The Readers Review: Literature from 1714 to 1910 discussion
note: This topic has been closed to new comments.
Miscellaneous - Archives
>
Croissants, Coffee & Tea -- Part the Eighth
message 1:
by
Zulfiya
(new)
Oct 05, 2012 10:10PM
Dear friends, it is time for a new thread . Please share your thoughts about the big world around us and enjoy the banter.
reply
|
flag
Thanks Zulfiya. I have been wondering what folks here thought about the first Obama-Romney debate. Commentators here have said that Obama looked tired and suggested it might be the climate in Denver??? Did it really turn the tide in favour of Romney?
He indeed looked somewhat tired while Romney was aggressive and pushy. But Obama was very emotional and forthright on Thursday and Friday when he met with his supporters. Besides, his position was boosted by the job figures that were released yesterday. So, I am keeping the fingers crossed. The next debate will be less 'pre-scripted' and the voters will be given a chance to ask questions. I hope Obama will do better this time.
The amount of money swilling around during your elections is obscene and gives me no faith in any party or contender:(:(
Does it make much difference? Parties seem much the same these days:(:( (Same in UK but much less money.)
It was painful to watch. Romney lied through the entire debate with a smirk on his face. And Obama was passive.But, I was watching Rachel Maddow - yes, she's very much to the left, but she's still a Oxford Ph.D. who really researches what she puts on her show - and she said that out of the 6 televised debates with an incumbent President seeking re-election, only one won their first debate: Bill Clinton. Even Ronald Reagan - gifted speaker - lost his first debate (badly) when seeking re-election as an incumbent.
Lots of reasons why - they are rusty, they aren't used to someone speaking down to them after 4 years in the Presidency, etc.
I think that Obama will be fine in the second debate.
Glad to see that the gap between them is unchanged. And Romney told so many blatant lies that Obama's team will have a field day with attack ads using footage from the debate.
The one thing that annoyed me the day after was all the references to Big Bird. With all the things wrong in the country, people were outraged and focusing on Big Bird? But now I'm having fun with it myself. Some funny pictures with captions floating around them internet. And Santorum's comments about Big Bird...momma mia! :-)
Excuse my gender bias, but here is the link with the video footage, featuring Santorum's comments. http://thecelebritycafe.com/feature/2...Three speakers were asked about the fate of Big Bird. One of them is obviously a WACKO, another is a hypocrite, and the third is a woman ... Whose voice is a voice of wisdom?
Currently, I am reading the book In One Personby J. Irving. The question that is permanently on my mind is what will the reaction of the ultra-conservative audience be when they or if they read this book. I like J. Irving, his somewhat eccentric characters, and virtually the same setting. He is very Dickensian!
MadgeUK wrote: "Does it make much difference? Parties seem much the same these days:(:( (Same in UK but much less money.)"It is the same everyone, with a lot of money in the campaigns or without a lot of money in the campaigns.
Cameron might not have had a lot of money to spend on his election, but he's the type of candidate who would get hundreds of millions of dollars here in the U.S. from corporations and multi-millionaires/billionaires because Cameron and Romney have the same views on the economy and towards the middle/lower classes.
And the "liberals" are just as beholden to big business as conservatives.
So in the end, it is the same result.
A lesson to the U.S.'s multi-millionaires/billionaires - they could save a lot of money and still have control of the federal government.
Of course, with that said, there are some fundamental differences between the two sides.
For this Presidential election, Medicare, economy, environment, etc. - there are stark differences. I know that it will make a big difference to me if Romney is elected vs. Obama. I have 12 years until retirement, and would just miss out by 10 months on getting guaranteed Medicare if Romney is elected. Basically, I would be in deep poo.
BunWat wrote: "Well then I guess we'd better just pack it in and not elect a president after all."Well, the way around the above is for "we the people" to get involved.
If "we the people" actually did what we are supposed to do - become informed on the issues from non-partisan sources, vote, write letter and visit our elected officials, etc. - i.e., become active participants in government, neither side would get away with what they now get away with.
Wouldn't matter how much money was involved.
Cameron would not be allowed to accept more than a limited amount of money from corporations etc either for his party or personally. It does matter how much money is involved because too much money spells easier corruption.
Certainly, money corrupts. And yes, the U.S. does have a problem with the amount of money involved. But I definitely know that if the American people actually were involved, all the money in the world wouldn't make a difference.And I watch British politics, and you have the same issues that we have...without all the money involved.
A lot of times here, the money doesn't matter. So many politicians run with tons of money on their side, and they still lose.
...giving money to a campaign doesn't buy the candidate's opinion. What it buys is an opportunity to talk to him. But the other side is almost certainly buying an opportunity to talk to him as well.'Talking to the candidate' means being able to persuade him to favour your company and the more money that is given the more favours are asked. That both sides are able to engage in it does not make it any better.
I cannot agree that money doesn't make a difference - we do not say that when African states use money corruptly to buy votes etc. IMO it is a corrupt way of doing politics, whoever does it and the less money available to politicians during their campaigns and whilst they are in office, the better. Money spent at this level can buy anything.
