I say yes, you say no, OR People are Strange

gardengumby

It started raining today - just sprinkling now, but there's supposed to be a real downpour this weekend along with a fair amount of wind - so we get our first storm of the fall right off the bat.  I'm already missing the sunshine - and it just left.  I'm not real sure how much many more winters I want to spend here.

QuinnCat

When I lived there in 1990-1991, it started raining on Oct 1 and never stopped!  I remember my hair was never dry.

QuinnCat

In 1995, Mark and Sheryl Nixon's children were involved in a minivan crash after attending a youth group meeting. Two of the children were severely injured, and the family went on to incur hundreds of thousands of dollars in expenses.At the time of the crash, the Nixons did not know the Romneys, but they did attend the same Mormon church.

 I don't count anything he does with his own church "charity."  For Romney, this is quid pro quo.  If he gave spontaneously, to non-Mormons, I would view that in a more charitable way. Likewise, I think as a POTUS, he would serve, first, the hierarchy in SLC when there was a conflict. 

crazy4carrots

So I now understand what the TP/GOP actually mean when they say they "want to take the country back".  And this guy sits on the Congressional Science Committee!  Incredibly backward, IMO.

 

Now, the GOP Senate candidate who’s running against Sen. Claire McCaskill (D-MO) said Thursday at a Tea Party meeting in Jefferson City, Missouri, that there’s no science behind evolution:

AKIN: I don’t see it as even a matter of science because I don’t know that you can prove one or the other. That’s one of those things. We can talk about theology and all of those other things but I’m basically concerned about, you’ve got a choice between Claire McCaskill and myself. My job is to make the thing there. If we want to do theoretical stuff, we can do that, but I think I better stay on topic. 

1Athena1

Funny how these wingnuts insist on proof about science but have blind faith in totally, totally unprovable things.

Happy Friday everyone! Let's enjoy the evening. It is nice and cool here - finally.

Anyone diagnosed with cancer should learn to have a healthy disrespect for statistics. Statistics are maths. It's the science which still eludes us.
Dx 3/2009, IDC, 3cm, Stage IIb, Grade 3, 3/8 nodes, ER+/PR+, HER2-

lassie11

Drat - the video is gone, Linda. It's an surreal thing that a person who is running for office, a person on the science committee, for goodness sake, can make such clearly unscientific and false statements - and still expect to be elected. Is there something peculiar in the water there?

crazy4carrots

Lassie, I think we can honestly say that if a Canadian politician made those kinds of statements, he would be laughed off the rostrum, with no possible chance of winning any election.  So I think you're right -- it must be something in the water!

pupmom

Been away for a day and my head is spinning from all the posts! Watched the debate last night and loved the way Joe called out the little s%*&t head. There was a little too much laughing though. Looking forward to the town hall debate Tuesday. Hope somebody asks why did you say the Romney/Ryan ticket wants to eliminate abortions except in the case of rape, incest or life of the mother. Uh, I thought Romney said he WOULD NOT mess with Roe v. Wade.

BarbaraA

Biden was un-Vice Presidential. He debased the office by sneering and laughing while the question was around Iran and nuclear weapons. Sorry. Just wrong. And sneering and interrupting 83+ times! Please. At least stick to the issues. Come on. And the Benghazi stuff? If you progressives allow Ambassador Stevens death to be swept under the rug, shame on you. I thought better of you.

crazy4carrots

I heard about this on CBC radio today, I wonder if any of you heard it on your American stations?

 

Consumer Sentiment Rises To 5 Year High Capping Off Two Other Good Economic ReportsOnce again, queue the conspiracy theorists!  First unemployment drops to 7.8% and the right freaks out, then jobless claims drop and the right freaks out, now we have consumer sentiment reaching a five year high.

Somebody tell me how all these thing culminated in one month?  Is it all conspiracy?  

"The Thomson Reuters/University of Michigan's preliminary October reading on the overall index on consumer sentiment came in at 83.1, up from 78.3 the month before, marking the highest level since September 2007." CNBC is reporting.

"What changed was how (consumers) evaluated economic conditions," survey director Richard Curtin said in a statement. "Economic conditions during the year ahead were expected to be 'good' by more consumers, and more consumers expected 'good' economic times over the next five years." 

The survey's barometer of current economic conditions rose to 88.6 from 85.7 and was above a forecast of 86.
The survey's gauge of consumer expectations jumped to 79.5 from 73.5, above an expected reading of 74. Expectations were at their highest since July 2007.
You know what drives consumer sentiment? Jobs and an improving economy.  If the two other numbers weren't real and were a mass conspiracy to re-elect President Obama, consumer sentiment would be remaining level or dropping.

