MOBILE USERS: m.isthmus.com
Connect with Isthmus on Twitter · Facebook · Flickr · Newsletters 
Sunday, April 20, 2014 |  Madison, WI: 62.0° F  Partly Cloudy
Collapse Photo Bar

Impressions of the Debate

Races for the Senate, U.S. House, etc. and other issues of national importance.

Re: Impressions of the Debate

Postby Talon Newsman » Wed Oct 17, 2012 8:43 am

pjbogart wrote:And saying that you got yourself a "binder full of women" to put some diversity in your cabinet probably isn't the best choice of words.

I thought you leftists would be happy that Romney made a vigorous endorsement of Affirmative Action during the debate.
Talon Newsman
Forum Addict
 
Posts: 472
Joined: Thu Mar 02, 2006 6:28 pm

Re: Impressions of the Debate

Postby Stella_Guru » Wed Oct 17, 2012 8:46 am

President Obama's point about how it is going to take more than 4 years to dig out of what Bush left us was good. But it begs the question, and one that won't be asked. How was one of the most hated presidents in history able to achieve his goals passing whatever draconian and undemocratic laws he wanted, able to engage in warmongering unchecked, absent his party controlling the House or Senate?
Stella_Guru
Forum God/Goddess
 
Posts: 1157
Joined: Sat Mar 01, 2008 7:08 pm

Re: Impressions of the Debate

Postby Endo Rockstar » Wed Oct 17, 2012 8:55 am

Talon Newsman wrote:
pjbogart wrote:And saying that you got yourself a "binder full of women" to put some diversity in your cabinet probably isn't the best choice of words.

I thought you leftists would be happy that Romney made a vigorous endorsement of Affirmative Action during the debate.


Responses have been edited for clarity:

Obama:
I have passed Lily-Ledbetter Act, makes businesses liable for unfair payment; enforce the laws that already exist; fight against discrimination in every aspect


Romney:
I hired a woman once. Turns out there was one who was qualified. I want to improve the economy and make companies so desperate for workers, they'll even hire women!



-Dan Motor
Endo Rockstar
Forum God/Goddess
 
Posts: 1230
Joined: Wed Nov 06, 2002 11:16 pm
Location: Madison

Re: Impressions of the Debate

Postby kurt_w » Wed Oct 17, 2012 9:29 am

Stella_Guru wrote:How was one of the most hated presidents in history able to achieve his goals passing whatever draconian and undemocratic laws he wanted, able to engage in warmongering unchecked, absent his party controlling the House or Senate?


Most of the big items on Bush's agenda were passed when his party controlled both the House and Senate, and were done using "reconciliation" rules, which prevented the Democrats from using the filibuster to block them. This was true for both the 2001 and 2003 tax cuts. The GOP temporarily lost control of the Senate in mid-2001, when Jim Jeffords switched from "Republican" to "Independent" ... but he waited until after the tax cut bill had passed through conference. The GOP regained control in the following year's elections.

The Medicare Drug bill also passed in 2003, when the Republicans controlled the Presidency, House, and Senate. Even so, it required a remarkable degree of arm twisting, and barely succeeded.

The Patriot Act and the Iraq War AUMF were both passed in the aftermath of 9/11, when the country was temporarily inclined to rally around Bush and his polling numbers were sky high.

If you look at the later years, Bush didn't really do well at getting his legislative agenda implemented. His main objective for the second term (privatizing social security) failed to go anywhere.

Most of the other stuff Bush accomplished was via executive orders, appointments, etc. The executive branch has a lot of power to set policy without input from Congress.

The authorization for the use of torture during interrogations is a good example. Bush authorized it on his own. Obama repealed that authorization on his own. It's true that in either case Congress could have pursued impeachment, as the ultimate way to stop it. But the GOP controlled the House up until 2007, and I guess in the last two years of the Bush administration, the Democrats decided that (unlike having sex with an intern) merely violating the Geneva Conventions isn't enough to justify impeachment.

All that said, it's true that the Republicans tend to be more unified and lock-step in Congress, while the Democrats tend to be more flexible about letting their members pick and choose what they support. That gives the GOP a bit of an advantage when it comes to ramming through their agenda.
kurt_w
Forum God/Goddess
 
Posts: 4818
Joined: Tue Jul 22, 2003 3:11 pm

Re: Impressions of the Debate

Postby Henry Vilas » Wed Oct 17, 2012 10:21 am

On cnn.com's homepage is this question: Who do you think fared better in the second presidential debate?

