• Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.

US PoliGAF 2012 | The Romney VeepStakes: Waiting for Chris Christie to Sing…

Status
Not open for further replies.
I

Invisible_Insane

Member
I merely posted the article for context.
Kosmo said:
The government basically did exactly what Romney suggested, with the exception that the government chose to protect the UAW and screw the bond holders who had a legal right to be paid first. Which part of this do you disagree with:
Click to expand...
Mitt Romney said:
It is not wrong to ask for government help, but the automakers should come up with a win-win proposition. I believe the federal government should invest substantially more in basic research — on new energy sources, fuel-economy technology, materials science and the like — that will ultimately benefit the automotive industry, along with many others. I believe Washington should raise energy research spending to $20 billion a year, from the $4 billion that is spent today. The research could be done at universities, at research labs and even through public-private collaboration. The federal government should also rectify the imbedded tax penalties that favor foreign carmakers.

But don’t ask Washington to give shareholders and bondholders a free pass — they bet on management and they lost.
Click to expand...
Click to expand...
 
Dude Abides

Dude Abides

Banned
Kosmo said:
The government basically did exactly what Romney suggested, with the exception that the government chose to protect the UAW and screw the bond holders who had a legal right to be paid first. Which part of this do you disagree with:
Click to expand...

You're wrong. The court, applying the bankruptcy code, confirmed the plans over the objections of the bondholders. You don't understand how bankruptcy works.
 
S

Stinkles

Clothed, sober, cooperative
AlteredBeast said:
Were you asking it seriously, or to be snide? Mormon's believe in the Bible...
Click to expand...

But the bible is not the primary book of faith. The book of Mormon is. A Jew would swear on the Talmud, a Muslim on the Quran. It is a 100% reasonable question. I assume he would swear on a new testament or holy bible, but it would certainly be a compromise of sorts. I don't, however, give a shit because it's a meaningless and invariably hypocritical gesture.
 
JetBlackPanda

JetBlackPanda

Member
OuterWorldVoice said:
But the bible is not the primary book of faith. The book of Mormon is. A Jew would swear on the Talmud, a Muslim on the Quran. It is a 100% reasonable question. I assume he would swear on a new testament or holy bible, but it would certainly be a compromise of sorts. I don't, however, give a shit because it's a meaningless and invariably hypocritical gesture.
Click to expand...

The Book of Mormon to LDS people is another testament of Jesus Christ it does not replace the bible, in fact to Mormons the scriptures includes both.

but I agree its meaningless

Theodore Roosevelt did not use a Bible when taking the oath in 1901. John Quincy Adams swore on a book of law. Lyndon B. Johnson was sworn in on a Roman Catholic missal on Air Force One.
 
G

Gaborn

Member
A controversial online piracy bill could force President Obama to choose between two of his most important allies: Hollywood and Silicon Valley.

Obama hasn’t taken a position yet on the Stop Online Piracy Act (SOPA) that has divided senior lawmakers in both parties, but that will have to change if it clears Congress.

If Obama signs the bill, he will dash the hopes of Silicon Valley executives who donated heavily to his 2008 campaign and are vehemently opposed to the anti-piracy measure.

But the entertainment industry would see a veto as a betrayal by the administration on its most significant priority.

SOPA would empower the Justice Department and copyright holders to demand that search engines, Internet providers and payment processors cut off access to sites “dedicated” to copyright infringement.

The legislation is aimed at blocking foreign sites such as The Pirate Bay that offer illegal copies of movies, music and television shows with impunity.

Movie studios, record labels and business groups say the law is necessary to crack down on online copyright infringement, which is hurting businesses and destroying jobs.

But consumer groups and major Web companies, including Google, Yahoo and Facebook, warn SOPA would stifle innovation. They say the legislation would impose an unreasonable burden on websites to police user-generated content and could lead to legitimate websites getting shut down.

Although Hollywood and Silicon Valley are engaged in an all-out lobbying war over SOPA, they are also two of President Obama’s most important bases of support.

Google Chairman Eric Schmidt, who just last month warned that SOPA would “criminalize linking and the fundamental structure of the Internet itself,” campaigned for Obama in 2008 and has already donated the maximum amount to his reelection campaign.