Instead this poll indicates that the two prior economic reports from the Bureau of Labor and Statistics are true and the economy is doing better and people are feeling more confident.  So, Donald Trump, Jack Welch and all the other conspiracy Right wing radicals can put their tin foil hats away and come out from under their  bunkers. 

1Athena1

Barbara - I don't think anyone wants the ambassador's death swept under a rug. The problem as I see it is that the situation of "who done it" is SOOOO complex that it is hard to know how to react. Perhaps Obama could explain that to the nation - perhaps a televised speech would have been in order. We are definitely far from the Cold War days in which you sort of knew why every terrorist act happened, who did it and things were binary and rather simplistic by comparison. There is so much disaggregation of ideologies and movements that it's hard to know whom to be angry at. We are not comfortable with ambiguity in this country - but that is our fault as a people.

Biden was aggressive, but I don't blame him. Ryan is a serial liar, it seems. He explicitly denied asking for stimulus money - last night he had to admit he did - but he is on record as saying he never did. Ryan hasn't shown that he can earn respect. All politicians twist things, but this man doesn't seem to know what honesty means. What I saw was Biden's frustration. He was not NEARLY as snide and superior as McCain was in all of his debates with Obama in 2008, mind you.

covertanjou

Peanuts--I mean Barbara, I also thought better of you.  Please look in the mirror before you start saying we should feel shame about anything.

crazy4carrots

Barbara -- You've really taken me by surprise.  I was aware of your political leanings, but never thought you'd issue a blanket insult to those of us here who consider ourselves forward-thinking, or progressive.  As the Brits would say, I'm gob-smacked, and very disappointed.

RetiredLibby

Oh, and where were the condemnations from the right when Dick Cheney debased the office of the vice president ON THE SENATE FLOOR by telling Senator Patrick Leahy to go eff himself? Where were the condemnations from the right when Dick Cheney SHOT an old man in the face while hunting illegally? (That wasn't hard to figure out -- the sunrise and sunset times are easily available and he was hunting illegally in the dark.)



And shame on ANYONE who accuses "you progressives" of allowing Ambassador Stevens' death to be "swept under the rug." As a former Foreign Service Officer, I find that accusation not only baseless but repulsive. It is an INVESTIGATION. That means information is collected and collated and analyzed in a methodical fashion to draw conclusions based on the entire picture and not partisan hysteria whipped up by politicians who want to fly the flag on the bodies of murdered Americans while voting to cut security funds for the State Department. The situation the night the consulate was attacked was fluid and confusing -- an attack by unknown persons in the dark, confusion about who was where and what they were doing, confusion about who were friendlies and who were foes, and confusion about escape routes, meeting points and security of the buildings. The situation in a country that only recently overthrew a brutal dictator is also fluid, with various political factions and militia groups switching alliances and allegiances like a kaleidescope. This is not a bank robbery. It is an attack on a U.S. diplomatic installation by persons unknown.



And by the way, Foreign Service Officers are told when we go overseas that if someone is intent on killing you personally, as opposed to a generic American, then they will most likely get you. You cannot protect against every eventuality, just as you cannot protect the population from someone who is willing to commit an irrational act (and die in the process) of terrorism.



NOBODY is "sweeping Ambassador Stevens' death under a rug." The names of several of my friends and several other people I know are on the memorial wall plaque in the lobby of the State Department, and their deaths -- where appropriate -- have bren investigated and appropriately responded to. But a thorough investigation takes TIME and RESOURCES and the cooperation of local authorities. It is NOT a vast liberal conspiracy to cover up a death ... No more than it is a vast right-wing conspiracy to reduce the size of government (and particularly U.S. diplomatic missions overseas) by slashing security funds to the State Department and allowing Americans to be killed in attacks on U.S. installations overseas. Shame on anyone who suggests either.


And now, I am sorry to say, I am forced to engage the "block user" button right here at home.





L

covertanjou

I need a lilke, make that LOVE, button for Happy and Lindasa.

208sandy

Barbara - sorry you didn't like the debate last night but that's absolutely no reason to be lecturing those of us on this thread - perhaps for the duration of the election campaign you'd feel happier among those posting on the mirror thread, and it goes both ways Barbara I thought better of you too.

YramAL

Count me among the disappointed. "You progressives" indeed. There are a lot of people here who have cared about you, Barbara, for a long time. 

Mary 

Beesie

Snide and superior?  How about "Hillary, you are likeable enough?" Or a few hundred (or thousand) other examples, straight out of Obama's mouth.  Obama defines snide and superior.  And now he and Biden are going to throw Hillary, his loyal soldier, under the bus on the Libya terrorism murders.  

