2012 U.S. Presidential Election

The Armed Forces Committee makes decisions based on cronyism as much as national defense, hence Jim Inhofe pushing for us to keep oversized fighters we don't use and no one wants, trying to revive artillery systems that have been killed by multiple SODs and that no one wants, and opposing the Navys experimentation with alternative methods of fuel (the navy has been very successful fyi). Inhofe bitches about the cost of going green, yet he pushes for production of systems that are absolute CRAP. The number one cause of death in Afghanistan and Iraq is/was IEDs against mounted movements, and the number one mounted movement in Afghanistan and Iraq are FUEL CONVOYS. So yeah, eat a *****, Inhofe.

Oh, and even though the due date for owning a set of dress blues for the army has not yet arrived (we changed over from the greens a couple of years ago, blues are being phased in).... the Army is now talking of a new class A uniform. They are also working on a contract for a new PT uniform, and this one os only a few years old and works just fine.... I'm sure there is no cronyism here at all, nothing to see here, move along

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ICantSpellDawg

He's taking us back to water's edge foreign policy. Differ in important details, not in substance. You guys honestly can't see how agreeing with some of your opponents on some issues/actions might be both reasonable and politically advantageous? You wonder why your representatives are having a hard time pulling their heads from their arses? (goes for you Irish, too)

---

What doe that comment even mean "Waters edge" there was me thinking foreign policy was by definition about you know stuff abroad. You cant claim Obama is weak for doing X when in the debate itself you essentially say "Mubarak had to go" that "Sanctions on Iran are a good thing" etc etc etc these are all things Obama gets lambasted for by Romney. Or at least they like to give the impression there lambasting him for these policies with certain voting bloc's.,

You say he agrees on good things when all I see is a man who is executing a massive turnaround in policy with two weeks to go, essentially Romney is pro cake and pro eating it but which Romney is real.

Is it the one who agrees with Obama policy on Iraq or Iran or the one who winks at the hawks through Ryan standing around tank plants.







Ah it seems "Waters Edge Foreign Policy" essentially means you pretend yer all one happy family, it's like that British atittude of not in front of the neighbours. Waters edge foreign policy is pretty much not possible anymore with a 24hr media cycle.




In 2008 if I had being an American I would have probably not have voted Obama however now I would because I don't believe the Repubs deserve another chance at making an even bigger mess than they left the last time.

Obama did apologise for US policy and has done NOTHING on the Israeli/Palestine problem that underlies alot of trouble in the ME. He was also right that Iran is closer now to a nuclear weapon than it was. Look foreign affairs is about threatening the worst precisily so that you do NOT have do it. Clinton is no match for Lavrov nor is Obama capable of dealing with Putin. Why? Because the the first thing they try to do 'work with Russia'. All well and good is you're dealing similarly well meaning people but they are not. Poland was 'sold out' on the missile shield when Putin threatened to put missles Kaliningrad. But that is not a reason to sell your ally down the road...it should have been an incentive to press forward more on the missile shield. You cannot afford to give into bullies in foreign affairs and the current US Government has done so.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Major Robert Dump

While we are on this topic of useless things....

This:
http://www.toledoblade.com/Politics/...y-in-Lima.html

Although I didn't see it in this article, on several of Ryans rounds on the talk shows he discussed how closing this factory would put American lives in danger. This is the crap that bugs me. We are winding down 2 wars, we don't need as many toys, and I am sure Ryan and Romneys vision have nothing to do with contracts and cronies. Nothing at all. Yes, I know Obama essentially did the same thing with green companies and the GM bailout, and I didn't like that either. But someone may want to point out to Ryan that we are not using many tanks in Afghanistan, so the conclusion that American lives are in danger because of scaled back production is pulling-the-patriot-hearstrings crap that politicians are so good at.

---

You are going to have to show me why closing the tank plant is a good idea.

There is one. No more. It is government owned and contractor operated. The contractor operation was one of your beefs but that aside I guess you never think we will ever, ever need another tank.

Of course 6 months after it is closed we will pay some contractor millions to build a privately owned one that we paid for.