Employees of computer and Internet companies have donated a total of $1.3 million to Obama’s 2012 campaign, one of the highest figures for any industry, according to an analysis of campaign finance data compiled by the Center for Responsive Politics.

Obama has made Silicon Valley a frequent stop on recent West Coast swings. In a September visit to California, he held fundraisers at the homes of former Symantec CEO John Thompson and Facebook Chief Operating Officer Sheryl Sandberg.

Obama credited tech-industry donors with helping him win the White House and implored them to work for his reelection.

“So I expect all of you, again, not just to be supporting me; you have to be out there, active, engaged — just as engaged as you were in 2008,” Obama said at Thompson’s house in San Jose, Calif.

The president is also close with the entertainment industry.

Employees of television, movie and music companies have donated more than $1 million to Obama’s reelection campaign, according to the Center for Responsive Politics.

He also makes time for fundraisers in Los Angeles, some of them attended by A-list Hollywood stars, from Tom Hanks to Eva Longoria.

Vice President Biden, who served on the Senate Judiciary Committee and has long advocated for tough intellectual-property protections, is close with former Sen. Chris Dodd (D-Conn.), now the head of Hollywood’s trade group, the Motion Picture Association of America.

“Look, piracy is outright theft,” Biden told Variety last year. “People are out there blatantly stealing from Americans — stealing their ideas and robbing us of America’s creative energies. There’s no reason why we should treat intellectual property any different than tangible property.”

“Joe believes it passionately and understands it intellectually. The marriage of those two doesn’t always happen in this town,” Dodd told Variety.

Congress is expected to move forward with SOPA when it returns from its recess.

House Judiciary Committee Chairman Lamar Smith (R-Texas), SOPA’s sponsor, plans to bring the bill to a vote in his committee this month.

The Senate is expected to vote on its version of the bill, the Protect IP Act, which has already cleared the Senate Judiciary Committee, by the end of the month.

It is difficult to handicap where the administration will come down on the issue. While the administration has made copyright protection a priority by launching a public education campaign against illegal downloading and seizing hundreds of allegedly infringing websites, it also has sought to help grow innovative companies seen as bright spots in the future U.S. economy.

An administration spokeswoman said the president’s chief adviser on intellectual property issues, Victoria Espinel, is reviewing the legislation. She has met with tech companies, unions, copyright holders, consumer advocacy groups, progressive groups and Internet freedom advocates, according to the spokeswoman.

Other Democratic constituencies are involved in the fight. Labor unions back the movie studios, while Internet freedom advocates such as the American Civil Liberties Union and Public Knowledge are lobbying against it.

But Hollywood and Silicon Valley are unique for their combination of zeal on the issue and their clout in Washington. It will be a difficult decision for Obama to disappoint either side.
Click to expand...

Story Here

I hope Obama vetoes. I doubt he will.
 
C

Clevinger

Member
Manos: The Hans of Fate said:
Didn't he get arrested for trying too...in the dumbest fucking manner possible...but a Congressional Office, or was it a local office or State Rep?
Click to expand...

A senator's office, yup. He also tried to seduce a CNN reporter to tape it or some weird shit. O'Keefe is the dumbest of fucks and it's hilarious and depressing that he's not in prison.
 
G

Gaborn

Member
PhoenixDark said:
I'm starting to doubt it will even reach his desk. But given how much money Google and other e-folks have given him, I think it's more likely that he would veto it if it reached his desk
Click to expand...

I think it's overly optimistic to say it won't reach his desk, there is too much money involved in the bill. It will be an interesting fight to watch though, and even MORE interesting to see which way he comes down on it. I'm guessing he'll try to find some way to ask lawmakers to "split the baby" as it were and please no one which would ultimately be very bad.
 
P

PhoenixDark

Banned
Gaborn said:
I think it's overly optimistic to say it won't reach his desk, there is too much money involved in the bill. It will be an interesting fight to watch though, and even MORE interesting to see which way he comes down on it. I'm guessing he'll try to find some way to ask lawmakers to "split the baby" as it were and please no one which would ultimately be very bad.
Click to expand...