As for liars, yeah, there have been a few doosies from Ryan and Romney, but how about Obama's promise to close Gitmo?  His promise to cut the budget deficit in half by the end of his first term?  His promise to increase bipartisanship?  His promise to keep unemployment below 8% with the stimulus monies?  Romney and Ryan have changed and restated and rephrased and clarified their plans and platforms.  Often they've just tried to correct misstatements made by the other side. But it's not really fair to call all those things lies, since they haven't actually had a chance to do anything yet. It's all just words, changes or refinements in position.  But if Romney says he will do something and then he fails to do it, then what he said would have been a lie. Sort of like Obama's promise to close Gitmo. 

I know, it's all the Republican's fault.  They "stymied" the administration - that was Biden's choice of word yesterday.  But isn't that what always happens?  Doesn't the opposition always try to stymie the administration?  And isn't it the job of the president to figure out a way to get things done despite having that opposition?  It's call working across the aisle. Reagan did it with great success. Clinton did it with great success. Obama has not faced an opposition that's any more difficult than what Reagan and Clinton faced.  Obama has shown that he does not have the ability or willingness to work with Congress, whoever might be sitting in Congress. But that's the job description. And he can't do it. 

I shouldn't be posting here... I'm Canadian so I can't vote. And if I lived in the U.S., I would not be a registered Democrat, I'd be an Independent. However, I certainly am more inclined towards the Democrats, particularly when it comes to social issues.  And there's a lot about the Republican positions that I really don't like.  So I want to support the Democrats. But I can't.  Not Obama and Biden. 

BarbaraA, I agree with you. Biden was disrespectful and rude. He went into the debate with the objective of firing up the Democratic base by harrassing his opponent and never letting him finish a sentence.  That's not how you debate. Let's not try to win by having and articulating the best plan for the country.  Let's try to win by pounding the crap out of our opponent. And people think this was good?

What scares me the most is to realize that Biden is a heartbeat away from being President. I'm not an Obama fan, but if he is re-elected, I certainly wish him good health!

I know that the Mods want us to keep this civil and to that end, I promise I won't post here again. I know that I can't be the only Democrat-leaning person who is disappointed in the administration and upset by the tactics of the Obama/Biden campaign.  But the others are smarter than me.... they are staying away. 

By the way, HappyLibby, I agree that the Benghazi attack is a complicated situation. I agree that conclusions shouldn't be drawn until all the facts are in.  But then why did the Administration send Susan Rice out to say that it was all caused by the video and to emphatically declare that it was not terrorism?  Why did Obama and Clinton also both say repeatedly that the attack was caused by the film? And they too flat out said, at least for the first couple of weeks, that it wasn't terrorism.  Considering that the president of Libya said in a television interview within 2-3 days of the attack that it was unquestionably a planned terrorist attack and was not caused by the video, why did the Administration say the opposite?  Why didn't they just say what you are saying, which is that all the facts aren't in and we can't draw any conclusions yet?   

Okay, I'm out of here. Feel free to shift your guns from Barbara over to me now.   

208sandy

Won't be shifting any "guns" Beesie - just wish you'd save your "lecturing" for some other thread - where it might do some good instead of hurting people - try the mirror thread you seem to have a lot in common with the posters there.

riley702

A better response than mine, Sandy. Thank you.

Ang7

Can't ladies post their comments on here without being told to try another thread instead?

Good conversation should be allowed on both threads.

riley702

Good conversations would be what we do here. "Drive-by" swipes and insults to us, not so much. Also, there's a policy of "don't like? don't read" because of the acrimony. Finally, ladies who don't toe the line get told to leave the mirror thread all the time. What's good for the goose is good for the gander?

Carolyn - 6 months neoadjuvant chemo (clinical trial), BMX and rads. Dx'd and treated as TN. After MX, I was informed my tumor was weakly ER+ after all (8%)

Enjoyful

Barbara - I love you and always enjoyed the times we spent together. I also have a soft spot for my right-wing biscuit buddy LauraGTO.



We've been friends despite our opposing political views and have been fairly successful at keeping politics out of our friendships. Can't we continue that way?

Ang7

Thank you Enjoyful.

My thoughts exactly.

This thread has been around for so long,  I did not think politics would cause it trouble.

Enjoyful

And now - its time to donate to our favorite charities and liberal groups! Who shall it be tonight? Planned Parenthood? Nuns on the Bus? Who's your favorote?

riley702

The Obama campaign for me! - Done!

Enjoyful

Nuns on the Bus for me. Done!

lewing

I'm all for respectful discussion and disagreement - but not for name-calling and not for repeating things that aren't true.  Or, worse, just plain making stuff up.  I guess the litmus test for me is, when someone asks a question or offers up facts, do those become the basis for the discussion, or are facts dismissed if they don't support one's views?

So just a few responses to Beesie.

Yes, I'm deeply disappointed that Gitmo has not been closed.  I'd say that's my biggest disappointment with Obama's first term.  I understand the complications in closing it fully, but it's still an affront to my values and to our country's values.

