Romney- "America doesn't dictate nations, it frees them"

[Jesus Saves Gretzky Scores]

I'm, (unfortunately), watching the presidential debate, and Romney spewed something along the lines of:

"America doesn't dictate nations, it frees them."

:rolleyes:

They're both just so ridiculous.

[Stand Your Ground]

I'm, (unfortunately), watching the presidential debate, and Romney spewed something along the lines of:

"America doesn't dictate nations, it frees them."

:rolleyes:

They're both just so ridiculous.
Anything that comes outta their mouths looks a little bit like the brown stuff I left in the bathroom this morning.

[Art Vandelay]

Getting drunk and watching this is a quick way to lose all hope and become suicidal. Same fucking stupid fucking rhetoric and talking points every four fucking years.

[the Left™]

I remember in the primaries he said that there was no privileged class in the United States.. just people achieving the american dream

[thriller]

Getting drunk and watching this is a quick way to lose all hope and become suicidal. Same fucking stupid fucking rhetoric and talking points every four fucking years.

Drink every time both of them parrot each other (aka .8 BAC by the end).

[Althusser]

I got up at one point and cursed at the screen. Don't even remember what was said. Something about drones and fighting "bad guys"?

[Comrade Samuel]

I literally stood up and yelled "bullshit!" at my TV when I heard that....yep...I'm the coolest teenager sitting at home watching debates.:cool:

[Tenka]

I can't watch it, it's so stupid.
On a related note, I was outside the other day. I live in what I suppose is a relatively poor neighbourhood of old decrepit bungalows, and TWO LAWNS ON MY VERY STREET proudly displayed Romney/Ryan 2012 signs.

I was aghast!

[thriller]

I can't watch it, it's so stupid.
On a related note, I was outside the other day. I live in what I suppose is a relatively poor neighbourhood of old decrepit bungalows, and TWO PEOPLE ON MY VERY STREET proudly displayed Romney/Ryan 2012 signs on their lawns.

I was aghast!

Time to go sign punting eh?

[Tenka]

Time to go sign punting eh?

Naw I'd be afraid of getting shot at. This is Texas.

[thriller]

Naw I'd be afraid of getting shot at. This is Texas.

Ohh Jesus! A guy ran across a highway in Houston to yell at me for my big ass hammer and sickle shirt. But there was actually this old timer sitting there who schooled him which was sort of funny.

[Princess Luna]

I love how high school debate clubs have stricter rules and better moderators then presidential debates. Seriously it's supposed to be a debate about foreign policy when the person spends 5 minutes talking about how they would improve the US economy, the moderator should tell them to get the fuck back on topic, not ask them nicely to get back to get back on topic, and then let them continue on with their bullshit anyway for 20 more minutes.

[Os Cangaceiros]

I did think it was funny, in the one brief part of the debate that I watched, when Romney started moaning about the lack of ships in the US Navy, and Obama replied that there are less ships for the same reason there are less horses and bayonets in the military. :lol: He made some catty comment like "y'know there are these things called aircraft carriers, I don't know if you've ever heard of them or not..." too.

[thriller]

I love how high school debate clubs have stricter rules and better moderators then presidential debates. Seriously it's supposed to be a debate about foreign policy when the person spends 5 minutes talking about how they would improve the US economy, the moderator should tell them to get the fuck back on topic, not ask them nicely to get back to get back on topic, and then let them continue on with their bullshit anyway for 20 more minutes.

My US history professor was actually talking about the previous debate and said the moderator and Romney were rude and out of line because they kept interrupting Obama and criticizing him. I usually play devils advocate and act like a Romney supporter just to piss him off. I said "well it is freedom of speech, one can criticize anyone, even the President, and interrupt him, if you believe we are all equal." And he responded "Well no, there are national security issues with it." My mouth just dropped. So one can't criticize the the government because it is against national security? Sounds a lot like Germany in '33 to me...

[helot]

Anything that comes outta their mouths looks a little bit like the brown stuff I left in the bathroom this morning.

I'm sure what you left in the bathroom is more appealing.

[Crimson Commissar]

Sometimes I have to wonder if Romney is an actual person, or just some kind of mythical being constructed out of pure stereotypical American idiocy...

[Regicollis]

When there is no free and diverse media you can make people believe the most ridiculous lies.

In a free society a statement like that would have been met with laughter.

