Romney VS Obama: The Megathread

[Farnhamia]

I just saw Obama2016 movie last night so here is what I saw if Obama is reelected

The Nuclear weapons will drop to 0 in America

A third world with a evil USA

The dept higher to 16 trillion way then his first term

His father Obama Senior influence him

That's what I saw.

That's what they want you to see. They don't want you to see a reformed health insurance system with costs coming down and coverage extended. They don't want you to see the budget controlled. They don't want you to see the US regaining the international respect that was thrown away by the previous administration. It's pure propaganda.

[Cannot think of a name]

The Nuclear weapons will drop to 0 in America

Is this a bad thing? I mean, I know it got lost in all the handwringing and hyperbole, but that's kind of what he got his Nobel Peace Prize for...

[Ashmoria]

I just saw Obama2016 movie last night so here is what I saw if Obama is reelected

The Nuclear weapons will drop to 0 in America

A third world with a evil USA

The dept higher to 16 trillion way then his first term

His father Obama Senior influence him

That's what I saw.

Ohhhh. I have been looking to see if anything can be worst then Hercules of New York or Gigli.

Where do you find that?

oh dont GO to it. its bound to be in video before the election. its propaganda.

look up dinesh d'souza's forbes article to find out what it says. that way you dont have to give the asshole another dime.

A author wrote what's going to happen

Was this author Dan Brown or Rick Santorum, by any chance?

worse

dinesh d'souza

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dinesh_D'Souza

[Farnhamia]

The Nuclear weapons will drop to 0 in America

Is this a bad thing? I mean, I know it got lost in all the handwringing and hyperbole, but that's kind of what he got his Nobel Peace Prize for...

The movie was made by Dinesh D'Souza. He's already made up his mind about the President. And it's not a documentary, not by any means.

Curses! Ninja'd!

[Norstal]

The Nuclear weapons will drop to 0 in America

Is this a bad thing? I mean, I know it got lost in all the handwringing and hyperbole, but that's kind of what he got his Nobel Peace Prize for...

That would be evil because then all we have are ABMs and we'd look like impenetrable pussies.

[Cannot think of a name]

And it's not a documentary, not by any means.

Curses! Ninja'd!

No no no no, let's not get into this game. It's one of the things that makes my head pop whenever the Michael Moore pinata is brought around.

A documentary is under no obligation to be impartial (a documentary is an argument, even if that argument is "home economics are important" or "penguins (or anything narrated by the not late Morgan Freeman) are awesome") nor are the actually under any real obligation to be accurate.

This goes all the way back to Nanook of the North. In short, making your documentary say what you want it to say is as old as the documentary itself.

Leni Riefenstahl is still considered a documentary filmmaker and a propagandist.

The second you frame the camera you have made a decision about what story to tell and how you're going to tell it. If you want to included "every side" that's up to you, but even what constitutes a 'side' and the way you tell it is still an interpretation of the story you have made. Every cut is an opinion and every shot is a story you are deciding to tell.

You can disagree with a documentary, it can be full of lies and bullshit, but that doesn't mean it's not a documentary, it just means it's a really shitty documentary.

/pet peeve

[The Black Forrest]

\
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dinesh_D'Souza

Ohhhh yeaaaaaa.

I will avoid it as this little gem caught my eye:

Dinesh has argued that the Abu Ghraib torture and prisoner abuse scandal was a result of “the sexual immodesty of liberal America” He further asserted that the conditions of prisoners at Abu Ghraib “are comparable to the accommodations in midlevel Middle Eastern hotels”

Sorry I can't give money to stupid hateful dumb shits like that.

Hmmm. Dartmouth must of had low admission standards when he was there.

[Khadgar]

And it's not a documentary, not by any means.

Curses! Ninja'd!

No no no no, let's not get into this game. It's one of the things that makes my head pop whenever the Michael Moore pinata is brought around.

A documentary is under no obligation to be impartial (a documentary is an argument, even if that argument is "home economics are important" or "penguins (or anything narrated by the not late Morgan Freeman) are awesome") nor are the actually under any real obligation to be accurate.

This goes all the way back to Nanook of the North. In short, making your documentary say what you want it to say is as old as the documentary itself.

Leni Riefenstahl is still considered a documentary filmmaker and a propagandist.

The second you frame the camera you have made a decision about what story to tell and how you're going to tell it. If you want to included "every side" that's up to you, but even what constitutes a 'side' and the way you tell it is still an interpretation of the story you have made. Every cut is an opinion and every shot is a story you are deciding to tell.

You can disagree with a documentary, it can be full of lies and bullshit, but that doesn't mean it's not a documentary, it just means it's a really shitty documentary.

/pet peeve

Does that mean that Expelled counts as a documentary? Because as a fan of educational films in general and documentaries particularly that makes me ill.

[Cannot think of a name]

No no no no, let's not get into this game. It's one of the things that makes my head pop whenever the Michael Moore pinata is brought around.