I doubt his backers would be very happy with a split the baby approach. This is an issue that not only is important to young people, it's important to internet giants. And it's not connected to a military spending bill either, so there's no excuse for stupidity here on his part (not that there was for NDA, but you get my point)
 
C

Cyan

Banned
Invisible_Insane said:
Kosmo may have many issues, but let it never be said that the man does not recycle.
Click to expand...

Over and over and over...

The Kosmo cycle:
1. Post something incorrect.
2. Completely ignore the multiple people who post corrections.
3. Respond to any perceived criticism of a Republican with a non sequitur criticism of a Democrat. (Make sure the Dem criticism is at least a year old!)
4. Goto 1.

For bonus efficiency points, combine 1 and 3!
 
G

Gaborn

Member
PhoenixDark said:
I doubt his backers would be very happy with a split the baby approach. This is an issue that not only is important to young people, it's important to internet giants. And it's not connected to a military spending bill either, so there's no excuse for stupidity here on his part (not that there was for NDA, but you get my point)
Click to expand...

I think you're underestimating the strength of the supporters of SOPA/PIPA though. I would say odds are 60-40 he signs it rather than vetoing. Probably with another "signing statement" that means nothing but is meant to calm the uninformed.
 
A

Averon

Member
I don't know. I think Obama prides himself with being one of the most tech savvy of politicians. I don't think he wants to ruin his credibility with Silicon Valley by signing SOPA. I'm leaning towards him vetoing it, if it even gets to his desk.
 
G

Gaborn

Member
Averon said:
I don't know. I think Obama prides himself with being one of the most tech savvy of politicians. I don't think he wants to ruin his credibility with Silicon Valley by signing SOPA. I'm leaning towards him vetoing it, if it even gets to his desk.
Click to expand...

Well, like I said I hope you're right. I think Hollywood has traditionally been a very strong force in liberal politics for a very long time and I have trouble seeing Obama disappointing them either. as the article said it will be a very interesting decision he makes.
 
S

sc0la

Unconfirmed Member
Gaborn said:
Well, like I said I hope you're right. I think Hollywood has traditionally been a very strong force in liberal politics for a very long time and I have trouble seeing Obama disappointing them either. as the article said it will be a very interesting decision he makes.
Click to expand...

I think the distinction here is that the typical vocal Hollywood support is from actors, directors etc and to a lesser extent the studios and rights holders.

Sure there is a lot of industry money backing it but this could be an issue that splits moneyed Hollywood interests and vocal partisans.

Edit: Anecdotal for instance: all the musicians coming out with the mega-upload song while the studio tried DMCA maneuvers to suppress it.
 
J

Jackson50

Member
ToxicAdam said:
The establishment has always been behind Romney. He was killing everybody in endorsements. These Newt attacks came well after that reality.
Click to expand...
Party support is why Romney's positioned to withstand Newt's ad blitz. Party support is essential to winning the nomination. And the past month has demonstrated why. And Romney appears to be attracting party actors previously ambivalent or opposed to his nomination. Even DeMint's camp is gravitating towards Romney. He's in a good position to win SC and prevent a protracted victory.
AlteredBeast said:
The world was definitely not ripe for an Obama-style candidate, that's for sure. The fact remains that Kerry was boring. He couldn't incite young people to vote for him. I used to run Music for America voter registration booths at concerts and the stickers said, Kerry vs Bush is this the best we could do? When a lefty organization calling out for the young vote despises a candidate, you know thats a pretty crappy sign.
Click to expand...
Kerry was boring, certainly. But could a more exhilarating candidate have defeated Bush? Probably not. Seemingly, Kerry failed to inspire young people. Nevertheless, young people were stimulated to vote Democratic. They were one of the few demographics to buck the national trend and shift towards Democrats in 2004. Could a more engaging candidate have stimulated the young vote even more? Perhaps. The shift in 2008 was more pronounced for young people. That could have been a function of Obama's charisma. Alternatively, it could have been a function of young people being disproportionately affected by the recession; more likely it was a combination of both. Now, would a more appealing candidate have stimulated young people enough to defeat Bush? I highly doubt it. Again, the fundamentals were good enough to push Bush over the threshold.
Oblivion said:
Didn't everyone pretty much agree that Bush won cause Karl Rove scared the Evangelicals about the gays coming to steal their husbands?
Click to expand...
No. Although, that is the conventional wisdom. And even I previously ascribed a portion of Bush's success to "values voters." But additional research indicates the effect of social issues were exaggerated.
 
