?

Log in

No account? Create an account
Am I the only one - alyburns' (aka sideburns & alyjude) Hiding Place
If you spoke faster than David Hewlett you’d travel back in time: Michael Shanks
alyburns
alyburns
Am I the only one
who thinks the upcoming Presidential Debate will be a bomb-dropping event (as in Romney blowing Obama out of the water)? If you go by Murphy's Law, a man who has made as many mistakes as Romney is bound to hit it out of the park at least once - and I'm thinking with all the practice his team is putting him through, it's going to be the debates? Admittedly, it could be easier for Ryan (not because he's smarter than Biden - as we've discovered lately) but during the VP debates he'll be able to steamroll over Biden (he's pretty good at that thanks to his time in Congress).

I also found myself in a 'chase the tail' moment the other day when Ryan brought up how he and Romney were the 'clear choice' because they could get people off Welfare and back to work. At that...conundrum (of getting people to work when there are no jobs), my mind popped up this big circle with a dog running around inside it while chasing its tail - and inside the circle were the following words:

"Man has job--->man loses job--->man collects unemployment--->man fails to find new job--->man runs out of unemployment--->Congress filibusters attempt to lengthen unemployment benefits--->man loses house--->man applies for Welfare---man applies for Food Stamps---man tries to get job--->still no jobs available---his State applies new rule: "Must work to stay on Welfare"--->man shoots his brains out.....>

I think I'll wait for Spoilers on Wednesday and skip the debate....
6 comments or Leave a comment
Comments
(Deleted comment)
alyburns From: alyburns Date: October 4th, 2012 10:54 pm (UTC) (Link)

turns out I was right

and the moderator was useless (which is a shame, he has such a wonderful rep, but maybe he's just not up to it anymore?), Obama seemed a million miles away, and Romney cleaned up. *shrugs* You know you're in trouble when Romney lies and Obama doesn't call him on it.

Hopefully Obama will be better prepared and realize it's not the walk in the park he thought. AND Biden will kick Ryan's butt. *fingers crossed* Oh, and if Obama doesn't answer the accusation Romney made about Medicare Advantage - he really will be sunk - he'll even lose my vote. :(
From: ma_aaaa Date: October 2nd, 2012 03:44 pm (UTC) (Link)
The debates will be pretty much a farce, IMO.
alyburns From: alyburns Date: October 4th, 2012 10:55 pm (UTC) (Link)

Well, now that it's over, I can say it turned out to be

the most surprising debate I can remember. And not in a good way. :(
sistermu From: sistermu Date: October 2nd, 2012 09:17 pm (UTC) (Link)
In a weird way, I hope crime levels would increase rather than having people killing themselves. Yeah, not great. Starting co-operatives? Communes? Joining the Amish?

Yeah.

I am currently pissed with our supermarkets. Just when unemployment is high, they have started to introduce self-service checkouts. They aren't firing anyone, they're just not hiring so many. I predict that as the century continues, people will start to boycott companies that would rather automate than hire. And it's stupid not to. If people don't have jobs, they can't spend. If you want people to spend, you have to give them jobs. The shareholders can't be expected to cover all your profit. After all, they like to get money, not lay it out.

I know the left can go too far, but why do right-wing politicians think that cutting taxes for the rich will put money into the economy? Number one definition of someone who is rich : someone who KEEPS most of their money. Number one definition of a poor person : someone who has to SPEND most to all of their money (which ends up in the pockets of the rich). Am I missing something? I know never studied economics.
alyburns From: alyburns Date: October 2nd, 2012 11:46 pm (UTC) (Link)

you pretty much nailed it with the rich

which is why I'm so puzzled, as are you, by the number of people willing to trust our economy again to the 'trickle-down' theory of economics. Heck, even the phrase, 'trickle-down' should tell us something. Like, hello? The money will TRICKLE down, as in very slowly and never enough because, as you said, the rich really do prefer to KEEP their money. So again, one wonders how the older 'middle-class' folks can support the 'new' Republican party?

OTOH, it seems that no single party has what it takes to turn things around - too much big money in the hands of the selfish few; who literally control the world. Just between the Koch Brothers they must own half of America - and tons of media too. They make Rupert Murdock seem like a pauper by comparison.

I once believed that our government was only as good as the people who voted the politicians into office - but now? The fact that our current congress has the lowest approval rating in history and yet has dong NOTHING to change how they're operating tells me they don't care. And even knowing that we have a chance to boot them out this year had done nothing to change their MO either, which says they believe themselves to be untouchable - as in protected by the huge money men around them - and yeah, my fear is...maybe they are. Maybe that's why Romney hasn't seemed all that concerned with each new gaffe? He thinks he's untouchable too? And that's why the Republicans suddenly stopped trying to register new voters in five of the swing states? Because they don't need to WORRY?

Lord, I hope not. Scary thought, though, isn't it?
6 comments or Leave a comment