The 47% Video

[wgbgator]

Originally Posted by HudsonGator

I've been around a lot of politicians in my life, including some great ones. The really good ones treat every moment like they are giving a speech to thousands, and as a result, they never have to apologize for anything they said.

Well, I didn't need the video to tell me Romney wasn't very good at politics or lacked the common touch.

[MichiGator2002]

I long for the day it would get old. Romney states a political tautology, he is assailed. Obama's Dunn admires a soulless butcher like Mao, nuthin. Obama's Holder says voter intimidation cases won't be prosecuted against "his people", nuthin. Both infinitely more venomous and sickening positions than anything Romney said, no consequences in public perception for then or their employer.

[wgbgator]

Maybe when those people run for elected office, they will get assailed? Or were you just wishing that guilt by association be as powerful as statements made by an actual candidate?

[MichiGator2002]

Originally Posted by wgbgator

Maybe when those people run for elected office, they will get assailed? Or were you just wishing that guilt by association be as powerful as statements made by an actual candidate?

Oh, so only statements made by actual politicians are scrutinized. Lollerskates?

[MastaG8r]

Originally Posted by rivergator

yes, because Republicans are always treated so unfairly ... Seriously, doesn't the victim role get a bit old?

What gets old is people on the Left complaining about people on the Right playing the victim role. Victim politics is the Democratic Party's stock-in-trade. "Voting is the best revenge!"

It's pretty funny that this isn't even the first time you have tried to mock Republicans for supposedly playing the victim role in one thread, while simultaneously complaining in another thread about Democrats being victimized by Republicans who supposedly won't let them vote.

Seriously, doesn't the duplicitous hypocrite role get a little old?

[wgbgator]

Originally Posted by MichiGator2002

Oh, so only statements made by actual politicians are scrutinized. Lollerskates?

That's not at all what I said. I mean, I scrutinize the "sickening" positons you take all the time. There's a thread here pretty much everyday on something someone said about something. Scrutiny abounds. But you (and most of the people saying stuff) are not running for office or in my employ, so I'm not sure I have the means at my disposal to hold you accountable for your quasi-public statements. Nor do I care enough to boycott or protest whatever it is you do. That's the way it goes. I suppose if I had the twisted sense of equality, justice and victimhood unique to American conservatives, I'd find some injustice in the idea that a presidential candidate gets more flack for a statement actually made by themselves than something someone's friend or employee said about something.

[rivergator]

Originally Posted by MastaG8r

What gets old is people on the Left complaining about people on the Right playing the victim role. Victim politics is the Democratic Party's stock-in-trade. "Voting is the best revenge!"



Seriously, doesn't the duplicitous hypocrite role get a little old?

Right. It's the left's stock in trade. That's why conservatives do it over and over and over again.

It's pretty funny that this isn't even the first time you have tried to mock Republicans for supposedly playing the victim role in one thread, while simultaneously complaining in another thread about Democrats being victimized by Republicans who supposedly won't let them vote.

Just a bit of a difference though. On the vote thread, I'm talking about specific laws that do specific things, which even you admit is being done to limit Democratic voting.
Michi's complaint, which is typical from conservatives here, is about some vague, speculative conclusion. "Well, IF this happened, THEN I'll bet THAT would happen" always with the same result of how badly treated conservatives are.
You want to point to a specific action, it's different. As you know, I've asked you for examples of Democrats passing laws to limit Republican voting and you've been unable to find any.

[DaveFla]

Originally Posted by orangeblueorangeblue

That doesn't seem right, and it's definitely not the case under Florida state law.

It's not. Hudson stayed at a Holiday Inn Express last night, and therefore, has become a legal expert.

[HudsonGator]

Originally Posted by DaveFla

It's not. Hudson stayed at a Holiday Inn Express last night, and therefore, has become a legal expert.

That's your contribution?

Time for you to go back to sleep.