[rednordman]

tbh I know that the media is in overdrive trying to get yet another republican back in office, but from what i have seen, Romney looks a little out of his depth. Like he has a lot of promises but a poor hamfisted half done plan to carry them out. He is also as fake as hell. any one who doesn't believe that, simply doesn't want to believe that. Obama is literally the lesser of two evils, and to have Romney in power, would be a serious blow for the leftwing movements in the states. So why there are socialists and anarchists on here telling everyone not to vote Obama, I cannot really comprehend. Romney would rather got to war with a non-socialist Russia, than with places like Iran and such..

[l'Enfermé]

^^There are no genuine worker-class movements in the US. Not for decades.

[GPDP]

Obama is literally the lesser of two evils, and to have Romney in power, would be a serious blow for the leftwing movements in the states. So why there are socialists and anarchists on here telling everyone not to vote Obama, I cannot really comprehend. Romney would rather got to war with a non-socialist Russia, than with places like Iran and such..

Comrade, I think you're getting too caught up in the election fervor. A lot of times what's said by candidates during an election year is nothing but posturing for their base and rhetoric meant for media sound bites. So Romney, to appease his Republican conservative base, will say some outlandish right-wing crap, and Obama will say some reasonable, sorta social-democratic things to appeal to liberals. But come inaguration, most of that crap will get thrown out the window, and they'll do the job they're actually there to do: preserve American hegemony abroad and protect the bourgeoisie at home.

Sure, sometimes you get presidents like Nixon and Bush that go way beyond what they're supposed to do and really fuck shit up, but there's a reason no one, not even Republicans or the capitalists they so bent over backwards to serve, wants anything to do with them. I don't really peg Romney for being one of those particularly bad presidents, if only because he's shown he's not even THAT right-wing in plenty other occasions. Like you said, he's fake as hell and will say anything to appeal to anyone he wants to appeal to, so he said a bunch of reactionary shit to appeal to the Tea Party types, and now he's backpedaling back to the center to appeal to "independents" because he knows he already has the Republican vote pretty much secure. He and Obama are almost identical when you really get down to it. I suppose if you were to tally every single one of their positions, Romney would come out to be more reactionary, but I doubt it would be by much.

And in any case, who cares who people vote or not vote for? Bourgeois democracy is not a system we have any real say in no matter who is in office. If you wanna waste your time and vote for Obama, be my guest. I don't really see the point, but whatever. What I have a problem with is you implying people SHOULD vote for Obama. You're actively campaigning for the guy here. And no, qualifying that by saying that Obama is bad too, etc. doesn't help your case. By campaigning for him, you're tying people TO the Democrats rather than shying them away from them, which is what we need to do. It's something the Democrats themselves already employ as an electoral tactic: stirring up shit about how bad and scary the Republicans are so people scurry over under their umbrella for safety. It's the proverbial wolf in sheep's clothing telling other sheep to hurry over to his side of the fence for protection from the lion on the other side.

And you speak as if Obama didn't do plenty to quell leftist movements. Need I remind you of the anti-war movement, which thrived under Bush but effectively disappeared when Obama came into office because that very movement didn't want to rock his boat?

[GPDP]

Anyway, I pretty much only watched the debates for comedy potential. I already know both assholes are gonna lie through their teeth and spout the same old talking points from forever and a half ago, so I just watched them for the gaffes and to see Romney look like a dumbass. I don't really get mad over whatever gets said because I already know bourgies are gonna bourgie. I pretty much pretend it's a circus with suits.

[Bronco]

At one point he also went on about how "the mantle of leadership for promoting peace had fallen to America. We didn't ask for it but we have it", and how he was going to indict Ahmadinejad on genocide charges :rolleyes:

[Bardo]

I got up at one point and cursed at the screen. Don't even remember what what said. Something about drones and fighting "bad guys"?

He must've meant to say "evil doers"

[rednordman]

Comrade, I think you're getting too caught up in the election fervor. A lot of times what's said by candidates during an election year is nothing but posturing for their base and rhetoric meant for media sound bites. So Romney, to appease his Republican conservative base, will say some outlandish right-wing crap, and Obama will say some reasonable, sorta social-democratic things to appeal to liberals. But come inaguration, most of that crap will get thrown out the window, and they'll do the job they're actually there to do: preserve American hegemony abroad and protect the bourgeoisie at home.