I don't believe I or anyone was misled on the Benghazi attack by the President or Sec. of State or Susan Rice.  I certainly don't recall any "denials" that it was terrorism . . . what I recall (and please correct me if I'm wrong) were careful statements saying things like, "no evidence at this time," "we don't think," etc.  As for the role of the video: for crying out loud, our embassy in Cairo had just been attacked, protests were erupting all over the place, and our sketchy intelligence on the ground in Libya was also pointing to the video, so that's the information that was initially shared with us.  As that evaluation changed, we were told differently.  (And frankly, while I'm totally for transparency in government, I really don't expect to be kept fully informed of every twist and turn in an investigation -- seems to me that would jeopardize the investigation and put our intelligence operatives and informants in real danger.)

I'm really surprised, Beesie, that you would jump on the "Obama promised that with the stimulus unemployment would never rise above 8%" bandwagon.  That famous 8%, as you must know, came from an early economic forecast that WAY underestimated the depth of the Great Recession . . . by the time the stimulus bill was signed (in Obama's FIRST MONTH -- so much for the charge that he put job creation on the back burner!), unemployment was already above 8% and rising.  The important thing is, did the stimulus spur growth and bring the unemployment rate down from where it would otherwise have been?  And the consensus among economists is: yes.

As for cutting the deficit in half -- thank God Obama DIDN'T pursue that goal in his first term, given the depth of the economic crisis.  If he had tried to play Herbert Hoover, we would be in deep trouble now.  Sometimes, in the real world, situations change.  That's not "breaking a promise" in my book.  That's being a responsible adult.

Linda

RetiredLibby

Thanks, Linda, for addressing some of Beesie's questions, especially the ones about Susan Rice and the Administration's discussions of Benghazi. This Administration has been open and aboveboard about sharing (insofar as practical) what they know. What is offensive to me is the persistent belief that there is something nefarious about the evolving narrative, instead of an understanding that as the investigation continues and more information is collected that the picture will indeed change. Doesn't anyone remember the conflicting stories from Columbine? OK City? Shanksville? Virginia Tech? Aurora? Gabby Giffords' shooting, for Pete's sake? Remember the reports that she had died (thankfully false)? And this was in an American city, in daylight, with multiple witnesses who spoke English, video footage, instant police response and a shooter on the spot.



Linda, thanks also for addressing the "promises" allegedly not kept. It is a wonderment to me that people seem to think the President can just *fix* the economy by fiat, as if other factors he cannot control don't come into play.



As for not closing Gitmo, that is one of my grave disappointments about his administration so far. However, I don't think it is commonly known (or remembered) that the Republicans attached a rider to an essential spending bill that no appropriated funds may be spent to close Gitmo. That means they cannot even pay the military people to wind the facility down or transport prisoners. All the Executive Orders in the world cannot overcome the power of the purse that Congress has as per the Constitution.



And as far as the oft-repeated conservative trope that the President has not been bipartisan and Bill Clinton was -- it was a different Congress, folks. (Let's not forget, however, that Newt Gingrich's Congress shut down the government 3 times.) And no

Senate minority leader ever said smirkingly in public that Republicans' #1 job was to make Clinton a one-term president. And no Representative ever stood up in the State of the Union Address and shouted, "You lie!" to Clinton. And no-one ever questioned his religion or his citizenship. And the Republicans ultimately impeached President Clinton! Holding him up as a model of bipartisanship fails to recognize that it was a different time with different personalities.



I won't invite anyone to post elsewhere or suggest they not post. But likewise, I can also exercise "don't like, don't read" right here at home. It pains me to do so, but it makes for a more peaceful experience.



L

Anonymous

Interesting drive bys....what happened to "Don't Like, Don't Read."  Strange to come on this thread and be addressed as "you people" ( or close to it) - glad there's another thread now that welcomes those derogatory accusations.  Tho I can't report, as the only time I visited it was to put eveyone on ignore. We have all read ( esp. during the "non profits" attack on this thread) what "those people" wrote about the individuals who regularly post here - even giving us nicknames, thank goodness their Pod was Private.  Ah, the things some women forget..

Maybe we all ought to just be "innocent" and go back to reading Heidi, righty-ho?  Good idea?  There is a very interesting PM, sent to a regular poster on this thread, from, ah, "someone who shall not be named" which shows the way "you people" are "welcomed" (NOT) on other threads - no, I'm not gonna post it, no body who knows what's happening will have any trouble guessing.  And, lest I get "banned" will definitely not use the word, obviously(oooohhh....hope I'm not being "unkind.")

Better reading:http://www.nytimes.com/2012/10/13/opinion/the-moderate-mitt-myth.html?hp

Amazed, still, at the people who read this thread, with such distain, why bother?  Rhetorical, don't waste anybody's Happy Saturday time...off to Call & Canvas for ELIZABETH.