Next, it is a little specialized and skills can’t be replaced should we find we need a few more.

The army has cut tank units to nothing and the infantry is not exactly over manned either. The only place we can repair them other than Lima is Anniston but they don’t make new parts.

The Navy may not need a lot of new ships but it still has a couple of shipyards still open, that have not been sold to the Chinese yet.

I see your point about the uniforms but this is not one of those cost saving measures that will save money.

This is one of those, seemingly, short sighted measures that will cost a lot more than money when it is needed.

Saying that Iran is 4 years closer to a nuke is like pointing out that I am four years older than I was 4 years ago.

While fighting 2 wars, we cannot start another. Nothing would have been any different under McCain. I mean, if we can levy heavy sanctions on Iraq for 10 years and they can still manage to make an IMAGINARY NUKILLER BOMB, then imagine what Iran can do since they already have the necessary tools. Romney and Ryan are blowing hot air about Iran.

I do, however, agree that O has dropped the ball on Isreal/Palestine and Russia/Poland, but I cannot honestly blame him for not wanting to try the middle east thing. Hell, I would not want to try either.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Fisherking

You are going to have to show me why closing the tank plant is a good idea.

There is one. No more. It is government owned and contractor operated. The contractor operation was one of your beefs but that aside I guess you never think we will ever, ever need another tank.

Of course 6 months after it is closed we will pay some contractor millions to build a privately owned one that we paid for.

Next, it is a little specialized and skills can’t be replaced should we find we need a few more.

The army has cut tank units to nothing and the infantry is not exactly over manned either. The only place we can repair them other than Lima is Anniston but they don’t make new parts.

The Navy may not need a lot of new ships but it still has a couple of shipyards still open, that have not been sold to the Chinese yet.

I see your point about the uniforms but this is not one of those cost saving measures that will save money.

This is one of those, seemingly, short sighted measures that will cost a lot more than money when it is needed.

---

It depends on who you want to believe. The department of the Army says closing and reopening when its needed will cost 400 million. GD says 3 times that. Who are we gonna believe?

No one is talking about closing it and building another. The plan is to stop operations until we need them again.

GD suggests scaling back and going to limited operations making fewer tanks. It appears the Pentagon is willing to consider this. Romney and Ryan will have none of this.

If we are not using the tanks, then we will not need many new parts. If we have too many tanks, then we have extras from which to pull the parts from.

I do not work at the Pentagon. All I know is that the Department of the Army and the Pentagon say we have too many, and the ones we do have are only used in training and foreign posturing, minus a couple stationary tanks in Kabul. One might be able to argue that we continue to produce them for the purpose of selling them to other countries, like NavAir does with helicopter type stuff, but again, I don't know that Abrams tanks are a hot commodity right now

And I do not even know why anyone brings up the jobs that will be lost/gained amisdst all of this, because as we all know, the government doesn't create jobs.

Never mind. I see it will only be closed for 3 year at a cost of $822 million. General Dynamics will maintain the contract and get paid for not doing anything. It is just the workers who will lose out.

We pay them 6 months unemployment but then they drop off the records and don’t count any more. So who should care.


edit:By the way, when they say build the tanks, it is from the ground up. They smelt the steel and secret stuff too. The place started out making the gun tubes but we closed the other plants so this one does it all.

And if GD says it will cost more you can bet they will get paid.

I certainly don't care. Just like I don't care about GM employees or Bank of America employees.

Blame the paying-them-for-nothing thing on the people who wrote and approved the contract. This stuff is written into the agreement, and signed by greased palms and noses covered in fecal matter. It's the norm, and this is the price we pay.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Major Robert Dump

Saying that Iran is 4 years closer to a nuke is like pointing out that I am four years older than I was 4 years ago.

While fighting 2 wars, we cannot start another. Nothing would have been any different under McCain. I mean, if we can levy heavy sanctions on Iraq for 10 years and they can still manage to make an IMAGINARY NUKILLER BOMB, then imagine what Iran can do since they already have the necessary tools. Romney and Ryan are blowing hot air about Iran.

