so-called super tuesday

[pieces o nine]

Although unable to force myself to watch *any* of the fifty seven million Republican Debates, I did watch Rachel Maddow's anchoring coverage of the Big Deal tonight, complete with live speeches from Newt, Rick, and Mitt. After awhile I became inured enough to stop hissing facts back at the teevee, or uttering very untaddy ... activity suggestions ... at the candidates, or face-palming at the fatuous glee with which crowds of supporters wildly cheered speeches in which their respective candidates openly promised to (*) them over. Hard.

I freely admit to being partisan, but truly don't think I am blindly partisan. The strong (R) members in this household actually praised one early Obama speech for its uplifting content, which I surprised them by mercilessly dismissing as lacking real substance. I saw no tough-love, critical thinking displayed by supporters tonight.

Newt's crowd booed the pres for *not* supporting non-fossil-fuel-development, followed immediately by booing him *for* supporting non-fossil-fuel-development; they booed him for *not* interfering in the free markets to 'create' jobs, followed immediately by booing him *for* interfering in the free markets to 'create' jobs; they booed him for *not* acting boldly to improve the healthcare crisis, followed immediately by booing him *for* acting boldly to improve the healthcare crisis; they booed him for *not* interfering in restrictions against individual civil liberties by religious zealots, followed immediately by booing him *for*  interfering in restrictions against individual civil liberties by religious zealots; they booed him for *not* waging world wars without end, amen, followed immediately by booing him *for* waging world wars without end, amen. The mind reels.

Rick's crowd screamed with excitement when he repeatedly referred to 'everyone behind him' and his 'bottom-up' plans for us. I regressed to nine years old and laughed hilariously each time, interspersed with no laughter whatsoever at his starry-eyed plans to become our first Inquisitional, Bowdlerizing Pope.

Mitt's crowd. "How do you solve a problem like that Mitt's crowd? " Each successive soundbite that fell from his lips promised third-world conditions, in ever more bombastic phrasing, and they screamed with approval.







edit: fixed typo in thread title!

[Sibling DavidH]

We get far too much coverage of it over here. I don't follow it closely, but my impression is that the Republicans are busy knocking seven bells out of each other, to the point where the eventual candidate will be greatly weakened.  IMO this is probably a good thing, though Obama is pretty anti-British and a change might benefit us in some ways.

[Swatopluk]

I assume the candidates think the same as Joseph Goebbels noted in his diary after his most infamous speech (Wollt ihr den totalen Krieg?) at the Sportpalast. In essence: What a bunch of morons. If I had asked them to join a new religion or to jump out of the windows many would have done it.
And the crowds then had at least the excuse that they were victims of a gifted demagogue not the current freak show.

Here's a newsreel about the speech (the subtitles are far from perfect) http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LWueAam-w-c
The speech can be found more or less completely on youtube but I will not link to that since it is obvious that the upladers are nazis (or how could you explain user names like IntJewrywonWW2 ?)

[Sibling Zono (anon1mat0)]

Although unable to force myself to watch *any* of the filthy seven million Republican Debates...

^That's what I read...
---
Any knowledge I have is via TDS & CR, I lie, NPR covers them too (much if you ask me).

I'm starting to be hopeful on the subject, regularly I would be (and regularly am) appalled at their bigoted, petty, greedy, dishonest and plainly disgusting speech, but it is too much, it reaches more and more fascist themes, and some go even beyond that, to the point that I'm starting to think that the break point is coming soon, where those in the middle will avoid voting for them, making them a true fringe party like the ones in Europe, where they may command a worrisome ~20% of followers but have little chance to become rulers (only through coalitions) which diminish their options to move the agenda.

It is unavoidable that a portion of the population likes that kind of view, but the more extreme it is the less individuals will be willing to put up with it.
---

..though Obama is pretty anti-British and a change might benefit us in some ways.

I'm curious about that, why do you say that Obama is anti British?

[Sibling DavidH]

Because all the commentators say so, and that's the way some of his words and actions have come across.

Here's one recent article from a reputable newspaper: http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/news/nilegardiner/100027838/barack-obama%E2%80%99s-top-10-insults-against-britain/

Many people think it's because of his Kenyan heritage and our actions against the Mau Mau.

[Sibling Zono (anon1mat0)]

Holy smokes! That's a Fox right wing hack, and his 'grievances' are -from my point of view- ridiculous, is it really that aggravating if the US says that it recognizes the sovereignty of the Falklands but declares it self neutral? The only country supported unconditionally (and I absolutely don't agree with the position) is Israel and that has more to do with powerful lobbies than anything else.

Aside from two incidents of diplomatic clumsiness I don't see anything out of order, now, I do understand that after the blank check sent by T. Blair during the Bush administration, you Brits expect a bit more recognition, and that may be warranted to a degree, but IMHO it should have never been sent to the US on the first place.

As for the AngloSaxon exceptionalism... that is blatant right wing/hawkish talk and you can hear that here from Republicans and Fox News commentators. Personally I dislike the idea very, very much, but then again I myself am not AngloSaxon and by been born in the "area of influence" of the US I don't see it as positive at all, but that's just me. I'm sorry if I sound radical on the subject but while the influence of the US may be positive in certain cases, it has had some devastating effects in Latin America over the past 200 years and it is still going. Perhaps the influence isn't as much the US as multinational corporations, but the 'enforcer' of the influence is the US and I can assure you it hasn't been pretty.

[Opsa]

I just love how the GOP front runners look like dogs in a circle chewing each other's tails off. I am hoping that they will just eat each other completely.

