Good god we aren't ****ing Greece or close to it. What kind of industry does Greece actually have outside of olive oil and shipping?
As for Clint Eastwood's speech it wasn't bad but age really seems to have caught up with Clint. It seemed most of like an Academy Awards speech, not very substantive and is mostly about the audience showing their love for the actor. One part that seemed really odd was when he talked about Afghanistan. I don't know if Eastwood was making an attack on Obama for launching the Afghan surge and not quickly withdrawing troops from there. That is definitely not a line of attack that Romney wants to make and one reason why Romney never mentioned Afghanistan in his own speech.
It does have it own Twitter account. Invisible Obama @InvisibleObama Rubio 2016, book it (Jon Stewert thinks so)
Actually when Romney was talking about Bain I thought he was at his best. He seemed the most loose and energized while much of his speech he seemed stiff and uncomfortable, particularly about talking about himself. My feeling is that talking about Bain is something he has done for years and to him it is just like any other talk at a shareholders meeting while he is actually a somewhat private and self-effacing guy who doesn't like to talk about his own life.
I am sure he is physically healthy but he looked and sounded like his SNL parody. http://www.hulu.com/playlist/266576 He was rambling and at times seemed lost about what he was saying.
That's very hard to do. I can tell the difference obviously when the person is black, but is hard to distinguish between other minorities.
Taibbi: Mitt Romney actually made his fortune: by borrowing vast sums of money that other people were forced to pay back.
Sam you are no less racist than BigTexx has been accused of being. The RNC ran out 10+? minorities speakers (not counting white women) that made it to television. You are dismissive of any Republican minority as being a worthless token. I guess the only good minority is one that agrees with you huh Sam? Ask the people who brought it up. Maybe they could clarify why it matters and help alleviate your befuddlement. I agree that they have nasty anti-minorities strains in the party. Each party has it's insane extremists, unfortunately the right's nutjobs tend to be racist nutjobs.
He has pledged to push for and support a federal amendment banning gay marriage. And since much of this fight is fought in the federal court system, he also can appoint judges that are not supportive of the idea. States are widely pushing bills that restrict abortion providers' abilities to continue to operate. There's no reason to believe he would veto such bills at the federal level pushed by an extreme House GOP. He also would potentially have the opportunity to make Supreme Court appointments that could shape the future of abortion policy in the US. This is ludicrous. If you believe that, you have no understanding of what caused Greece's problems. Japan has twice the debt load we do and has near record-low interest rates and no one thinks they are remotely in trouble.
I thought his speech was just really strange, and in a funny entertaining way. Especially the Afghanistan part seemed like it didn't belong at the GOP convention. Also the part about voting for the guy you really want and not just picking what's offered was referring to Obama, but it seemed like it was supporting the Ron Paul supporters based on what's happened at the convention. We also know that Clint is in favor of gay marriage, pro-choice, and all of that. Eastwood also made the commercial which supported the auto bailout for the super bowl. None of those things fits in with the GOP today. He just seemed kind of out of place.
UPDATE: My brother-in-law passed away. His partner of 44 years had to get my wife to sign the cremation papers as next of kin. absurd.
The GOP nominee is generating 0% support among black voters. What are the black faces if not tokens? They are certainly not represenative of the party's membership or support. Why would they be featured otherwise? The GOP's weird brand of affirmative action has always fascinated me in its ridiculous hypocrisy. We must be color blind...but look at all of our black folks! No matter that she presided over a huge-iffic epic fail of a foreign policy, probably the most disastrous since Vietnam, but hey, she's black! It's not just a random hardcore of racist nutjobs like the folks tossing peanuts at the black "animals", the party's whole history since the 1960's has been littered with coded references and dogwhistling for white working class voters which largely consists of "the democrats are going to give all your stuff to blacks and browns" - The Southern Strategy, Cadillac Driving welfare queens, Willie Horton, Macaca, voter suppression, birtherism, the latest round of Romney/Ryan lies about welfare reform - these are all part of the same strain of racially-exploitative campaigning, and they are all mainstream GOP initiatives.
Absolutely absurd. What is weird to me is that when you talk about this sort of specific issue with people, even the hardcore tea partiers I know have agreed that it isn't right. I don't understand how things like this still happen anywhere. I've never met a single person who thought that these sorts of "spousal" rights (next of kin, insurance, etc.) should be restricted from gay couples.