I do, however, agree that O has dropped the ball on Isreal/Palestine and Russia/Poland, but I cannot honestly blame him for not wanting to try the middle east thing. Hell, I would not want to try either.

---

In general I agree but that is not my point. The point is that if you talk big you often save yourself having to do what you have threatened to do.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Major Robert Dump

government doesn't create jobs.

---

But Springfield, Oregon has the job-creation thing down. Proof.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Gelatinous Cube

I shit you not, one of the reasons i didn't re-up was because i will never, ever wear those stupid new dress uniforms. I still have my greens in my closet.

---

The online vote/survey on AKO I believe is still going on. Basically, it was a Q&A about what we want with our new PT uniforms. Or at least thats what I think it was, because I refuse to take it.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Gelatinous Cube

Its true. The University of Oregon drives the economy of Eugene, but Springfield (right next door--basically the same town, aside from the invisible political line on a map) is driven by Strip Clubs.

Fun fact: Mat Groening (creator of the Simpsons) was an Oregonian. Springfield is based on Springfield and Shelbyville is based on Eugene. Ironically, the Comic Book Guy was based on a store called Emerald City Comics (in Eugene) which was (until recently) run by a guy who fit the character to a tee. Moe's tavern is also based on a Eugene establishment called Max's--a great little bar.

---

the university brings horny your men that sponsor the strip clubs, which in turn, pays for the tuitions of several young ladies to frequent the university.
It's the circle of night life.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by SoFarSoGood

Obama did apologise for US policy and has done NOTHING on the Israeli/Palestine problem that underlies alot of trouble in the ME. He was also right that Iran is closer now to a nuclear weapon than it was. Look foreign affairs is about threatening the worst precisily so that you do NOT have do it. Clinton is no match for Lavrov nor is Obama capable of dealing with Putin. Why? Because the the first thing they try to do 'work with Russia'. All well and good is you're dealing similarly well meaning people but they are not. Poland was 'sold out' on the missile shield when Putin threatened to put missles Kaliningrad. But that is not a reason to sell your ally down the road...it should have been an incentive to press forward more on the missile shield. You cannot afford to give into bullies in foreign affairs and the current US Government has done so.

---

USA was weak before Obama got elected or did Georgia get a millitary hammering for nothing.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by SoFarSoGood

In general I agree but that is not my point. The point is that if you talk big you often save yourself having to do what you have threatened to do.

---

USA was talking big for 8 yrs and did precisely nothing on North Korea, the reality is that Russia an China seen weakeness in the USA as a result of how the War on Terror panned out.

http://www.usnews.com/news/blogs/was...-irresponsible

Quote:

---

Senior adviser to the Obama campaign David Axelrod made a hairy wager on MSNBC's "Morning Joe" Wednesday: he will shave off his four-decade-old mustache on national television if Obama loses Minnesota, Michigan or Pennsylvania on Election Day.

---

Quote:

---

The American Mustache Institute isn't pleased with the wagers, especially the bet by Axe. "It's incredibly irresponsible for Axelrod to be playing games with such an exceptionally powerful mustache," institute chairman Dr. Aaron Perlut tells Whispers, noting that Axelrod's famous stache can be categorized as the "Chevron style," or the standard issue law enforcement mustache.

"There are very few people in positions of power who are mustached Americans, so for he to even jest about removing his lip sweater is somewhat offensive to the entire American mustached community," he says.

---

I've been enjoying some of our political ads on local TV. One of the better ones comes from the PA senate race which features this:

https://imageshack.us/scaled/landing/827/capturerk.png

Stay classy folks...:laugh4:

Both Mayor Bloomberg of NYC and The Economist just endorsed Obama.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by a completely inoffensive name

Both Mayor Bloomberg of NYC and The Economist just endorsed Obama.

---

Shocker.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Hooahguy

Shocker.

---

Bloomberg refused to endorse either of them until Obama's response to Sandy got his respect.

True, but I think this was an excuse by Bloomberg to pick a side while looking bi-partisan. His political views mostly match up with Obama, at least to my understanding.

From The Economist's endorsement:

Many of The Economist’s readers, especially those who run businesses in America, may well conclude that nothing could be worse than another four years of Mr Obama. We beg to differ. For all his businesslike intentions, Mr Romney has an economic plan that works only if you don’t believe most of what he says. That is not a convincing pitch for a chief executive. And for all his shortcomings, Mr Obama has dragged America’s economy back from the brink of disaster, and has made a decent fist of foreign policy. So this newspaper would stick with the devil it knows, and re-elect him.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by a completely inoffensive name

Both Mayor Bloomberg of NYC and The Economist just endorsed Obama.

---

I've said as much before, and I'll say it again- Bloomberg is an imbecile.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Xiahou

Bloomberg is an imbecile.

---

How dare you speak of your betters a job creator in that way.

When in the presence of wealth you should be silent and respectful.

http://video.elsevier.nl/#!clip/2080528 LOL

I kinda suspect a case of abuse though

God hates Florida

What began Sunday morning as an attempt by the Miami-Dade elections department to let more people early vote devolved into chaos and confusion only days before the nation decides its next president.

Call it the debacle in Doral.

Elections officials, overwhelmed with voters, locked the doors to its Doral headquarters and temporarily shut down the operation, angering nearly 200 voters standing in line outside — only to resume the proceedings an hour later.

On the surface, officials blamed technical equipment and a lack of staff for the shutdown. But behind the scenes, there was another issue: Miami-Dade Mayor Carlos Gimenez.

The Republican had never signed off on the additional in-person absentee voting hours in the first place.

“That was counter to what I said on Friday, which was we were not going to change the game mid-stream,” he said. “I said, ‘No, there’s no way we did this.’”

The Redskins lost

God also hates Ohio

A small fraction of Ohio voters’ absentee ballot requests may have been mistakenly rejected due to a recently discovered glitch in the transfer of change-of-address records.

Even though the deadline for voters to register or change their address was three weeks ago, Ohio Secretary of State Jon Husted just this week sent about 33,000 updated registration records to local elections officials. The local boards had to immediately process the records to ensure those voters could properly cast a ballot in the Nov. 6 election.

An unknown number of absentee ballot applications across the state have been rejected due to the delay because election officials did not have some voters’ current addresses.

Officials in Cuyahoga County said 71 such applications were rejected. Those voters now will be sent new absentee ballots. Figures for rejected absentee ballot applications in other counties were not immediately available.

The delay can be traced to a breakdown in the data-sharing partnership between the Secretary of State and the Bureau of Motor Vehicles.

Husted last year began working with the BMV to coordinate the agency’s online change-of-address system with the state’s voter registration rolls.

But, according to a directive Husted sent Monday to election officials across the state, "the vast majority of the records collected electronically through the BMV change of address system between July and Oct. 9, 2012 were transferred late last week."

Husted, a Republican, sent the updated data to county boards of elections in batches on Monday and Tuesday. He called the timing "unfortunate" in his directive.

I've always been a little uncomfortable with the whole early/absentee voting for everyone thing. It's ripe for fraud and absentee ballots have a much higher rate of rejection that in-person voting so your ballot is less likely to be counted that way.

In other news, the latest CNN poll says it's all tied up at 49% but ,when you look at the crosstabs, it looks bad for Obama- he's losing independents by 22%. The only thing keeping it tied is the sample, which is assuming a larger Democrat turnout than in 2008- unlikely.

I'm done talking about the election until my vote is cast. This thing is over and we'll find out the results soon enough.

Guys, I'll say it again.

The Redskins lost, there is nothing left to talk about

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Xiahou

I've always been a little uncomfortable with the whole early/absentee voting for everyone thing. It's ripe for fraud and absentee ballots have a much higher rate of rejection that in-person voting so your ballot is less likely to be counted that way.

---

why is the vote on a Tuesday anyway?
wouldn´t it be easier to move the vote to one of the days on the weekend than having to deal with this early voting thing?