The results so far (with over 33 thousand responses) has Obama leading, 65% to 35% for Romney.
Henry Vilas
Forum God/Goddess
 
Posts: 19159
Joined: Wed Sep 04, 2002 8:57 pm
Location: Name sez it all

Re: Impressions of the Debate

Postby pjbogart » Wed Oct 17, 2012 10:54 am

Henry Vilas wrote:On cnn.com's homepage is this question: Who do you think fared better in the second presidential debate?

The results so far (with over 33 thousand responses) has Obama leading, 65% to 35% for Romney.


At the risk of suffering Huck's wrath, I think that once again the narrative is driving a lot of people's perception about the debate. The President was on the ropes! He needed a good debate to close the gap! Whoa! An uppercut with his left and Romney goes down! Watch for the next debate, the one that will decide the outcome of the election!!!

Yeah, I think Obama won, or at least he did what he needed to do which was not appear like a milquetoast. The fact checkers are on his side, he was feisty and persistent. But if you're a complete moron, or an irreversibly dedicated Republican, Romney scored some huge points. He said "jobs" a lot... and I mean a lot. He came off as very caring about women's issues. He really nailed the President on Libya and "Fast and Furious". Those people weren't swayed.

So we're back where we started. The battle for the independent voter and the swing States. Expect to see Romney/Ryan in Ohio a lot over the next few weeks. It really doesn't matter what the popular vote says, if the President wins Ohio, he'll very likely win re-election. And he's got a comfortable lead there.
pjbogart
Forum God/Goddess
 
Posts: 6019
Joined: Thu Sep 04, 2003 4:57 pm

Re: Impressions of the Debate

Postby Stebben84 » Wed Oct 17, 2012 11:24 am

pjbogart wrote:He came off as very caring about women's issues.


I thought he was absolutely horrible on the women's issues. "binder full of women" and I can't tell you how many jokes are being made about letting women off work early so they can "cook dinner"

pjbogart wrote: "Fast and Furious"


I honestly think most people don't care about this because there is nothing there*

Cue Ned
Stebben84
Forum God/Goddess
 
Posts: 4533
Joined: Thu Mar 02, 2006 12:59 pm

Re: Impressions of the Debate

Postby Stebben84 » Wed Oct 17, 2012 11:44 am

Image
Stebben84
Forum God/Goddess
 
Posts: 4533
Joined: Thu Mar 02, 2006 12:59 pm

Re: Impressions of the Debate

Postby pjbogart » Wed Oct 17, 2012 12:11 pm

Stebben, I wasn't saying I believed any of those things, but Meade and Ned did. The Republican party fluffers felt like they had plenty to crow about.

And I was very disappointed that Obama didn't pounce on Romney's fantastical description of "Fast and Furious." Anyone who took the time to read that Fortune magazine article about the program knows that little if anything that Mitt Romney said about "Fast and Furious" was accurate.
pjbogart
Forum God/Goddess
 
Posts: 6019
Joined: Thu Sep 04, 2003 4:57 pm

Re: Impressions of the Debate

Postby fisticuffs » Wed Oct 17, 2012 12:13 pm

And I was very disappointed that Obama didn't pounce on Romney's fantastical description of "Fast and Furious."


He wasn't allowed to respond. Yeah Mitt was super shady in that bit. He continually made it sound like no one had any idea what it was even about? Clearly he doesn't read newspapers, websites, or watch TV. And it was started under Bush of course.
fisticuffs
Forum God/Goddess
 
Posts: 7738
Joined: Sat Jul 24, 2004 2:49 pm
Location: Slightly outside of Madison

Re: Impressions of the Debate

Postby Stebben84 » Wed Oct 17, 2012 12:21 pm

pjbogart wrote:Stebben, I wasn't saying I believed any of those things, but Meade and Ned did. The Republican party fluffers felt like they had plenty to crow about.


Blerf, sorry. I had to re-read that. I hate myself.
Stebben84
Forum God/Goddess
 
Posts: 4533
Joined: Thu Mar 02, 2006 12:59 pm

Re: Impressions of the Debate

Postby Stebben84 » Wed Oct 17, 2012 12:36 pm

Oh this is just classic. I hope Meade is gonna be outraged cause someone fibbed.

And -- and so we -- we took a concerted effort to go out and find women who had backgrounds that could be qualified to become members of our cabinet.

I went to a number of women's groups and said, "Can you help us find folks," and they brought us whole binders full of women.


Buuuuuuut:

Not a true story.

What actually happened was that in 2002 -- prior to the election, not even knowing yet whether it would be a Republican or Democratic administration -- a bipartisan group of women in Massachusetts formed MassGAP to address the problem of few women in senior leadership positions in state government. There were more than 40 organizations involved with the Massachusetts Women's Political Caucus (also bipartisan) as the lead sponsor.

They did the research and put together the binder full of women qualified for all the different cabinet positions, agency heads, and authorities and commissions. They presented this binder to Governor Romney when he was elected.