I agree that Obama raising more money from the general public is good but how much corporation money does he also raise?
True to a point, Madge. But what I don't think you understand - you might not be able to understand unless you live here - is that there are offsets to the money. We aren't one of the corrupt third world nations. Money doesn't mean a win. And money doesn't mean that the Congressperson or President will vote the way the person who gave the money wants them to vote. And politicans get money from both sides - each group hedging their bets. It's a strange system, and yes, getting money out would be good. But it's not this corrupt system as your media makes it out to be. As Bunwat said one of the biggest issues is that our elected officials have to spend raising money instead of staying in Washington and getting things done.
And that goes back to "we the people." Rather than educating themselves on the issues, many people just watching the ads on TV to make a decision. People complain about the attack ads, but they work. Therefore, politicians have to raise the money for the TV ads.
It isn't our media making this out Lynn, it's me. I sincerely believe that large amounts of money swilling around in any election system is corrupting per se. And I just do not believe that Congresspeople and Presidents are not influenced by this money, just as they are influenced in other systems (including the UK, despite there being much less of it).There is also a strict limit on the amount spent on political advertising in other Western countries and this too has a corrupting influence on American politics.
Here are some interesting statistics for election year:-
http://truth-out.org/opinion/item/119...
A nice little video about depression, although it gives black dogs a bad name!http://blogs.independent.co.uk/2012/1...
Mod
Yes, they have always been associated with witches:(Good Winston Churchill archive now available online:-
http://www.guardian.co.uk/uk/2012/oct...
Mod
No that doesn't happen here Deborah!!! Halloween isn't so big and perhaps our non-religious society doesn't think about the evils of witches these days.Cleo was my second black cat and they were both very long lived - I think they might have a 'survival' gene due to past persecution.
Madge - you will like this quote from Matt Taibbi. Taibbi is co-editor of Rolling Stone magazine, and caused quite a stir with his book, Griftopia, that explores the 2008 economic collapse. One of the best books that I read on the subject.“What we Americans go through to pick a president is not only crazy and unnecessary but genuinely abusive. Hundreds of millions of dollars are spent in a craven, cynical effort to stir up hatred and anger on both sides.
A decision that in reality takes one or two days of careful research to make is somehow stretched out into a process that involves two years of relentless, suffocating mind-warfare, an onslaught of toxic media messaging directed at liberals, conservatives and everyone in between that by Election Day makes every dinner conversation dangerous and literally divides families.”
Yes, although I am not sure that a democratic election result can be achieved by 'one or two days careful research'.
Depends on how much time you have in the day. ;) And quite frankly, the differences between the President and Mitt are clear. Once you hit the 3-4 top issues that you are concerned about, you probably can make up your mind fairly quickly just by reading a summary of their positions, and then doing some non-partisian research on the issues for a couple of hours.
Yes but how do you translate that into votes?Most people will have already done their 'research' and have decided where their X is going.
MadgeUK wrote: "Yes but how do you translate that into votes?Most people will have already done their 'research' and have decided where their X is going."
Which brings us back to Taibbi's point - why have a 1-2 year process when we really only need a couple of months. Then, the candidates would have to focus on the specifics right away. And less of the attack ads.
It would target the independents who take more than 2 days for many reasons. And they only begin to pay attention for the last couple months anyway to make up their mind.
The time prior to the two months is - as Taibbi said - just fighting between the two sides that already made up their minds.
It's becoming uglier and uglier each election cycle.
We have 3 weeks but I think a country as large as yours would need quite a lot more, just for the candidates to get around. It is more important to tackle the excessive amount of money and advertising in your system I think.
In Sweden no election television ads are permitted; in France, no opinion polls can be published in the week before the election; Italy and Japan do not allow negative advertising; in Mexico, the broadcast hours allowed in a presidential campaign are limited, as is the money spent on television advertising. The UK has strict limits on advertising, time and money.
We do need to tackle it. It will take Congress to do it, and the Republicans will never go for it. The system helps them and hurts the Democrats so they want it to stay just as it is.
No, he won! He schooled young Mr. Ryan.Biden did smile a bit too much, but he went on the attack. And in doing so, did what he was supposed to do - get the Dems excited again after the President had auch a bad first debate.
And everyone is focusing on Biden's smiling. But Ryan smirked - as Republicans are apt to do - through the entire debate. A trait that annoys Dems to no end.
Presidential elections are not won on VP debates. But they can excite the base. Biden did that. And Ryan was everything annoying that Dems can't stand. The Dems needed that.
Ryan's performance didn't excite the Repubican base. They just breathed a sign of relief that he didn't screw up badly. Only looked like a deer in the headlights a couple of times against a much stronger and experienced Biden.
There have been a number of these articles lately, but I thought this one was particularly "clever"..."have a look!" ;)"Americans are Barmy over Britishims":
http://www.nytimes.com/2012/10/11/fas...
Yes, I had read something about this and have noticed on GR for quite a while. If only you would copy the good things about our elections!
