. Why you thought that was an appropriate time to attempt a Civics lesson, I don't know.

Toontown said:
Which doesn't change the fact that the president's constitutionally-mandated primary responsibility is defense and foreign policy.

I was speaking specifically about defense and foreign policy when I said Bush would have done much the same as Obama has done.
Click to expand...

Well, we "lefties" also care about other things that the President has influence over. Maybe that's why you don't understand "us": you've arbitrarily drawn a distinction over which Presidential actions "matter".

Nor is it true that Bush would never have approved health care legislation. It is only (probably) true that he wouldn't have approved that particular version.
Click to expand...

For the record, I said "attempted meaningful healthcare reform", not "signed any random healthcare bill that happened to hit his desk."
 
Toontown said:
Long story short, Obama has done pretty much what Bush would have done if Bush had a 3rd term.
Click to expand...

Exactly. I'm sure Bush would have passed his own nearly $800 stimulus filled with green spending, progressive tax cuts, health record digitization, state bailouts, high speed rail and educational reform programs. Those were all Bush's top priorities. And Obamacare? He just stole it from Bush. All Bush needed was another 4 years. And Financial reform? Dude, that was just on the tip of Bush's tongue. Oh, and the fuel efficiency standards stuff? Yeah, again, he just stole that idea straight from Bush's list of "Things I want to do but just haven't yet."
 
Halfcentaur said:
Sadly, most of the people I know who are still undecided seem to excuse Romney's inconsistent behavior for being a willingness to compromise and his far right wing stances in the past were just pandering to pat the right wing on the head and shut them up.
Click to expand...
I'd like to ask more about this. It seems to me that there is a genuine difference between Romney and Obama in terms of policy, temperament, etc. There is also a vast difference between the two parties. So I can't conceive how someone could be undecided. Even the LIVs must have some sense of their vote.

So, Halfcentaur, I'd like to hear a little bit about the undecided you know because I don't know any. Are they purely apolitical? Apathetic? Hostile to government no matter what? And so on. Just give a sense of some of them. Thanks.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom