I don’t mean to take this thread off to a tangent, but I just really hate it when people say things like this. No, I will not (ever) acknowledge “that being a politician gives one a license to lie.” Of course I will acknowledge that most (all?) politicians do, but that fact really disgusts me (about as much as people saying we should just “accept” it). Also, I’m not really directing this to you, Danalan, just to comments like yours in general.
Yeah, this is what I get for trying to be fair (i.e. watch the RNC as I did the DNC). I know the “right” thing to do was just turn on Faux News and get the highlights, but I couldn’t help myself, flicking between Faux and CNN to watch the actual speeches.
Nope, juat being a mini-Snopes, and saying that the story had some basis in fact. There are several soldiers Gov. Schwarzenneger could have met on his visit that lost legs and returned to battle, as well as many more who could have expressed a wish to do so.
What effect this story had on people, I’ll just leave to individuals to decide. I do hope, though, that you’re all as moved by Sgt. Chandler’s story as I am.
I thought the speech was really good – Reaganesque in its optimism. Arnie didn’t actually say “city on a hill,” but he may as well have. I thought it was better than any of the other speeches thus far.
And Dio’s tantrum notwithstanding, it’s a good broad-stroke outline of typical Republican policy stances (low taxes, strong military, free enterprise, etc, etc, etc). No, it isn’t a detailed position paper. It’s a convention speech. It isn’t designed to communicate nuance or exception. Nice turns of phrase and rhetorical flourishes are the order of the day.
The less said about the cheesy Vegas lounge act put on by the Bush twins, the better.
Oh, it’s moving all right. But, to paraphrase what Diogenes said (I can barely believe I agree with him on something…maybe I have a fever ), is the bravery of U.S. soliders a sufficient reason to vote for Bush?
Not to defend this moronic action star, but plenty of our own supported this law as well; too bad the Democrats didn’t have the balls to stand up to the Pubbies when they saw an opportunity. I don’t think you can blame this one on the Repugs.
Which prominent Democrats support medical marijuana? Or (better yet) general legalization? I haven’t heard from any myself; I don’t doubt that there are some on the coasts but in general, this isn’t a message I’ve been hearing (here in flyover country) from my own Democrats. God knows I would vote for anyone who supported legalization, but I don’t get the opportunity.
They don’t want to stop the gays from getting married. They just want to make sure it’s with the opposite sex. :rolleyes: in the general direction of the conservative leadership.
See, them damn liberals want to make sure the government performs its essential duties, even if it means actually taxing the public. Liberal would be glad to explain why having to pay a couple bucks extra in tax is a moral outrage. Course, must also point out that it’s under the Pubs that we’ve had massively-soaring deficits; suppose fiscal solvency is a liberal, PC, one-worldist, secular humanist attack on the basic Christian moral values our country was founded on.
Is anyone besides me and apparently Dio just outraged that Ahnold’s fellow Repugs had no trouble with his comments? Shouldn’t they be a little bit up in arms about the whole thing?
By the way, remember Arnold’s politics. He’s a libertarian leaning Republican. Like me. He may very well actually believe what he says, he may well be trying to make some of it happen.
It ain’t much, and he’ll never be president… but he’s one sign of hope. Anyone got another?
I saw it as simply cliched and insubstantial, but even if you’re correct that he outlined some broad Republican ideals, how is that likely to persuade undecided voters to vote for Bush? That’s what I thought was lacking. He made no compelling case at all to vote for his candidate.
BTW, I think that in many ways Arnold Schwarzenegger is an exemplar of the American ideal. His ability to acheive whatever he wants despite what has sometimes seemed like absurd odds is uncanny. I remember back in the 70s hearing him say that he intended to become the biggest movie star in the world. I heard that coming from an Austrian body builder who not only had a thick accent and a complete lack of any visible acting ability, but was also saddled with the name, Arnold Schwarzenegger, and I thought he was completely deluded. I was not quite as cynical when he first started making noises about getting into politics but it was still a remarkable accomplishment for this guy to become the governor of the most populous state in the country. He is the epitome of the over-achieving optimist. He should have been more inspiring than he came across. I was also reminded of the contrast between Arnold and Bush, who has been handed everything and knows nothing of what it is to actually earn anything.
Let’s see… Arnold is entirely a self-made man. He comes to another country, overcomes the problem of his accent and name, makes himself several fortunes while exploiting nobody, and gets himself elected Governor of the most populous state in the union, with some of the highest approval ratings in years. This man is a moron…why?
He used “girlie men” a few months back in a Californian context. He was criticised for this by quite a few people - I believe there was some discussion on these boards.
I read the “girlie men” phrase in the latest speech as a tongue-in-cheek reference to his last, more controversial, use of the phrase.
I don’t think Schwarzenegger is an idiot. I think, like McCain, he’s trying to tread that fine line between staying on the good side of the GOP and not having to say something he’s going to hate himself for endorsing in the morning.
If he doesn’t give you any reasons to vote for Bush, then that’s probably because he can’t honestly think of any.
If he dances around the topic… well, that’s politics.
As for the “girly man” stuff, this morning’s Los Angeles Times mentioned that the RNC seems to be angling to position the Bush-Cheney ticket as the “manly” vote in November – all grit, all machismo, no time for wussified “nuances” and “sensitive” warfare and whatnot. Which, of course, is totally laughable once you remember that Cheney didn’t go to Vietnam because he had “more important things” to tend to, and George just went running like a scared pup.
Maybe that’s why Schwarzenegger got the prime-time slot tonight. Instead of Kerry’s real-life machismo (stormed any VC nests lately?), the Republicans had to import some from Hollywood.
exploiting nobody…
whatever happened to all of the charges against him for sexual assault/misconduct/rape etc.
I’ve read his interviews and know what his beliefs were or at least how he presented himself. A saint the guy ain’t.
Genius may be a bit of an overstatement.
Entirely self-made…perhaps when it came to bodybuilding. Gets himself elected…this isn’t a valid argument against him being a moron. We elect morons to office all the time. Matter of fact, it appears that lately you have a better chance to get elected if you ARE a moron.
Republican=Moron (Some of my best and smartest friends are republican)
Nope not at all. Moron because everytime he opens his mouth, moronic shit spews forth. Like someone else I’d rather forget.
The stupid motherfucker actually said he admired Hitler! and lots more. The list of stupid shit from him is almost as long as jrs.
(well, honestly I guess they’re not that smart, since they are republicans. But they’re definitely NOT morons)
), is the bravery of U.S. soliders a sufficient reason to vote for Bush?