A documentary is under no obligation to be impartial (a documentary is an argument, even if that argument is "home economics are important" or "penguins (or anything narrated by the not late Morgan Freeman) are awesome") nor are the actually under any real obligation to be accurate.

This goes all the way back to Nanook of the North. In short, making your documentary say what you want it to say is as old as the documentary itself.

Leni Riefenstahl is still considered a documentary filmmaker and a propagandist.

The second you frame the camera you have made a decision about what story to tell and how you're going to tell it. If you want to included "every side" that's up to you, but even what constitutes a 'side' and the way you tell it is still an interpretation of the story you have made. Every cut is an opinion and every shot is a story you are deciding to tell.

You can disagree with a documentary, it can be full of lies and bullshit, but that doesn't mean it's not a documentary, it just means it's a really shitty documentary.

/pet peeve

Does that mean that Expelled counts as a documentary? Because as a fan of educational films in general and documentaries particularly that makes me ill.

I'm afraid so. You'll have to evaluate them the same way you evaluate every other source, by their content and not their format.

[Farnhamia]

And it's not a documentary, not by any means.

Curses! Ninja'd!

No no no no, let's not get into this game. It's one of the things that makes my head pop whenever the Michael Moore pinata is brought around.

A documentary is under no obligation to be impartial (a documentary is an argument, even if that argument is "home economics are important" or "penguins (or anything narrated by the not late Morgan Freeman) are awesome") nor are the actually under any real obligation to be accurate.

This goes all the way back to Nanook of the North. In short, making your documentary say what you want it to say is as old as the documentary itself.

Leni Riefenstahl is still considered a documentary filmmaker and a propagandist.

The second you frame the camera you have made a decision about what story to tell and how you're going to tell it. If you want to included "every side" that's up to you, but even what constitutes a 'side' and the way you tell it is still an interpretation of the story you have made. Every cut is an opinion and every shot is a story you are deciding to tell.

You can disagree with a documentary, it can be full of lies and bullshit, but that doesn't mean it's not a documentary, it just means it's a really shitty documentary.

/pet peeve

Yes, alright, good point.

[Minnysota]

I don't like the whole "this nation was bestowed by God" bullshit.

Romney is really getting annoying with his God nonsense. Hell, any rich man who claims to be an adamant follower of God (or more specifically a Christian) is a hypocrite. Large chunks of the New Testament preach about how a man should give his wealth to the poor and to the world and follow God.

[Western cuba]

I don't like the whole "this nation was bestowed by God" bullshit.

Romney is really getting annoying with his God nonsense. Hell, any rich man who claims to be an adamant follower of God (or more specifically a Christian) is a hypocrite. Large chunks of the New Testament preach about how a man should give his wealth to the poor and to the world and follow God.

The reason Romeny is preaching all about God is to aim for more votes, and sadly it's probably true. I wouldn't be surprised if he didn't even know what the last book of the Bible was.

[Sprits]

I just saw Obama2016 movie last night so here is what I saw if Obama is reelected

The Nuclear weapons will drop to 0 in America

A third world with a evil USA

The dept higher to 16 trillion way then his first term

His father Obama Senior influence him

That's what I saw.

That's what they want you to see. They don't want you to see a reformed health insurance system with costs coming down and coverage extended. They don't want you to see the budget controlled. They don't want you to see the US regaining the international respect that was thrown away by the previous administration. It's pure propaganda.

Technically, what you said is also propaganda. We have no idea what will happen. Most likely, it will be some mixture of good and bad. We have no idea. Although, my vote's to Obama, the lesser of two evils.

[Wamitoria]

I don't like the whole "this nation was bestowed by God" bullshit.

Romney is really getting annoying with his God nonsense. Hell, any rich man who claims to be an adamant follower of God (or more specifically a Christian) is a hypocrite. Large chunks of the New Testament preach about how a man should give his wealth to the poor and to the world and follow God.

The reason Romeny is preaching all about God is to aim for more votes, and sadly it's probably true. I wouldn't be surprised if he didn't even know what the last book of the Bible was.

The Book of Mormon?

[Swith Witherward]

I don't like the whole "this nation was bestowed by God" bullshit.

Romney is really getting annoying with his God nonsense. Hell, any rich man who claims to be an adamant follower of God (or more specifically a Christian) is a hypocrite. Large chunks of the New Testament preach about how a man should give his wealth to the poor and to the world and follow God.

My secular viewpoint: Romney is a Christian (Mormon, whatever). I would expect him to bring "God" into his campaign. The bible also whinges on about "being a good steward with money".

[Minnysota]

My secular viewpoint: Romney is a Christian (Mormon, whatever). I would expect him to bring "God" into his campaign. The bible also whinges on about "being a good steward with money".

I don't recall Romney ever being a "good steward". I just recall him being a gigantic douche who I would like to punch.

