Help ATS with a contribution via PayPal:
learn more

2012 Republican National Convention Discussion

page: 14
14
<< 11  12  13    15  16  17 >>

log in

join

posted on Aug, 29 2012 @ 09:32 PM
link   

Originally posted by thepresident

Originally posted by Kituwa
reply to post by thepresident
 


Bush who? I havent seen a Bush or a Karl there, have you? I thought this was about the convention.

How about that guy in the 60's. What was his name?

Suzanna Martinez Rocks!!



Well then, start a thread about it then. This thread isnt about bush and karl sonny.





Ya Bush and Karl's associates and ideas are serving as Ryan's advisors.

They are there, they are everywhere.




posted on Aug, 29 2012 @ 09:33 PM
link   
Paul Ryan needs to get some corporate tattoos on his forehead.

Gotta make sure the multinationals get richer!



posted on Aug, 29 2012 @ 09:34 PM
link   

Originally posted by Kituwa

Originally posted by thepresident

Originally posted by Kituwa
reply to post by thepresident
 


Bush who? I havent seen a Bush or a Karl there, have you? I thought this was about the convention.

How about that guy in the 60's. What was his name?

Suzanna Martinez Rocks!!



Well then, start a thread about it then. This thread isnt about bush and karl sonny.





Ya Bush and Karl's associates and ideas are serving as Ryan's advisors.

They are there, they are everywhere.


This thread is about the RNC and the RNC is crawling with Neocons, you can
only do so much to hide the stench.



posted on Aug, 29 2012 @ 09:41 PM
link   
Ryan talking about Obama Care attacking the elderly???



that guy is a massive liar -

He wants to create a massive cash give away to the insurance companies.


What a dickweed



posted on Aug, 29 2012 @ 09:42 PM
link   

Originally posted by thepresident
Paul Ryan needs to get some corporate tattoos on his forehead.

Gotta make sure the multinationals get richer!


Wow! Eddie Haskell ( from Leave It To Beaver ) much? Yes, it's an ancient reference ( Google it ), but Ryan is worse at reading a teleprompter than Jindall, if that's at all even possible. No wonder his HS yearbook deemed him the biggest "brown noser" ( Google that, too. :~D )

This guy adds absolutely NADA to the ticket. The GOP is in big trouble if this is all they got.



posted on Aug, 29 2012 @ 09:48 PM
link   
This dude is just constantly bagging on Obama, I guess he thinks he is a comedian...What's funny is he is no different from people like Obama....



posted on Aug, 29 2012 @ 09:54 PM
link   
Does it bother anyone else that Eddie Munster is pretty much telling us we will be going to war in February if Romney wins? Also note McCain also pushed that position.



posted on Aug, 29 2012 @ 09:54 PM
link   
RYAN Translation


"We need to bomb Iran and Syria"



posted on Aug, 29 2012 @ 09:54 PM
link   

Originally posted by OutKast Searcher
Wow, I'm watching Condi Rice give a speech...and she is a horrible speech giver.

No wonder she didn't want VP...it's very uncomfortable watching her...I fell like I'm watching SNL.


I very much disagree. I've always thought her a great speaker. very charismatic and smart. She comes across as a person you'd not want to face on the other side of a debate table. She'd eat most of us and most anyone politician alive.

Like I say, I call it like I see it. I've always thought Condi was brilliant. Her academic pedigree sure bears it out. Did you compared to all other speakers so far, she makes them all seem lightweights? The woman wears so much gravitas it drips from her dress. She makes the rest of the Right seem to be petty children.

Now I don't think she was a very good Sec of State or NatSec Advisor before that. Also, she was considered one of the world's top Russia experts, but she got Putin all wrong. Her ideas about Iraq were disastrous (she was an ardent supporter as NatSec and internally battled then Sec State Colin Powell who did not want war there. Powell left and Condi took his place.

But America has a very short attention span and few Americans really what's happening, so most probably don't even know what her roles were, much less her actions. For that reason, I think she would have been the best VP pick, for the following reasons:

1. She's a boot strapper. She came from very humble roots and made herself.
2. She's a brilliant academic (Standford Ph.D), counting the arguably accurate meme that most on the Right these days are science denying ignoramuses.
3. She's black, so she'd have taken a very sizable percentage of that vote.
4. She's a woman, so she would have erased the women gap (currently at 10% between O and Romney
5. She has foreign policy chops. Romney is an idiot there. Ryan knows nothing about it either.
6. She actually puts California in electoral reach, since she was a respected professor there and can claim some roots in CA.

Now, she's also unmarried, without kids. She'd have had to explained that on some level. Maybe she is gay, who knows, but it would hurt her on the Right.

My guess for her now? She takes a CEO role over the next 4 years because she has no real private sector experience and needs to round that out. Then runs for president in 2016 (Romney will lose this cycle). She runs against a white male Dem or Hillary. If Hillary is her opponent, we have a battle between giants. If she runs against a white male, she very well could win.

That's my opinion, for what its worth.
edit on 29-8-2012 by pajoly because: (no reason given)



posted on Aug, 29 2012 @ 09:55 PM
link   

Originally posted by KeliOnyx
Does it bother anyone else that Eddie Munster is pretty much telling us we will be going to war in February if Romney wins? Also note McCain also pushed that position.