I

Invisible_Insane

Member
AlteredBeast said:
That is insane. Literally insane. If anyone 15 years ago would have told you we were going to repeal Glass-Steagall and consequently blow up the world economy, thus massively expanding the deficit, they would have called you crazy and burned you at the stake.
Click to expand...
It's down significantly from last year, which I suppose I should have said initially.

Measley said:
Yeah, we really need to let EGTRRA expire.
Click to expand...
Which would reduce last year's deficit to something on the order of 200 billion.

Won't happen, though.
 
M

Manos: The Hans of Fate

Banned
Gaborn said:
I think you're underestimating the strength of the supporters of SOPA/PIPA though. I would say odds are 60-40 he signs it rather than vetoing. Probably with another "signing statement" that means nothing but is meant to calm the uninformed.
Click to expand...

It's united the AFL-CIO and the US Chamber of Commerce in supporting it (which is an unholy combination if there ever was one), the bill is going to be signed.
 
W

Wolfgunblood Garopa

Member
Measley said:
Great interview between Stewart and Demint;

http://www.thedailyshow.com/#tool_tip_1

It really is amazing how the conservative talking points get ripped apart when a "journalist" simply challenges it in an intelligent manner.
Click to expand...

If more journalists did their job, Republicans wouldn't have a chance at a majority in Congress, much less the WH. You barely have to challenge rightwingers' bullshit and they either expose what hateful jerks they are or they just fall apart. It's not difficult.

It's rare you see someone other than Jon Stewart or Chris Matthews doing the job correctly, like the 60 Minutes interview with Cantor.
 
A

Allard

Member
Gaborn said:
Well, like I said I hope you're right. I think Hollywood has traditionally been a very strong force in liberal politics for a very long time and I have trouble seeing Obama disappointing them either. as the article said it will be a very interesting decision he makes.
Click to expand...

Like sc0la said, the "liberal" part of Hollywood is not the same people who are backing SOPA. It is all the CEO's and Production groups who hire those actors that are for it. The only thing I'm worried about isn't the hollywood groups who are backing the bill, but Obama's stance on IP rights. Lets put it this way, if SOPA gets to his desk before the election, its getting vetoed (He gets way, way too much money from silicon valley, plus his biggest advantage is how rooted he is in the internet communities, look what happened to Go Daddy after they came out in favor of it, no way he wants that kind of back lash in an election year), if it pops up after the election, its hard to say, but I still think he is sensible enough in the tech industry to know that signing SOPA would only stifle long term tech advancement and general rights of the populace for the PROFIT of only a small group of people.
 
W

Wolfgunblood Garopa

Member
AlteredBeast said:
That is insane. Literally insane. If anyone 15 years ago would have told you we were going to run deficits like this year after year, they would have called you crazy and burned you at the stake.
Click to expand...

As opposed to no deficit spending, leaving foreign interests and big corporations to swoop in and pick up the scraps as the country bottoms out. How long would the Great Depression last? 10, 15 years? You tell me how you think that would go.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

  • Locked
PoliGAF 2017 |OT6| Made this thread during Harvey because the ratings would be higher
338 339 340 341 342
17K
2M
UselessNapkin replied
  • Locked
PoliGAF 2017 |OT5| The Man In the High Chair
395 396 397 398 399
20K
2M
RDreamer replied
  • Locked
PoliGAF 2017 |OT4| The leaks are coming from inside the white house
396 397 398 399 400
20K
2M
ShironRedshift replied
  • Locked
PoliGAF 2017 |OT3| 13 Treasons Why
393 394 395 396 397
20K
2M
Zaraki_Kenpachi replied
  • Locked
Poligaf 2017 |OT| It Almost Isn't Fair
9
3K
Bonen no Max'd replied
Top Bottom