What I want to know is how do we demand that the government make it illegal for people to bribe candidates with "donated" money and how to put an absolute limit on how much each candidate can spend on their campaign. These seem to be contributing factors as to why we are in so much carp in the U.S. today. Don't tell me it can't be done. It has to be done or, or... or we're done for.

No more marionette shows.  

[Scriblerus the Philosophe]

What I got out of Super Tuesday: I've been predicting the GOPster ticket will be Romney/Santorum for a while and I'm pretty sure this settles it. It's gonna be like 2008's, in that the presidential candidate will be actually semi-sane but has fundied up to have a chance to get the vote and the VP will be the actual nutbag to get the nutbag vote.

Because all the commentators say so,

Is that ever a reason to believe something?

and that's the way some of his words and actions have come across.

Here's one recent article from a reputable newspaper: http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/news/nilegardiner/100027838/barack-obama%E2%80%99s-top-10-insults-against-britain/

My response to the article:
1. First, why would we get involved? If another nation tried to claim, let's say, Samoa, I wouldn't expect the British to coming running to our aid even if there were concerns about our ability to defend it. Second, according to what I've heard, people who live in the Falklands think of themselves as British and aren't wild about the Argentinians shrieking about this issue again, so even if the UK were unable to defend the FI, Argentina would still have a fight and probably a long and protracted one with unhappy locals.

2. And? From a purely political angle the Special Relationship doesn't really benefit either side any more, from what I understand.

3. I don't know enough to comment.

4. Kinda douchey and a little self defeating, yeah.

5. Hella douchey. Won't lie.

6. To me, that sounds a lot like on the author's part.

7. Should have been phrased better and yes, were I Obama, I would have issued an apology to a nation the state department insulted, no matter who it was.

8. That was totally not well handled on the White House's part.

9. Not well done, sure.

10. That one confuses me. It's not like your papers are universally sterling in quality, but either are they all on par with Fox. So, douchey, I suppose.

Many people think it's because of his Kenyan heritage and our actions against the Mau Mau.

SAIK, the Special Relationship between the US and the UK didn't start to come unglued when Kennedy was in office so I dunno. Also, Obama doesn't seem the type.

[Griffin NoName]

We get far too much coverage of it over here. I don't follow it closely, but my impression is that the Republicans are busy knocking seven bells out of each other, to the point where the eventual candidate will be greatly weakened.  IMO this is probably a good thing, though Obama is pretty anti-British and a change might benefit us in some ways.

^^ what you said.

I tape the news and skip past it 

[Bob in a quantum-state-of-faith]

Well... I went and "voted" on Tuesday.

No, I'm not registered ReThuglican, so I put in my "choice"-- I had thought there was going to be a state initiative, or I would not have bothered (it's only a primary).

I was surprised to see several other candidates running in the Democratic slot, against Obama...!?!  Odd, that I'd never heard of a single name...

My take?  Give Obama 4 more years (he has to be better than the religious kooks the Rethugs are fielding this time around) and being a Lame Duck?  Obama can quit pandering to the "next election politics" crowd.

Maybe he can get some more good things done (apart from the hash-up medical thing-- it's better than what we had, but it's far from good enough as-is).

Oh, and he did get DADT eliminated-- which is a good thing.

And it looks like he's pulling us out (finally) of Iraq.  And maybe Afghanistan too?  We can hope.

A ReThug victory in 2012 would mean staying in both of those festering stink-holes... not good.  Enough people have died as it is.

.. meh...

I wonder what Chatty would have had to say about the current crop of misfits?  It's times like this, when I miss her cutting out the fat, and getting at the real issue.

*sigh*

[Sibling DavidH]

I won't derail this thread any further but I do think it's clear Obama doesn't like us very much.  I'm not jumping up and down with rage, but there might be some advantage to the UK if he were replaced.  Other than that, it's a US affair and, to be honest, doesn't interest me that much.  Maybe I should pay more attention, but I can't be bothered! 

[Opsa]

I sure wish that I can't be bothered, but unfortunately, here I am, in the U.S.A., with a whole array of marionettes to choose from to be my leader. It's pretty creepy, actually.

It's very weird to hear talk of Obama being anti-British. Of course, I don't know the guy, but I think that in general we as Yanks like the British.

[Griffin NoName]

I have a different view to DavidH. I think Obama is just not particularly interested in the British. Which seems reasonable to me since we are a tiny island, without an Empire. Maybe he does not like Cameron etc. I wouldn't know.

[Sibling Zono (anon1mat0)]

^That sounds more like it, the Obama administration isn't jumping up and down for the UK (as opposed to Israel) but then again, my perception of the Bush years wasn't that they were doing stuff for the UK but pressuring the UK to do stuff for them, in fact the hands off approach shows in the Libyan upraising and conflict in which France and UK took the initiative and the US played more a supporting role. That looks to me like a less-interventionist approach whenever that's possible, and I would think that is generally a good thing.

[pieces o nine]

I can't speak to how Obama looks in other countries, but I'm with Zono on his assessment. After being treated like Bush & Cheney's pet trained Bulldog, I would think that being treated as a separate, sovereign country would be an improvement.

[Sibling DavidH]

^ and ^^  That had occurred to me, too.

[pieces o nine]

Maybe he's just jealous of your Socialized Health Care...  




[edit] I have decided to add this here; it's been an enormous favorite of mine for the last couple of days.

Yes, I am Godwinning my own topic! [/edit]

[youtube=425,350]EJFp-tcJBVA&feature=related[/youtube]

I watched all 600 debates for nothing. Those hours of my life, I'll never get them back.

[Bob in a quantum-state-of-faith]

That was ... priceless.

I love it, I really did... thanks for sharing.