Yes and Eddie Munster has hired Bush's advisors as his own.



posted on Aug, 29 2012 @ 09:58 PM
link   
The media loves Ryan. I think he is a lightweight, pseudo intellectual given to pulp theory (aka Randian) and a poseur.



posted on Aug, 29 2012 @ 10:01 PM
link   

Originally posted by pajoly

Originally posted by OutKast Searcher
Wow, I'm watching Condi Rice give a speech...and she is a horrible speech giver.

No wonder she didn't want VP...it's very uncomfortable watching her...I fell like I'm watching SNL.


I very much disagree. I've always thought her a great speaker. very charismatic and smart. She comes across as a person you'd not want to face on the other side of a debate table. She'd eat most of us and most anyone politician alive.

Like I say, I call it like I see it. I've always thought Condi was brilliant. Her academic pedigree sure bears it out. Did you compared to all other speakers so far, she makes them all seem lightweights? The woman wears so much gravitas it drips from her dress. She makes the rest of the Right seem to be petty children.

Now I don't think she was a very good Sec of State or NatSec Advisor before that. Also, she was considered one of the world's top Russia experts, but she got Putin all wrong. Her ideas about Iraq were disastrous (she was an ardent supporter as NatSec and internally battled then Sec State Colin Powell who did not want war there. Powell left and Condi took his place.

But America has a very short attention span and few Americans really what's happening, so most probably don't even know what her roles were, much less her actions. For that reason, I think she would have been the best VP pick, for the following reasons:

1. She's a boot strapper. She came from very humble roots and made herself.
2. She's a brilliant academic (Standford Ph.D), counting the arguably accurate meme that most on the Right these days are science denying ignoramuses.
3. She's black, so she'd have taken a very sizable percentage of that vote.
4. She's a woman, so she would have erased the women gap (currently at 10% between O and Romney
5. She has foreign policy chops. Romney is an idiot there. Ryan knows nothing about it either.
6. She actually puts California in electoral reach, since she was a respected professor there and can claim some roots in CA.

Now, she's also unmarried, without kids. She'd have had to explained that on some level. Maybe she is gay, who knows, but it would hurt her on the Right.

My guess for her now? She takes a CEO role over the next 4 years because she has no real private sector experience and needs to round that out. Then runs for president in 2016 (Romney will lose this cycle). She runs against a white male Dem or Hillary. If Hillary is her opponent, we have a battle between giants. If she runs against a white male, she very well could win.

That's my opinion, for what its worth.
edit on 29-8-2012 by pajoly because: (no reason given)


All very commendable, but Christie has positioned himself as the buzzsaw in the doorway she'd need to get past. Barring a heart attack, he's got the upper hand, as of now that is.



posted on Aug, 29 2012 @ 10:01 PM
link   
reply to post by pajoly
 


I agree, plus I have a hard time reconciling the fact that he is really a fraud. Didn't care about how much spending was going on when he acted as a rubber stamp for someone else's policy. This man is a walking disaster.



posted on Aug, 29 2012 @ 10:04 PM
link   
Ryan needs to cut out the comedian skits.

It just doesn't work.



posted on Aug, 29 2012 @ 10:05 PM
link   
reply to post by QueSeraSera
 


I agree she'd have trouble earning the nomination with this current anti-intellectual strain of the Republican party. But wouldn't you love to see the giant Italian/Irish populist Christie going head-to-head with the gravitas and stateswoman persona of Condi Rice. I'd do pay per view on that.
edit on 29-8-2012 by pajoly because: (no reason given)



posted on Aug, 29 2012 @ 10:07 PM
link   

Originally posted by pajoly
The media loves Ryan. I think he is a lightweight, pseudo intellectual given to pulp theory (aka Randian) and a poseur.


Yes, you can make everyone better off by funneling more money, more efficiently
to billionaires.

Hell, if Warren Buffet gets another tax break that means I'm getting a raise
and so will everyone else!


I am tired of being force fed this lie over and over, you will make the economy
better when you direct the focus or relief at the people who buy, not who sell.
edit on 29-8-2012 by thepresident because: (no reason given)



posted on Aug, 29 2012 @ 10:10 PM
link   
reply to post by pajoly
 

Rice is damaged goods and a chickenhawk really. One it was a huge mistake to crap all over Powell like she did that says more about her than anything else she will do in life. It was terribly painful to watch her talk i places because she was a key figure in putting us in the position we are in. The only redeeming quality about her is she is a Browns fan.



posted on Aug, 29 2012 @ 10:12 PM
link   
Guy on TV said

"Ryan's mom took a public bus, to a state school"



posted on Aug, 29 2012 @ 10:13 PM
link   

Originally posted by pajoly
reply to post by QueSeraSera
 


I agree she'd have trouble earning the nomination with this current anti-intellectual strain of the Republican party. But wouldn't you love to see the giant Italian/Irish populist Christie going head-to-head with the gravitas and stateswoman persona of Condi Rice. I'd do pay per view on that.
edit on 29-8-2012 by pajoly because: (no reason given)


They have two totally different approaches, for sure. But Americans are anti-intellectual ( and some demographics unfortunately still racist, too ) in general, unfortunately, so I can't really envision a level playing field for her.



posted on Aug, 29 2012 @ 10:22 PM
link   
reply to post by pajoly
 


I thought her speech was brilliant too, plus she did it all from memory.





new topics

top topics



 
14
<< 11  12  13    15  16  17 >>

log in

join