[JerseyGator01]

You shouldn't be allowed to do something like that if you are being paid to do a certain job. To me, it's highly unethical. You can't record your rep speaking publicly in your state house but you can record someone in a private meeting who is paying you to do another job. Stupid laws.

I wouldn't have a problem if it was an invited guest but a bartender paid only to do a certain job? Please. He'll probably be the next mayor of Miami.

The guy apparently owes $15K in back taxes from 2006. Funny how this comes out after the election.

http://www.newsmax.com/Newsfront/rom...3/14/id/494730

CORRUPTION RULES!!!!!

[MastaG8r]

Originally Posted by rivergator

Right. It's the left's stock in trade. That's why conservatives do it over and over and over again.

Conservatives have a whooooole lot of catching up to do if they want to play the victim as much as Liberals do. That is my point. Conservatives doing it a bunch of times doesn't change the fact that Liberals do it ALL THE TIME. So how can someone on the Left complain about it? What's the basis for the complaint? Patent infringement? You're mad that folks on the Right are stealing your tried-and-true routine?

For a Liberal to complain about Conservatives playing victim is like a Gator complaining about a Bulldog being arrogant. It's hypocritical. Because let's be honest - we Gators are better at being arrogant than anybody. Just like we're better at everything than everybody. Well...except at crying about being victimized. Nobody does that better than Liberals.

Just a bit of a difference though. On the vote thread, I'm talking about specific laws that do specific things, which even you admit is being done to limit Democratic voting.
Michi's complaint, which is typical from conservatives here, is about some vague, speculative conclusion. "Well, IF this happened, THEN I'll bet THAT would happen" always with the same result of how badly treated conservatives are.
You want to point to a specific action, it's different. As you know, I've asked you for examples of Democrats passing laws to limit Republican voting and you've been unable to find any.

That little rant sounded like one of those little kids sitting around the table trying to explain something to that guy in the AT&T commercial. "Ruff ruff ruff ruff ruff, which means, I want to go back to a human!"

If we can somehow get the Chicago-style shenanigans down to a minimum so that the Republican Presidential candidate has a fair chance to win an election and then does so, that's when the Democrats will take their turn to try monkeying with the voting process. Right now as far as they're concerned it's, "if it ain't broke, don't fix it." With the definition of broke being, the Democrat lost.

[rivergator]

Originally Posted by MastaG8r

Conservatives have a whooooole lot of catching up to do if they want to play the victim as much as Liberals do. That is my point. Conservatives doing it a bunch of times doesn't change the fact that Liberals do it ALL THE TIME. So how can someone on the Left complain about it? What's the basis for the complaint? Patent infringement? You're mad that folks on the Right are stealing your tried-and-true routine?

For a Liberal to complain about Conservatives playing victim is like a Gator complaining about a Bulldog being arrogant. It's hypocritical. Because let's be honest - we Gators are better at being arrogant than anybody. Just like we're better at everything than everybody. Well...except at crying about being victimized. Nobody does that better than Liberals.

That little rant sounded like one of those little kids sitting around the table trying to explain something to that guy in the AT&T commercial. "Ruff ruff ruff ruff ruff, which means, I want to go back to a human!"

If we can somehow get the Chicago-style shenanigans down to a minimum so that the Republican Presidential candidate has a fair chance to win an election and then does so, that's when the Democrats will take their turn to try monkeying with the voting process. Right now as far as they're concerned it's, "if it ain't broke, don't fix it." With the definition of broke being, the Democrat lost.

That doesn't really seem to be an answer to anything specific, does it? Just kind of "Yeah, well you're a little kid!!!"

[MastaG8r]

Originally Posted by rivergator

That doesn't really seem to be an answer to anything specific, does it? Just kind of "Yeah, well you're a little kid!!!"

Pretty much.

[geauxgator1]

The trump card that the conservatives have in this debate is rather simple to me. The libs have every major network and 90% of the major newspapers, carrying their water except for FOX. They set the agenda, frame the debates, host the debates, and spin it all their way. We have talk radio, and that's about it.