I know that I am partial, but I am somewhat happy that Ryan was 'Bidened'. Democrats needed that kind of performance to boost their confidence. Biden was cocky and over-artistic, but you have to show your opponents that you also can implement the same strategy during the debate. It was interesting to read the social media last night when some of my 'uber-conservative' family members and their friends were very aggravated by Biden's performance while the same style of debate a week ago was viewed as 'brilliant' and 'life-changing'. Oh, hypocrisy.
I hope Biden's performance bucks up the ratings and that Obama performs better at the next debate. He was very lacklustre in the first one.
Mod
Sound as if you are in for a cosy winter!:) We are having warm sunny days and chilly evenings here. No frosts as yet.
Deborah wrote: "It's a chilly evening here in New England. Made a fire in the fireplace which always makes me feel like the house is cozy. Found a new favorite place - bookstore of course. A used bookstore with..."Sounds wonderful! And I loved used bookstores.
When I was younger, I dreamed of owning a bookstore. Now, of course, we just have to hope that all of them don't go out of business with ebooks taking over.
I have a friend who has a large secondhand bookstore and his business is thriving. He doesn't think that ebooks will put him out of business. Published books will just go in other directions; more illustrations perhaps, speciality editions, collectibles.
Yes, some of them are thriving. But sadly, many are not. I think it depends on the location. When I lived in NYC, so many of the wonderful used bookstores went under - between the big box stores (Barnes & Noble) and then ebooks, they are gone.
Mod
Well, I want B&N to survive. I love my Nook, and I love my local B&N store.And one big box bookstore left isn't what is hurting independents now (although B&N and Borders were part of what began their demise). It is ebooks.
I love B&N, too. But they also sell many books cheaper online than in the stores. However, they did take away members' online discounts, and only give us free shipping, while I still get 10% off in the store. So I now comparison shop - if the item has a discount of 10% or more online, I will buy it like that, else I will go to the store to get it. Still, nothing beats the serendipity of browsing the store!
(What are 'big box' stores?)So, how did Obama's second debate go? What clips I heard were a bit tetchy - didn't think much of their debating style. I found the walking about distracting - people don't usually move around when speaking to each other.
http://abcnews.go.com/live
The style of our leadership debates is very different, maybe because they don't move around:-
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=438MjQ...
MadgeUK wrote: "(What are 'big box' stores?)So, how did Obama's second debate go? What clips I heard were a bit tetchy - didn't think much of their debating style. I found the walking about distracting - people..."
Big box stores are big chain retail stores - like WalMart, Best Buys, etc. The stores usually don't have much architectural beauty - they just look like big boxes.
Obama was very good. Won the debate hands done. And no smile while doing it, like Biden. ;)
And Romney keep sticking his foot in his mouth, especially about women. Binders full of women. Women who have to be home from work by 5:00 to cook. And one that I somehow missed - something about single mothers and gun violence. Obviously, I'm interpreting, but if social networking is any measure, American women aren't thrilled with Romney today.
Madge, the walking around was because of the debate format. This was a 'town hall' style debate, where members of the audience asked questions of the candidates (BTW, did anybody catch it when one woman addressed Romney as "President Romney"?). The question would be directed first at one of them, so he would get up and walk forward towards the questioner, and when the other would respond, he would do the same. It's supposed to be a bit more informal, more give-and-take, than the debates where both candidates just stand at a podium. They're not speaking to each other so much as addressing the audience, especially the questioner.I did notice Obama smiling and chuckling a bit at times, but it wasn't as obvious as Biden's laughter.
I saw a great picture today, of Romney holding a binder with a woman's head and feet sticking out of it!
I gotta have that pic of the binder! Problem is neither has any respect for the other as a person. R thinks blacks have become "too uppity, and don't know their place," O knows R is an uninformed, snobby, bigoted jerk.
Oops, excuse me, I have to be home at 5 for dinner
If you missed anything, check YouTube. They're allowing much longer videos than before, up to 20 MB.
MadgeUK wrote: "(What are 'big box' stores?)."
Some resemble warehouses, like Costco and BJ's, some actually were warehouses. High ceilings with ugly bulbs hanging down. And an absolute minimum of help from the staff.
Rochelle wrote: "MadgeUK wrote: "(What are 'big box' stores?)"Some resemble warehouses, like Costco and BJ's, some actually were warehouses. High ceilings with ugly bulbs hanging down. And an absolute minimum ..."
The Barnes and Nobles I've been in aren't that bad, i.e., like BJs. And I usually preferred Borders in recent years, sorry to see them go bankrupt.
https://www.google.com/search?q=Barne...
https://www.google.com/search?q=Costc...
This topic has been frozen by the moderator. No new comments can be posted.
The Readers Review: Literature from 1714 to 1910
Books mentioned in this topic
The Madwoman in the Attic: The Woman Writer and the Nineteenth-Century Literary Imagination (other topics)House of Bush, House of Saud: The Secret Relationship Between the World's Two Most Powerful Dynasties (other topics)
Don Quixote (other topics)
The Rifle in America (other topics)
The Buccaneers (other topics)
More...