[Wamitoria]

My secular viewpoint: Romney is a Christian (Mormon, whatever). I would expect him to bring "God" into his campaign. The bible also whinges on about "being a good steward with money".

I don't recall Romney ever being a "good steward". I just recall him being a gigantic douche who I would like to punch.

Especially since he received a federal bailout in order to keep Bain from going under at one point.

[Alien Space Bats]

The reason Romeny is preaching all about God is to aim for more votes, and sadly it's probably true. I wouldn't be surprised if he didn't even know what the last book of the Bible was.

That's a trick question.

It's Moroni, isn't it?

[Aryavartha]

Dinesh d'souza is a douche of the first order. I don't know why there are more prominent people of indian descent in republican party than democrats. It is also interesting that most of these have suppressed their 'indianness'. "bobby" jindal, "nikki" haley etc.

[Jocabia]

I just saw Obama2016 movie last night so here is what I saw if Obama is reelected

The Nuclear weapons will drop to 0 in America

A third world with a evil USA

The dept higher to 16 trillion way then his first term

His father Obama Senior influence him

That's what I saw.

It was an awesome movie. Brilliantly and masterfully put together. I think he is a genius.

And I came to that conclusion by throwing away Obama's entire first administration and instead focusing on one word from the title of one of his books. We vet Presidents before they become President. Just like we interview people for a job before they have the job. After someone gets the job, we look at their job performance, not their background. Why is the Presidency any different?

This process has somehow been flipped on its head by Republicans. We're supposed to vet Obama, by looking at the behavior of his cousins, or people he was linked to, or his parents, or something someone he knew once said, but we're not actually supposed to look at the policies he supported (particularly not those he supported and Republicans didn't or those that he and Romney and/or Ryan and/or every Republican in Congress supported). And we're not supposed to look at Romney as if he is a NEW candidate to the job and actually interview him. Nope, when you apply for a job, apparently, you don't get interviewed. Instead you only try to prove that the job should be available, i.e., suggest that Obama does not deserve another term.

[Jocabia]

George W, Romney was a moderate who supported civil rights, balanced budgets, and urban renewal. He also came to believe that the War in Vietnam was a huge mistake.

IOW, you can't judge politicians' beliefs by looking at what their fathers stood for. George W. Romney would have made a very good President; if elected, Mitt Romney will be a total disaster.

Indeed. The more I talk to my uncle and look into him I think he would have made a fine President.

As I have said Mitt will make us long for the days of the shrub.

I'm glad I'm not required to answer for the beliefs of my father. Or those of my mother. Or my cousins. Or my brothers. Or sisters. Or, frankly, anyone's but my own.

Obama has been President for nearly four years. We don't have to guess at what he will do as President. We can look at what he's done and extrapolate.

[Not Safe For Work]

Indeed. The more I talk to my uncle and look into him I think he would have made a fine President.

As I have said Mitt will make us long for the days of the shrub.

I'm glad I'm not required to answer for the beliefs of my father. Or those of my mother. Or my cousins. Or my brothers. Or sisters. Or, frankly, anyone's but my own.

Obama has been President for nearly four years. We don't have to guess at what he will do as President. We can look at what he's done and extrapolate.

Exactly. Remember how vitally important executive experience was, in the (GOP) campaign season of 2008?

Well, right now we have two main candidates, and only one of them has a proven presidential track-record.

[Revolutopia]

I'm glad I'm not required to answer for the beliefs of my father. Or those of my mother. Or my cousins. Or my brothers. Or sisters. Or, frankly, anyone's but my own.

Obama has been President for nearly four years. We don't have to guess at what he will do as President. We can look at what he's done and extrapolate.

Exactly. Remember how vitally important executive experience was, in the (GOP) campaign season of 2008?

Well, right now we have two main candidates, and only one of them has a proven presidential track-record.

To be fair, Romney also has executive experience by being governor of Massachusetts. However, there is the point of how Romney refuses to comment at all on his term as governor.

[Not Safe For Work]

Exactly. Remember how vitally important executive experience was, in the (GOP) campaign season of 2008?

Well, right now we have two main candidates, and only one of them has a proven presidential track-record.

To be fair, Romney also has executive experience by being governor of Massachusetts. However, there is the point of how Romney refuses to comment at all on his term as governor.

Romney has disowned his experience. Realistically, that's what he SHOULD be running on - but it's an embarrassment to him if he's running as a 'fatally conservative' (or whatever cute phrase that was, I can't remember. I like mine, though) candidate.

Still, only one of them has Presidential experience.

[Gauthier]

Dinesh d'souza is a douche of the first order. I don't know why there are more prominent people of indian descent in republican party than democrats. It is also interesting that most of these have suppressed their 'indianness'. "bobby" jindal, "nikki" haley etc.

We got Kal Penn. Better than all three of the Republicans.