Sure, sometimes you get presidents like Nixon and Bush that go way beyond what they're supposed to do and really fuck shit up, but there's a reason no one, not even Republicans or the capitalists they so bent over backwards to serve, wants anything to do with them. I don't really peg Romney for being one of those particularly bad presidents, if only because he's shown he's not even THAT right-wing in plenty other occasions. Like you said, he's fake as hell and will say anything to appeal to anyone he wants to appeal to, so he said a bunch of reactionary shit to appeal to the Tea Party types, and now he's backpedaling back to the center to appeal to "independents" because he knows he already has the Republican vote pretty much secure. He and Obama are almost identical when you really get down to it. I suppose if you were to tally every single one of their positions, Romney would come out to be more reactionary, but I doubt it would be by much.

And in any case, who cares who people vote or not vote for? Bourgeois democracy is not a system we have any real say in no matter who is in office. If you wanna waste your time and vote for Obama, be my guest. I don't really see the point, but whatever. What I have a problem with is you implying people SHOULD vote for Obama. You're actively campaigning for the guy here. And no, qualifying that by saying that Obama is bad too, etc. doesn't help your case. By campaigning for him, you're tying people TO the Democrats rather than shying them away from them, which is what we need to do. It's something the Democrats themselves already employ as an electoral tactic: stirring up shit about how bad and scary the Republicans are so people scurry over under their umbrella for safety. It's the proverbial wolf in sheep's clothing telling other sheep to hurry over to his side of the fence for protection from the lion on the other side.

And you speak as if Obama didn't do plenty to quell leftist movements. Need I remind you of the anti-war movement, which thrived under Bush but effectively disappeared when Obama came into office because that very movement didn't want to rock his boat?I would agree with everything you say, BUT i seriously loosing faith in the notion that people will revolt if situation gets dire. Also, how do you know that Romney isn't another Reagan or Bush?

[Igor]

How do you know anyone isn't "the next Reagan or Bush"? That's not something only a Republican can be.

[Krano]

I watched all the debates because of some masochistic reasons that I can't quite explain.

[thriller]

How do you know anyone isn't "the next Reagan or Bush"? That's not something only a Republican can be.

In fact look at Obama in regards to his policies on the War on "Terror". He's pretty much Bush #3.

[rednordman]

How do you know anyone isn't "the next Reagan or Bush"? That's not something only a Republican can be.better the devil you know, than the devil you dont;)

[GPDP]

I would agree with everything you say, BUT i seriously loosing faith in the notion that people will revolt if situation gets dire.

A notion you should never emotionally invest yourself into in the first place. And even if that was the case, there's the possibility they will revolt with reactionary rather than revolutionary intentions simply because the reactionary position is more socially prevalent. It's why so many people turned to the Tea Party at first, even though its main base appears to be in the petit-bourgeoisie.

Material conditions can push people to become dissatisfied, but if the mainstream ideas are not challenged and we do not work to break workers away from the accepted outlets for "change" or the reactionary ideas that present themselves as an alternative, then no shit people are not gonna break into socialist revolution.


Also, how do you know that Romney isn't another Reagan or Bush?How do you know Obama won't actually move further to the right now that he no longer has to appeal to his liberal base upon reelection? He's shown us he can be just as much of a dick as Bush in most ways except in personal mannerisms and a few token issues.

We can deal with what-ifs all day. The point is, focusing on whether one candidate or another is gonna be worse is at best a distraction and at worst legitimizes one over the other and invests people toward sticking with them from there on out. And you can bet lesser-evilism will not end with the choice between Obama and Romney. It'll get brought up again come next election, and the one after. We'll have effectively done the Democrats' job for them, and without getting paid for it! With enemies like us, who needs friends?

[A Revolutionary Tool]

I would agree with everything you say, BUT i seriously loosing faith in the notion that people will revolt if situation gets dire. Also, how do you know that Romney isn't another Reagan or Bush?
We aren't saying vote for Romney so the situation gets worse...

[RedHal]

and what did Obama say? "We are only out to get their Oil, enrich our bourgeoisie and secure our geo political strategic position against Russia and China" Nah, Obama says the same shit Romney says, but in a more eloquent way that fools the liberals and naive leftists. So is Obombma the lesser evil or the more effective evil?

[DasFapital]

He should go say this in Bahrain and see how it goes over

[Ocean Seal]

Sometimes I feel like I should become a religious fundamentalist and destroy all of the nice things that the rich have and claim that I am freeing them from their material urges. Maybe then they'll understand why the world's countries don't care much for you freeing them.