[jdrgator]

Originally Posted by G8trGr8t

and each state has different laws wrt recording of another person in a private setting. odd how the 0 comment didn't get nearly the press that the 47% comment did or impact the election nearly as much as the lmsm would have us believe

and jdr...my primary concern wasn't that, it was just a question wrt what the law is in the state of florida but it seems that once again I have offended your partisan sensitivity. props to him for doing the right thing when given a chance; just another example of how in the great majority of cases, the truly heroic things done to save people are not done by police or fire or?? but by common citizens that are first on the scene.

Don't worry, my partisan sensitivities weren't offended. But thanks all the same for your concern

I completely agree about the great and heroic things that ordinary citizens do.

[madgator]

Originally Posted by wgbgator

Well, I didn't need the video to tell me Romney wasn't very good at politics or lacked the common touch.

and you were going to vote for Obama regardless.....so the whole topic is irrelevant as it applies to you.

[madgator]

Originally Posted by jdrgator

Don't worry, my partisan sensitivities weren't offended. But thanks! I completely about the great and heroic things that ordinary citizens do.

so now we are a country of "you didn't build that" v. "47% won't vote me regardless of what I say"


seems to me like Romney was 100% correct in what he said......and the election results prove it.


so the question really should not be. Did this comment cost Romney the election, of course it did. A point which the liberal media is having a great time celebrating....the question then really should be; Since Romney was correct in what he said, what does that mean for the direction of the country?


because honestly. In fact, the election results prove that Romney short-changed the 47% number.

between the entitlement seekers, the white guilt voters, the enviromentalists, the atheists, the government contract seekers, and the protectionist elite who rely on keeping far away from a free market.....that number comes to about 51%

so what does this mean for our country?

the democrats seeking a "new america" now own it. what will the results be?

[jdrgator]

Originally Posted by madgator

so now we are a country of "you didn't build that" v. "47% won't vote me regardless of what I say"


seems to me like Romney was 100% correct in what he said......and the election results prove it.


so the question really should not be. Did this comment cost Romney the election, of course it did. A point which the liberal media is having a great time celebrating....the question then really should be; Since Romney was correct in what he said, what does that mean for the direction of the country?


because honestly. In fact, the election results prove that Romney short-changed the 47% number.

between the entitlement seekers, the white guilt voters, the enviromentalists, the atheists, the government contract seekers, and the protectionist elite who rely on keeping far away from a free market.....that number comes to about 51%

so what does this mean for our country?

the democrats seeking a "new america" now own it. what will the results be?

Regardless of whether you think he was substantively right (he might have been right that 47% just would not vote for him; why though is highly debatable), it's rarely a good idea for a politician to cast blanket and false condemnations upon the very people from which one is seeking their vote. As for the rest, I'll come back to it tomorrow. Gotta hit the rack.

[madgator]

Originally Posted by jdrgator

Regardless of whether you think he was substantively right (he might have been right that 47% just would not vote for him; why though is highly debatable), it's rarely a good idea for a politician to cast blanket and false condemnations upon the very people from which one is seeking their vote. As for the rest, I'll come back to it tomorrow. Gotta hit the rack.

like I had said. Obama had no trouble telling people "you didn't build that" in a tone of sharp condemnation.

So what substantially is the difference?

Honestly, in substance....not much. In tone, Obama's delivery was much more pointed and hateful.

Romney was simply stating what he saw as fact as a matter of policy. Obama was actively belittling those "who think they are so smart."

the difference in the results speaks volumes.

[madgator]

Originally Posted by MastaG8r

My post you're responding to was a question. You responded without answering it.

Romney said there are 47% of the people who will vote for 0bama no matter what, and "who believe they are victims." You're damn right that Conservatives agree with that comment. And my question is, if we are wrong about that then what was 0bama talking about when he told his 47 percenters to vote because, "voting is the best revenge"? I'll ask again - revenge for what, exactly?

I don't think this question ever was answered