I have written about this before, in various contexts; tonight I've checked with several people directly involved in the MassGAP effort who confirm that this history as I've just presented it is correct -- and that Romney's claim tonight, that he asked for such a study, is false.

I will write more about this later, but for tonight let me just make a few quick additional points. First of all, according to MassGAP and MWPC, Romney did appoint 14 women out of his first 33 senior-level appointments, which is a reasonably impressive 42 percent. However, as I have reported before, those were almost all to head departments and agencies that he didn't care about -- and in some cases, that he quite specifically wanted to not really do anything. None of the senior positions Romney cared about -- budget, business development, etc. -- went to women.


Oh Mittens you silly little freak. What is so funny about this is that his comment has become a mockery on the intertubes, but it wasn't even true. Ha.
Stebben84
Forum God/Goddess
 
Posts: 4533
Joined: Thu Mar 02, 2006 12:59 pm

Re: Impressions of the Debate

Postby DCB » Wed Oct 17, 2012 1:10 pm

Point:
Mitt Romney wrote:I know what it takes to create good jobs again.

It’s going to help those families, and it’s going to create incentives to start growing jobs again in this country.

Ronald Reagan’s recovery created twice as many jobs as this president’s recovery.

This is the way we’re going to create jobs in this country.


Counterpoint:
Mitt Romney wrote: Government does not create jobs. Government does not create jobs.
DCB
Forum God/Goddess
 
Posts: 2458
Joined: Fri Jun 20, 2008 5:08 pm

Re: Impressions of the Debate

Postby butters » Wed Oct 17, 2012 1:58 pm

Stebben84 wrote:
Not a true story.

... a bipartisan group of women in Massachusetts formed MassGAP to address the problem of few women in senior leadership positions in state government. There were more than 40 organizations involved with the Massachusetts Women's Political Caucus (also bipartisan) as the lead sponsor.

They did the research and put together the binder full of women qualified for all the different cabinet positions, agency heads, and authorities and commissions. They presented this binder to Governor Romney when he was elected.

I have written about this before, in various contexts; tonight I've checked with several people directly involved in the MassGAP effort who confirm that this history as I've just presented it is correct -- and that Romney's claim tonight, that he asked for such a study, is false.


ROMNEY: ... And I -- and I went to my staff, and I said, "How come all the people for these jobs are -- are all men." They said, "Well, these are the people that have the qualifications." And I said, "Well, gosh, can't we -- can't we find some -- some women that are also qualified?"

And -- and so we -- we took a concerted effort to go out and find women who had backgrounds that could be qualified to become members of our cabinet.

I went to a number of women's groups and said, "Can you help us find folks," and they brought us whole binders full of women.

==================

I don't see the falsehood. Romney didn't say that he asked for a study to be conducted. He didn't claim that he assembled the binder. He said that he went to a number of women's groups for help in finding women for his cabinet. One of those groups was MassGAP.

Is the argument who originally initiated the idea? Did Romney go to them for their help? Or did MassGAP present the binder to Romney without him asking for it? The fact that he used their recommendations in the binder tells me that it wasn't just another piece of unsolicited junk mail.
butters
Forum God/Goddess
 
Posts: 540
Joined: Wed Dec 05, 2007 1:30 pm

Re: Impressions of the Debate

Postby Stebben84 » Wed Oct 17, 2012 2:27 pm

I did forget a link: http://blog.thephoenix.com/BLOGS/talkin ... o.facebook

butters wrote: He said that he went to a number of women's groups for help in finding women for his cabinet.


Which he didn't. They created it before he was elected and then presented it after he was elected. There is no indication he ever asked for it, or thought it was an issue in his cabinet. MassGAP knew it was an issue.

butters wrote:The fact that he used their recommendations in the binder tells me that it wasn't just another piece of unsolicited junk mail.


What a trooper:

Romney did appoint 14 women out of his first 33 senior-level appointments, which is a reasonably impressive 42 percent. However, as I have reported before, those were almost all to head departments and agencies that he didn't care about -- and in some cases, that he quite specifically wanted to not really do anything.


This is my favorite part:

Third, note that in Romney's story as he tells it, this man who had led and consulted for businesses for 25 years didn't know any qualified women, or know where to find any qualified women. So what does that say?
Stebben84
Forum God/Goddess
 
Posts: 4533
Joined: Thu Mar 02, 2006 12:59 pm

PreviousNext

Return to National Politics & Government

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 0 guests

moviesmusiceats
Select a Movie
Select a Theater


FacebookcommentsViewedForum
  ISTHMUS FLICKR

Promotions Contact us Privacy Policy Jobs Newsletters RSS
Collapse Photo Bar